Best of the Web Today - November 22, 2004
By JAMES TARANTO
The Dissident
Michael Scheuer, who recently departed the CIA, appeared with Tim Russert on "Meet the Press" yesterday. The erstwhile senior analyst and anonym (author, in the latter capacity, of a book called "Imperial Hubris") offered the theory that American support for Israel is to blame for al Qaeda's terrorism:
Scheuer: I think we need to take a position with Israel that suits American interests.
Russert: Such as?
Scheuer: Such as perhaps being more insistent on some arrangement with the settlements. Certainly, no one is going to withdraw the protective umbrella of the United States, but at some point, Americans need to look after their own interests first.
Russert: But do you believe that being "tough on Israel" would in any way change Osama bin Laden's agenda or desire to destroy America?
Scheuer: His agenda is not to destroy America, Mr. Russert. He simply wants us out of his neighborhood. He wants us out of the Middle East. And I'm not--no, it would not change his agenda, but my point here is that America has a choice between war and endless war with the forces led by Osama bin Laden. And at some point, we need to take actions in our own interests that limit his ability to grow in power and popularity in the Muslim world.
Russert: But if America removes itself from the Middle East, isn't that appeasement to--
Scheuer: No, sir, I'm not suggesting that we remove ourselves from the Middle East.
Scheuer also made some truly bizarre statements about bin Laden, whom he called "a remarkable man, a great man in many ways . . . an admirable man." Scheuer added: "If he was on our side, he would be dining at the White House. He would be a freedom fighter, a resistance fighter"--though he insisted that all this was "not to praise him" but merely to "take the measure of the man and the power of his words."
On a more serious note, London's Sunday Telegraph reports that Secretary of State Colin Powell "was given his marching orders after telling President George W Bush that he wanted greater power to confront Israel over the stalled Middle East peace process. The Telegraph quotes "a recently-retired state department official":
"Powell thought he could use the credit he had banked as the president's 'good cop' in foreign policy to rein in Ariel Sharon [Israel's prime minister] and get the peace process going. He was wrong."
All this gives us a sense of what American foreign policy might have looked like if Bush had not been re-elected. Last week John Kerry issued what must be some sort of first: a four-minute postelection attack ad. In it, Kerry* declares:
Despite the words of cooperation and moderate sounding promises, this administration is planning a right wing assault on values and ideals we hold most deeply. Healthy debate and diverse opinion are being eliminated from the State Department and CIA, and the cabinet is being remade to rubber stamp policies that will undermine Social Security, balloon the deficit, avoid real reforms in health care and education, weaken homeland security, and walk away from critical allies around the world.
"Healthy debate and diverse opinion" seems to mean everything from Powell's purported adherence to the stale notion that the "peace process" is the solution to the problems in the Middle East to Scheuer's crackpot assertion that Osama bin Laden is "admirable" (but not in a good way!). As for the view that the terrorist threat would fade if only America would "pressure" Israel to be more accommodating, has it occurred to anyone that during the glory days of Oslo and Camp David, al Qaeda was regularly attacking America and gearing up for Sept. 11?
Last week President Bush met with Natan Sharansky, the Soviet dissident turned Israeli politician who has long advocated democracy in the Arab world as the way to peace, and whose new book, "The Case for Democracy," is a favorite of the president's. In National Review Online, Joel Rosenberg quotes Sharansky describing the meeting:
"I told the president, 'There is a great difference between politicians and dissidents. Politicians are focused on polls and the press. They are constantly making compromises. But dissidents focus on ideas. They have a message burning inside of them. They would stand up for their convictions no matter what the consequences.'
"I told the president, 'In spite of all the polls warning you that talking about spreading democracy in the Middle East might be a losing issue--despite all the critics and the resistance you faced--you kept talking about the importance of free societies and free elections. You kept explaining that democracy is for everybody. You kept saying that only democracy will truly pave the way to peace and security. You, Mr. President, are a dissident among the leaders of the free world.' "
Critics of the administration's foreign policy argue that this is "unrealistic." But we saw the fruits of "realism" on Sept. 11, 2001, and the American people rejected it this month when they voted against John Kerry, the candidate of the status quo ante. President Bush, meanwhile, has a bold agenda and only four more years left to accomplish it. One can hardly blame him for acting to remove from his administration those who would stand in the way.
* The haughty, French-looking Massachusetts Democrat, who by the way served in Vietnam.
