Sunday, October 24, 2004

Con. theory

Okay, I'm going to have to do some more research for this one, but here it goes:
The Bush administration actually knew 9/11 was going to happen before it did, for all the reasons we've already heard a million times, and they used it as a reason to invade Iraq. But the part I'm really interested in is comparing it to how Roosevelt knew about Pearl Harbor before it happened, but needed American support to get into WWII. Also how our government has a history of invading other cultures despite popular anti-war sentiment (Vietnam, etc...) So I'm thinking my paper would be more focused on the government cover-up angle than the very tired "Bush sucks" topic.
If I come up with anything better before Tue, can I change it? Let me know if you don't think this is interesting enough.

1 Comments:

At October 26, 2004 at 7:51 PM, Blogger shinyee said...

I think the idea is plenty interesting, especially if you tackle the issue from the "cover-up" angle, something that as you've pointed out there's plenty of historical precedence for. Somethings you may want to consider, especially in constructing your thesis, is why cover-up has remained such an important yet not often talked about (seriously) issue in American political life. What is at stake in uncovering something (for example, look at how Michael Moore's work of uncovering has created a lot of negative press for him--people focusing more on his weight problem and liberal bias than what's at the heart of what he has to say). It might be useful as well to represent in your argument the way in which conservative thinkers tend to shy away from admittance of any type of wrong doing or cover up.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home