Best of the Web Today - March 30, 2007
By JAMES TARANTO
Best of the Tube This Weekend: James Taranto joins the panel on "The Journal Editorial Report," discussing Romney, the GOP campaign and education with Paul Gigot, Dan Henninger and Jason Riley. Fox News Channel, Saturday 11 p.m. EST and Sunday 6 a.m. EST.
How to Hit Back
It's a bit reminiscent of the Jimmy Carter crisis of 1979-81: Iran last week captured 15 British sailors in Iraqi waters and has been holding them hostage, coercing some into reading videotaped "apologies." In the Washington Times James Lyons, a retired admiral, suggests a show of strength that Carter rejected back then:
In November 1979, when our embassy was sacked and our diplomats were taken hostage, I recommended to the then-acting chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Tom Hayward, that our only good option really was to capture Kharg Island, Iran's principal oil export depot. If we did this, we could negotiate from a position of strength for the immediate return of our embassy and our diplomats.
Unfortunately, the Carter administration rejected any offensive operations as a means of responding to this blatant act of war against the United States. We were humiliated and seemed to the world to lack the courage to defend our honor. . . .
While our State Department and the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office work to obtain U.N. and allied condemnation of Iran's illegal act, the Joint Chiefs of Staff need to develop or refine a series of military options that can be immediately carried out when directed by the commander in chief, President Bush after coordination with Prime Minister Tony Blair.
One such option should be the capture of Kharg Island. That could be viewed as part of a larger economic sanction that the U.N. Security Council has already endorsed. It is not an attack against the Iranian people. In fact, it could further encourage the popular antigovernment movement against the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's corrupt and already shaky regime. The economic cost to Iran would be catastrophic at minimum.
A reader, however, offers this crazy thought:
Capturing Iran's principal oil export depot would play right into the delusions of people who imagine we are out to grab the region's oil. Instead we should act on our concern, the centrifuges at Natanz. A few good hits on top of the centrifuge bunker would at the minimum send a message, and might rattle the notoriously sensitive centrifuges enough to make them unsafe to operate.
In the past, disturbances as small as fingerprints have caused the machines to spin improperly and explode. Now, with more centrifuges operating, one could get a chain reaction, and not the type the ayatollahs had in mind.
In an April 2006 Iranian TV interview (PDF, quote on pp. 4-5), Islamic Republic nuke official Gholamreza Aqazadeh elaborates on the centrifuges' vulnerability:
In the preliminary stages of the work, we noticed that our machines broke down frequently. We couldn't discover the cause, since we didn't have any scientific sources or books to refer to. After great efforts we discovered that our experts didn't wear fabric gloves during the assembly phase. We found out that when you assemble the parts with bare hands, germs are transferred to the machinery from the smallest amount of sweat which comes off the hands.
This little amount of germs is enough to trouble and destroy the machine. When we say a machine is destroyed we mean that it turns into powder.
Either way, as Lyons observes, "such a move would end almost 30 years of our Iranian appeasement policy, demonstrating to Tehran we finally mean business."
'It Didn't Happen'
Speaking of Jimmy Carter, his onetime national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, showed up for a talk at Duke University earlier his week, and the Herald-Sun of Durham, N.C., reports Brzezinski made this jaw-dropping assertion:
Brzezinski said there's no reason to think a bloodbath would necessarily follow a U.S. withdrawal [from Iraq].
"We expected that the U.S. leaving Vietnam would result in massive killings and genocide and so forth, and collapse of the dominoes in Southeast Asia," he said. "It didn't happen. How certain are we of the horror scenarios that have been mentioned in what will take place in Iraq?"
"It didn't happen"? Even the Herald-Sun is constrained to note: "History does record that a bloodbath that claimed millions of lives occurred in neighboring Cambodia, the so-called 'killing fields,' and that millions more people left Vietnam as refugees after the two countries fell in 1975."