Chilean Whines
The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Santiago, Chile, was the site of a pair of highly amusing kerfuffles over the weekend, as the Chileans picked fights with the U.S. Secret Service and lost. The first incident involved Nick Trotta, the second-ranking agent in President Bush's security detail. As the president and Mrs. Bush entered a Saturday night dinner, "Chilean officers, who appeared to be waiting for the moment, stepped in front of Trotta, blocking him from entering," reports the Washington Post:
U.S. officials said Chilean police had been chafing for a week about a demand by Secret Service agents that they control the president's space, even when he was on sovereign turf. Now, it was payback time.
In the fracas that ensued, amid a flurry of half nelsons, one Secret Service agent wound up jammed against a wall. "You're not stopping me! You're not stopping me! I'm with the president!" an unidentified agent can be heard yelling on videotape of the mayhem. . . .
Bush either realized he was missing something, or he heard the commotion. The president, who is rarely alone, even in his own house, turned and walked back to the front door unaccompanied, facing the backs of a sea of dark suits. Bush, with his right hand, reached over the suits and pointed insistently at Trotta. At first the officials, with their backs to him and their heads in the rumble, did not realize it was the president intervening. Bush then braced himself against someone and lunged to retrieve the agent, who was still arguing with the Chileans. The shocked Chilean officials then released Trotta.
Trotta walked in behind Bush, who looked enormously pleased with himself. He was wearing the expression that some critics call a smirk, and his eyebrows shot up as if to wink at bystanders.
The Post quotes Marcelo Romero, a Chilean reporter: "All of us journalists agree that President Bush looked like a cowboy. It was total breach of protocol. I've seen a lot of John Wayne movies, and President Bush was definitely acting like a cowboy." Apparently some journalists think that's a bad thing.
Later, as the New York Times reports, the Chilean government "disinvited more than 200 guests to a dinner with the president rather than let the Secret Service screen them for weapons on their way into the presidential palace."
The Times quotes "one of the disinvited Chileans, who spoke on condition that he not be identified": "Can you imagine someone like the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court having to submit to an inspection by gringo security agents in order to get into our own seat of government? That's an affront no Chilean was going to tolerate, and [Chile's President Ricardo] Lagos had no choice but to act the way he did."
Oh well, it's nice to hear that William Rehnquist is well enough to travel.
Here Come the Judges--II
On Friday we argued that the Democrats in the new Congress would have a very difficult time if they try to block President Bush's judicial nominees. A related point occurred to us later: that such battles as do arise are likely to be less racially charged than in the past.
Race played a decisive role in the most recent two Supreme Court controversies: over Robert Bork in 1987 (rejected 58-42) and Clarence Thomas in 1991 (confirmed 52-48). Bork's opponents painted him as a racist, citing a 1964 article he'd published in The New Republic opposing the Civil Rights Act on libertarian grounds. The civil rights establishment was fully mobilized against Bork--unlike Thomas, who, being black, could hardly be portrayed as antiblack.
When President Bush nominated John Ashcroft as attorney general, opponents again made race an issue, focusing in particular on his role in persuading the Senate to reject President Clinton's nomination of Ronnie White, who is black, as a federal judge. The Republican Senate confirmed Ashcroft, but by a fairly close 58-42 vote. (Of the 42 who voted against Ashcroft, 38 were still in the Senate in November 2003, and 34 of those joined a successful effort in November 2003 to deny a confirmation vote to Janice Rogers Brown, who is also black; the other four were absent.)
The purpose of these racial appeals is to induce Southern Democrats--whose constituencies are conservative on social issues but heavily black--to vote against a nominee. And it has worked: Of 16 Southern Democratic senators in 1987, only 1 voted to confirm Bork, and Ashcroft had the support of just 2 of 9. By contrast, Thomas won the backing of 7 out of 15 Southern Democrats, barely enough to put him over the top. (For a chart showing how each Southern Democrat voted, see here.)
The reason race won't matter much is that there will be hardly any Southern Democrats left in the Senate. In the outgoing Senate the GOP advantage in the 22 seats from the erstwhile Confederacy is 13-9, but Republican victories in five open seats will bring that to 18-4.
Homer nods: We erred in stating that Sens. Lincoln Chafee, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins hadn't opposed any of President Bush's judicial nominees. In fact, the liberal trio, joined by Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas and John Warner of Virginia, voted against Leon Holmes's confirmation as a federal district judge in July. But Holmes was confirmed 51-46, with six Democrats voting "aye," including the two from his home state of Arkansas.
