NY Times Editorial on Bush's Ft. Bragg Speech

This editorial shows, perhaps, the cause of the left's criticism of Bush's vision on the war on terror and the current war. Though before going in Iraq, there was less certainity that there was no connection. Since the WMD's have not been found immediately following the war, it seems critics everywhere--in particular, Kerry, Kennedy, other Congressmen, even President Clinton--assume that Iraq had no WMD's and that there clearly is no smoking gun connection between Iraq and bin Laden (ie 9-11).

There is even some resentment (highlighted below, emphasis mine) that Bush keeps 9-11 foremost in our minds when reminding us of the need for constancy. I can't believe that they would have had such a problem with FDR invoking the memory of Pearl Harbor keep America focused on pursuing the difficult European theater of WW II against Germany, obviously not involved in Pearl Harbor.

We did not expect Mr. Bush would apologize for the misinformation that helped lead us into this war, or for the catastrophic mistakes his team made in running the military operation. But we had hoped he would resist the temptation to raise the bloody flag of 9/11 over and over again to justify a war in a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with the terrorist attacks.

More:

No one wants a disaster in Iraq, and Mr. Bush's critics can put aside, at least temporarily, their anger at the administration for its hubris, its terrible planning and its inept conduct of the war in return for a frank discussion of where to go from here. The president, who is going to be in office for another three and a half years, cannot continue to obsess about self-justification and the need to color Iraq with the memory of 9/11. The nation does not want it and cannot afford it.

At what point do the critics see that our unity against our enemies is of greater importance than a war conducted to their refined sensibilities. Intelligence and the fog of war do not allow for the certainity of knowing lies beyond our vision at this point. But, with enemies certainly resolved and enabled to strike us and our allies, and have struck since 9-11, what side do the critics want to error on? Bush has chosen. And I am glad he did. Let's stick to it. His critics embolden desperate enemies and indicate a lack of understanding the enemy, as Rove jokingly said. In so doing, they seem to say that they would rather error on the side of the enemy.

Kelo vs. City of New London -- Just Kidding, right, Mr. Souter?

Those familiar with Supreme Court's silly and unconstitutional rulings these last few weeks, will know our robed masters (Justice Souter included) decreed, in Kelo v. City of New London, that a city could condemn private property if the property could be shown to generate greater revenue for the city than the private owner. The ludicrousness of this is already coming home to roost. At first, in a light hearted way, Watley Review reported that NYC wanted to condemn New Jersey for development. And, today, news has it that the stakes go up.

Logan Darrow Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, has filed a claim against Justice Souter's New Hampshire home in order to build a new hotel/restaurant. Supposedly, this is legitimate. The hotel will be called "The Lost Libery Hotel" and the restaurant "Just Desserts Cafe".

Quoth:

Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.

Further:

"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."

Tony Blair's son to intern for Republican David Dreier

According to this BBC report, Euan Blair, set to complete his degree in ancient history at Bristol University, is to intern for the chairman of the House's Rules Committee, David Dreier. Evidentally, that he has chosen a Republican rather than a Democrat to intern for has raised a few eyebrows. And that he has chosen not just any Republican but Dreier (a regular Hugh Hewitt guest and a leader of center-right politics) should cause more wonder.

Michael Lewis on the lessons of Coach Fitz

Last week (11 June 2005), Saturday Morning Edition's Scott Simon interviewed Michael Lewis on his book, an expansion of his NY Times article (28 March 2004), about his high school baseball coach, Billy Fitzgerald ("Fitz"). Lewis recalls his years of play with Fitz at Isidore Newman School in New Orleans and thereby the value of athletics for youth and how a change in parents' views of athletics and schools threaten a legend. Said headmaster, Scott McLeod,

''The parents' willingness to intercede on the kids' behalf, to take the kids' side, to protect the kid, in a not healthy way -- there's much more of that each year,'' he said. ''It's true in sports, it's true in the classroom. And it's only going to get worse.'' Fitz sat at the very top of the list of hardships that parents protected their kids from; indeed, the first angry call McLeod received after he became headmaster came from a father who was upset that Fitz wasn't giving his son more playing time.