The Religion That Dare Not Speak Its Name
"The European Union has drawn up guidelines advising government spokesmen to refrain from linking Islam and terrorism in their statements," London's Daily Telegraph reports from Brussels:
Brussels officials have confirmed the existence of a classified handbook which offers "non-offensive" phrases to use when announcing anti-terrorist operations or dealing with terrorist attacks.
Banned terms are said to include "jihad", "Islamic" or "fundamentalist." . . .
One alternative, suggested publicly last year, is for the term "Islamic terrorism" to be replaced by "terrorists who abusively invoke Islam." . . .
"The common lexicon includes guidance on a number of frequently used terms where lack of care by EU and member states' spokespeople may give rise to misunderstandings," [an unnamed EU official] said.
"Careful usage of certain terms is not about empty political correctness but stems from astute awareness of the EU's interests in the fight against terrorism.
"Terrorists exploit and augment suspicions."
It reminds us of our meeting last September with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who spoke of the problem of "radicalization" in American prisons but refused to say whether he meant Islamic radicalization.
There is a genuine problem here of choosing language that distinguishes between Muslim terrorists and plain old Muslims. But circumlocutions designed to avoid acknowledging the former's Islamic nature cannot possibly help clarify matters.
Spot the Idiot
One Rosemary Mellon of Franklin, N.H., solves the problem of the Middle East, in a letter to the editor of the Concord Monitor:
The Jewish lobby's hold on this country and Bush's wearing his religion on his sleeve lead me to believe there is no real desire to be involved. . . .
The United States cuts off all ties with Hamas because Hamas says the "Jews do not have a right to exist." This reminds me of the song we sang as children: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me." Every democratic state knows Israel has a right to exist. Perhaps through diplomacy, engagement and aid, this can be erased from the lips of Hamas. If not, so what? Everyone knows differently.
Apparently it has not occurred to Rosemary that suicide bombs and Kassam rockets may also "break my bones."
Politics for Me, Not for Thee
Blogger Tom Elliott makes a good point:
In 2005, President Bush fired 13 prosecutors, some of them, seemingly, for political reasons. House leaders are now threatening to subpoena members of his administration.
Concurrently, Bush's nominee for U.S. ambassador to Belgium, Sam Fox, has been derailed by Democrats because of a $50,000 contribution he made in 2004 to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. His qualifications, meanwhile, have never been questioned. [On Wednesday] Bush rescinded the nomination.
So, according to Democrats, is factoring in politics OK when hiring and firing, or not OK? The principle seems to depend on the politics. What we're seeing here is hypocrisy--in real time.
'Pretty Freaked Out'
Scientific American is furiously backtracking from its silly blog item, which we noted Wednesday, trumpeting a poll result that found a majority of those surveyed parrot what they have heard about global warmism. Here is ScAm's Chris Mims:
His first objection to my reporting of the study is that consensus among the American public does not a scientific fact make--a point with which I completely agree. My intent in posting that story was not to comment on the science of global warming--it was to point out that, whatever your opinion of the subject, an overwhelming majority of Americans are pretty freaked out about it.
Well, if an overwhelming majority of Americans are "pretty freaked out about" something, it must be true. That's science!
Meanwhile, the Burlington Free Press reports that S. Fred Singer, a respected scientist who doubts global warmism, spoke at the University of Vermont, prompting this reaction:
UVM environmental science major Elizabeth Lewis had a different take. She attended the discussion to see what she'll be up against once she enters the work force.
"I can't believe someone like that is out in the world trying to convert people," Lewis said. "I think it's tragic."
Trying to "convert" people? A few months ago a young lady at a party told us that she had seen Al Gore's global-warmist horror flick, "An Inconvenient Truth," and "it changed my life." This isn't science, it's religious zealotry.
Biblical Illiteracy Alert
"If you want to make it the David and Goliath story, we'll be the David and slay the dragon."--Qwest senior vice president Diana Gowen, on competing with AT&T and Verizon, quoted by the Associated Press, March 29
Glad They Cleared That Up
"In obituaries March 27 and March 28 for Cuban vocalist Faustino Oramas, The Associated Press erroneously reported the source of his nickname, 'El Guayabero.' According to popular legend, Oramas took his moniker from the name of the town where he escaped the wrath of a jealous husband, not from the fruit tree under which he supposedly flirted with the man's wife."--correction, Associated Press, March 29
That's One Precocious Baby!