The Power of Music
American troops in Iraq have been using heavy-metal music from groups like Metallica and AC/DC to wage psychological warfare against the enemy, the St. Petersburg Times reports:
While the tanks flattened Fallujah this month, Hell's Bells [by AC/DC] bombarded the town. Speakers as big as footlockers blared from Humvees' gun turrets. Boom boxes blasted off soldiers' backpacks. As the troops stormed closer, the music got louder. . . .
"Uncooperative prisoners are being exposed for prolonged periods to tracks by rock group Metallica and music from children's TV programmes Sesame Street and Barney in the hope of making them talk," the BBC reported in May 2003. "However, Amnesty International said such tactics may constitute torture."
This is a great idea, but what would make it perfect would be if the soldiers used music by artists like Bruce Springsteen, Barbra Streisand and the Dixie Chicks, who've been flamboyantly unsympathetic to the American cause.
Great Moments in Public Education
Richard Bugbee, a teacher at Vermont's Essex High School, "is being honored as one of the nation's most respected teachers," reports Internet Broadcasting Systems. An unnamed student nominated Bugbee for inclusion in Who's Who Among America's Teachers, published by Educational Communications Inc.
Just one problem: Bugbee isn't teaching anymore. Um, make that two problems: The reason is isn't teaching anymore is that he's in prison. OK, three problems: He "pleaded guilty in August to having sex with one of his students, starting when she was 13 years old."
Lesson No. 1: Don't Let Experts Drive
"Experts Learn Lessons From Crash"--headline, BBC Web site, Nov. 21
What Would We Do Without Studies?
"Old Habits Really Do Die Hard, Study Shows"--headline, Reuters, Nov. 22
Isn't Basketball Violent Enough Already?
"Litke: NBA Commissioner Stern Hits Back"--headline, Associated Press, Nov. 21
Now Even Golf Is Getting Violent!
"Tiger Injures Handler at Florida Fair"--headline, Associated Press, Nov. 21
But Worthless on the Football Field
"Dolphins Valuable to U.S. in Arabian Gulf"--headline, Associated Press, Nov. 19
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Headline Writer Wasn't One of Them
"32 U.S. Students Choosen as Rhode Scholars"--headline, Associated Press, Nov. 22
You Don't Say
"It is now a universally accepted truth that the future of girls and women is one and the same. Today's girls are tomorrow's women."--Rafiqul Islam Sarkar, Daily Star (Dhaka, Bangladesh), Nov. 21
Not Too Brite--CLXXIV
"An elephant that stamped on his keeper at a Chinese zoo in the mating season and crushed him to death has been declared innocent because of mitigating circumstances," Reuters reports from Beijing.
Oddly Enough!
(For an explanation of the "Not Too Brite" series, click here.)
Mystery Solved? Sorry, Nope.
Nasser al-Kidwa has received a copy of his uncle Yasser Arafat's 558-page medical record, and it turns out the cause of death is . . . sorry, he's still not saying! The Associated Press reports:
Al-Kidwa said toxicology tests were conducted and "no poisons known to doctors were found." He did not rule out poisoning categorically, saying "we don't have proof" that it was not a cause.
He also said that the files gave no clear diagnosis for the reasons of Arafat's death on November 11 in a Paris-area military hospital after two weeks of treatment.
He apparently did not deny rumors that Arafat had AIDS, a theory that is "rapidly gaining strength in the US, France and Israel," according to the Sunday Times of Western Australia. Canada, too: The Toronto Star devotes a good portion of an article to the possibility. And a Yahoo! News search for "Arafat" suggests "Arafat AIDS" as an alternate search.
Ararat is in stable condition after dying at a Paris hospital.
Al-Kidwa received the medical files after a long and very public fight with Suha Arafat, the terror honcho's widow, who had claimed that she alone had the right to Arafat's medical information. Reuters reports that "French Defense ministry spokesman Jean-Francois Bureau said on Thursday Arafat's wife, Suha, daughter, Zahwa, and al-Kidwa would be allowed by French privacy laws to request the records. The three relatives, he said, would be 'free to make whichever use of the medical records they want.' "
So it's settled then? Don't be so sure. We wouldn't be surprised to see a brouhaha erupt over who owns the movie rights. |