Evidently, since Lewis' NY Times article was published, Fitz's job was saved and the headmaster McLeod lost his job instead. As of October last fall, according to the school's website, they've hired a new headmaster.

Hattip: Camile, over at Book Moot.

Remember Amensty's "Gulag" Charge of Gitmo?

In the Washington Post, Pavel Litvinov, a former Gulag prisoner, speaks out on Amensty International Irene Khan's comparison of Gitmo as "the gulag of our time."

Real Torture

NY Times documents some real torture, just found in Iraq.

"Get that Sucker!"

Did you hear about this? From the Shreveport Times:

Beauticians beat up would-be burgler.

Mitchell tripped the robber as he tried to leave and cried aloud "get that sucker" as the group of about 20, nearly all women, some wielding curling irons, bludgeoned him until police arrived.
---
Jared Gipson, 24, of Shreveport was charged with armed robbery, Shreveport police said. He will be booked into the City Jail once he is released from the hospital.

Durbin and Gulags, Death Camps, and Pol Pot

Senator Dick Durbin (IL)

• Durbin's full speech, 14 June 2005, in the Senate
• "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."
• Comments on Gitmo, 15 June 2005
• Statement on Previous Comments, 17 June 2005
• From Spike O'Dell Interview, WGN 720, Chicago, 17 June 2005 (Via Hugh Hewitt).
• Q. No regrets on the statements you made?
  
  Durbin: No, I don't, and I'll tell you why. I went to the floor and read a memo from the FBI. This isn't something I made up. It was a memo that was unclassified, was disclosed, and I'm going to take, if I can ask you to bear with me, I'm going to read the highlights of it because it really sets the stage for my comments....[reads investigator memo] It goes on and on and on. I read this into the record because there has been a lot of controversy about what is happening in Guantanamo Bay where we have held 500 to 700 people for some times up to two and a half years with no charges. The Supreme Court has ruled that this Administration's new interrogation policy under Secretary Rumsfeld violates basic rights and I said if I just read this to you and you didn't know where it came from, where would you think this could happen? In the Nazi regime, in the soviet regime? Sadly it happened under Americans. Now the point I was trying to make is, we have departed from standards of conduct which presidents of both parties have played by for over 50 years, and we shouldn't be doing this....
• ---
  
• Q. I guess one of the reasons people are having such a hard time with this one, is when comparisons are made and you use names like Nazis and Soviet gulags, when you are talking Nazis there were what, 9 million people killed in the camps there. The gulags had about 3 million and so forth. And I know Gitmo is not the Holiday Inn down there, but I don't think anyone has died down there, have they?
  
  Durbin: No, that's true. In all fairness, they did not. But I don't believe we were dealing with deaths at Abu Ghraib either. We were dealing with a situation where when people saw the digital camera photographs, they said "My God! Americans should not be involved in that kind of conducrt." Now I will not demean or diminish the terrible atrocities that were commtted by the Soviets and the Nazis. The points I was, the point I was trying to make there was, if I just read this to you and say "What kind of country, what kind of governemtn would do that," and you'd think of some of the most repressive regimes in history. Sadly this FBI report says its being done by our government. I don't know who in our government. But it should stop....

Commentary (UPDATED 19 June):

• John Podhortz on Durbin stepping "Over the Line"
• Boston Herald's editorial calling on Durbin's resignation
• Michele Malkin has a roundup of what the Gulags, Pol Pot, and Nazis were really like, roundup of MSM's reactions, from Friday, including some remarks from Cheney. In other words, go read Malkin.
• Newt Gingrich sends all Senators a letter justifying censuring Dubin (Courtesy of Powerline).
• Mark Steyn on Durbin's slander.