"Mr. Heindl and his date, Breck Hostetter, have now been married two years, and have a 9-month-old daughter, Greta. She operates Sesame Letterpress out of their home in Carroll Gardens."--New York Times, March 29
What Would We Do Without Hoax Experts?
"April 1 Looms, but Hoax Expert Says Times Are Hard"--headline, Reuters, March 29
What Would We Do Without Fire Experts?
"Fire Experts Say Wildfires Could Start Anytime"--headline, KTAR-FM Web site (Phoenix), March 29
What Would We Do Without Experts on Drugs?
"Experts Give Wide-Ranging Views on Drugs"--headline, WJBC-AM Web site (Bloomington, Ill.), March 30
Better Late Than Never
"New Orleans Unveils Katrina Recovery Plan"--headline, Reuters, March 29, 2007
All Things Considered, It's the Talk of the Nation
"NPR Man Facing Charges After Fight With Family, Deputy"--headline, Bay News 9 Web site (Tampa, Fla.), March 29
Sounds Like a Bites-Dog-Man Story
"Videotaped Beating Dogs Chicago Police"--headline, Associated Press, March 30
The Winner Gets to Live
o "A Rare Catch: Fishery biologists work to save the elusive pallid sturgeon, an endangered Missouri River fish known for its odd appearance."--headline and subheadline, Columbia (Mo.) Tribune, March 29
o "Sturgeon Races Attract Field of Eight Hopefuls"--headline, Columbia Tribune, March 29
Because Some of Us Are Ugly!
"Study Explains Why We're Not All Beautiful"--headline, LiveScience.com, March 28
You Don't Say
"Drinking Culture Plagues Colleges Across Nation"--headline, Times (Trenton, N.J.), March 30
News You Can Use
o "Potholes Pose Problems"--headline, Herald Times (Manitowoc, Wis.), March 30
o "State Dept. Warns: Be Careful Overseas"--headline, Associated Press, March 30
Bottom Stories of the Day
o "Shareholders at Tully's Meeting Learn Little About Proposed IPO"--headline, Seattle Times, March 29
o "L.A. Police to Get New Flashlights"--headline, Associated Press, March 30
o "No New Movement, Sinking Seen in Portion of Viaduct"--headline, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, March 29
Environment Threatens Environment
The Contra Costa (Calif.) Times reports on an environmental blight:
The water in Alhambra Creek is at a standstill. The vegetation along the creek banks is mysteriously thinning, with only jagged tree stumps remaining.
Two blocks down, the fate of the trees is revealed: A 15-foot-wide, 5-foot-high web of twigs and saplings traps the water south of Marina Vista Avenue. But the culprits are seldom encountered.
"Beavers in downtown Martinez, who would think?" said Beth Lucas. . . .
City officials say the beavers' handiwork will have to be removed. The California Department of Fish and Game has agreed to permit that.
Down the coast a ways, the Tribune of San Luis Obispo reports that "a yearlong study has concluded that dust pollution is a serious problem on the Nipomo Mesa":
The study by the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District found that persistent winds blowing off the ocean from the northwest are picking up fine sand particles and carrying them onto the Mesa.
The result is that the Mesa regularly exceeds state and federal air pollution standards for coarse and fine particulate matter, said Larry Allen, county air pollution control officer. A state standard for coarse particulates was exceeded on a quarter of the days sampled. . . .
In addition to sand particles blowing onto the Mesa from the beach, dirt roads on the Mesa also contributed to the problem.
That's right, sand and dirt are "polluting" California's wilderness. These stories suggest a two-part solution to the Golden State's environmental woes: First kill all the beavers. Then pave the Earth!
URL for this article: opinionjournal.com |
