I guess the only question is, what took them so long? Don't have details, can't load site referenced. More when available.

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2001

Answers

US Embassy Building in Kabul Torched, September 26, 2001 3:01 am EST

DUBAI (Reuters) - The Gulf Arab Jazeera television network said on Wednesday Afghan demonstrators had set fire to the U.S. embassy building in Kabul.

The Qatar-based channel showed live pictures from the Afghan capital of smoke rising from what it said was a building that housed the U.S. embassy.

It said the fire had been started by demonstrators protesting against U.S. plans to launch an attack on the country in retaliation for the refusal of the ruling Taliban to hand over Osama bin Laden, top suspect in the September 11 attacks on targets in the United States.

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2001

Thanks, BF. Do you suppose anyone will criticize them for torching the embassy because they believe we might attack their country?

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2001

No, not really.

I suspect there will be no mention of why the Taliban didn't lift a finger to put the fire out.

But we have to wait for more news on this.

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2001

Don't get too excited. Another news source says we abandoned that building in 1989 and it's been sitting vacant ever since. Big deal.

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2001

So the question, "What took them so long?" is even more pertinent!

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2001

Don't ya just love members who quote unnamed news sources?

tsk tsk

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2001

Oh hell, I do it all the time. I do remember an unnamed new source saying the embassy was abandoned but my unnamed source didn't say for how long. Gordon's unnamed source is just a tad more detailed.

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2001

Barefoot, the news source was AOL's own current updates on that building. They go into more detail. Sorry, did you think I was being hooked by an urban legend or something?

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2001

Considering the main topic concerning the world right now, sources are important. It would have been easier to type AOL instead of 'another' in order for others to be able to forward information that can be verified.

If info cannot be verified it is discounted, generally. Nine times out of ten when git doesn't name the source, I personally can find it by going to Lucianne.com or her favorite UK paper, the telegraph.

Yes, it is possible for me to do a google search to verify what you wrote about the embassy being abandoned, but if there was a source for it already, it would have been much easy to be able to go there and read it myself, and hopefully get their source from there, and so on.

News without sources is basically rumor, until it is verified. This is something I learned on the original Timebomb board. sounded good then and still does, and I have done my best to follow that line of thinking.

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2001

Barefoot, you're right and I agree with you. I'll try to do better next time. It would have saved some typing to just put in AOL as you said.

-- Anonymous, September 26, 2001