Revisiting Iraq and Al Qaeda evidence

LAST UPDATED: 22 JULY 2005

(For a chronological and comprehensive listing of commentary and evidence, go to Archive News' Connect the Dots.)

------------------------ The Newsmakers -------------------------------

President Bush

• on Iraq and Al Qaeda, after Cabient meeting (17 June 2004)
• on Persevering in Iraq, Ft. Bragg (28 June 2005)

9-11 Commission Report and Staff Findings

• transcript of Commissioner Fred Fielding and Chicago U.S. Attorney Pat Fitzgerald (indicted bin Laden in 1998), regarding the allegation in the 1998 bin Laden indictment about an understanding between Iraq and al Qaeda (15 June 2004)

History News Network's compilation of newsmakers on topic.

------------------------ Commentators -------------------------------

Edward J. Epstein

• on mysteries of 9-11 and questions the Commission never addressed
• on Havel denying NY Times story relating Havel calling Bush to deny the meeting of Iraqi intelligence and Mohammed Atta in Prague
• on what is known of the meeting
• his article in Slate on the matter

Steve Hays on

• "Why Can't the CIA Keep Up with the New Yorker?" (13 September 2002)
  
• "A Match Made in Hell" (2 February 2003)
  
• "Maureen Dowd's Intelligence" (15 February 2003)
  
• "The Al Qaeda Connection" (12 May 2003)
  
• "Immigrant, Journalist, Iraqi Spy" (11 July 2003)
  
• "The Al Qaeda Connection" (11 July 2003) (Judge Merritt's report (via Instapundit))
  
• "Saddam's Al Qaeda Connection" (1 September 2003)
  
• "Dick Cheney Was Right" (20 October 2003)
  
• "Osama's Best Friend" (3 November 2003)
  
• "The Saddam-Osama Memo (cont.)" (19 November 2003)
  
• "Newsweek's 'Case'" (20 November 2003) (Newsweek's article (19 November 2003))
  
• "Case Closed" (24 November 2003)
  
• "The Clinton View of Iraq-al Qaeda Ties" (29 December 2003)
  
• "Cheney vs. Powell" (11 January 2004)
  
• Weekly Standard Editorial "Two Collin Powells" (19 January 2004)
  
• "More Connections" (3 June 2004)
• "The Connection" (7 June 2004)
• "Cutting Through the Fog" (23 June 2004)
• "Who is Ahmed Hikmat Shakir?" (23 June 2004)
• "Body of Evidence" - correcting CNN's error (30 June 2005)
• "The Mother of All Connections" - an Iraqi/alQaeda detainee (9 July 2005)
• "The DIA and CIA Go MIA" - American Intel's failure to connect the dots (17 July 2005)
  
• "Another Link in the Chain" - the creation of Ansar al Islam (22 July 2005)
  

Thomas Joscelyn

• "The Four-Day War" - Saddam's helpmate under Clinton's bombing (19 July 2005)
  

Cliff May

• "The Offended 'Offensive'" - Regarding Bush' Persevering Speech, Ft. Bragg, (29 June 2005)

Andy McCarthy (bio)

• "Iraq and Militant Islam" - legitmacy of links (1 June 2004)
• "Iraq and al Qaeda" -Questsions the Commission doesn't answer (17 June 2004)
• "It's All About 9-11" - Regarding Bush's Persevering Speech at Ft. Bragg (29 June 2005)
• Regarding Replies to his 29 June 2005 article (30 June 2005)
• "Case Not Dismissed" -Ahmed Hikmat Shakir & the 9/11 Commission (1 July 2005)
  

Richard Miniter on

• "The Iraq Al Qaeda Connections " Tech Central Station (25 September 2003)

Laurie Mylroie

• "How Terror Investigations Can Go Wrong" WSJ (26 December 2001)
• "Another Mistaken Conceptzia" Jerusalem Post (4 December 2002)
• "Understated" NRO (5 February 2003)
• "The Circle of Terror" NRO (19 February 2003)
• "The Baluch Connection" WSJ (18 February 2003)
• KJ Lopez Interviews Laurie Mylroie NRO (11 September 2003)
• Angelo Codevilla's Review of Mylroie's "Bush Vs. Beltway" NRO (1 November 2003)
• "'Al Qaeda Dunnit!' Think Again!" NRO (24 November 2003)
• Frontpage Interview: Saddam and 9/11 (8 January 2004)

Powerline on the relationship

Robert L. Pollock "Enemies Together: Clinton Was Right" WSJ (24 June 2004)

William Safire "The Zeiklow Report" -NYT (21 June 2004)

THIS JUST IN!! BILL CLINTON ADDS TO HIS MEMOIRS!

HE ALSO SAID HE RAISED TAXES TOO MUCH -- AND THEN TRIED TO RAISE THEM AGAIN [John Podhoretz]
Bill Clinton now acknowledges that his agonizingly boring memoir, My Life, was excessively verbose. ""Most people thought it was too long — a fair criticism," Clinton says. Unfortunately, he says it in a new paperback edition that adds something like 15 pages to the already endless 957 of the hardback.
Posted at 12:11 AM

John Lewis Gaddis on Bush's Grand Strategy

I have blogged on Gaddis before. (See February 8, 2004 entry for Gaddis' on Bush's first articulation of the grand strategy.) I heartily recommend this recent speech (given at Middlebury College in Vermont) by John Lewis Gaddis, professor of history at Yale and first to advocate the idea that Bush's war on terror, specifically, the pre-emptive war on the "axis of evil," is the first "grand strategy" of the 21st Century.

But, it's not all praise! It is a substantive, dispassionate, level-headed assessment of Bush's leadership failures and successes, his learning from mistakes, and the boldness of his vision, especially as it has been refined in his 2nd Inaugural Address.

Newsweek (flush)

Richard Brookhiser: Bush the Relentess Revolutionary

Here is a taste of Brookhiser's latest column in NY Observer.

Now President George W. Bush has gone to Moscow, on the 60th anniversary of the end of the war in Europe, to pay tribute to the Soviet Union’s achievement in defeating Hitler. At the same time, in very Bush-like fashion, he has been ruffling feathers.

Russia deserves Mr. Bush’s tribute. The first 20 minutes of Saving Private Ryan were pretty scary, but in the scale of the eastern front in World War II, it was a burp. Hitler lost his vision, his war and his life on the plains of Russia and Poland. Britain and America stabbed Germany in the belly and back in Africa, Italy and France, and incinerated it from the air. But it was annihilated by the Soviet Army.

. . . President Bush added to his trip to Moscow a side trip to Latvia, a former Soviet republic enjoying a still-tentative independence. Latvia’s first tentative independence followed World War I and ended when it was obliterated by the Soviets, the Nazis and then the Soviets again during World War II. Mr. Bush’s visit is an effort to do what we could not do at the time— to say "Alas!" to the defeated. "In Western Europe," Mr. Bush said, "the end of World War II meant liberation. In Central and Eastern Europe, the war also marked … Soviet occupation."

Michael Yon's picture and blog

By now, most people probably have seen this picture of Major Mark Bieger rescuing a small girl, Farah, mortally wounded in a suicide bombing in Mosul, on Wednesday I think. She did not live. But here is a little more information about the photographer, Michael Yon, and his work documented at his blog, a really interesting, upclose perspective, including more moving pictures, of some of our troops in Iraq. More power and prayers to him, the troops, and the Iraqis.
(Click for larger image.)

for the latest on Schiavo

Father Rob Johansen's Thrownback is one the best for the most extensive and latest information regarding Terri Schiavo. He cites several medical authorities on various parts of the debate.

"We are witnessing the second breakup of the Soviet Union."

Glenn Reynolds links to this Christian Science Monitor story about the repercussions of the most recent revolution in Kyrgyzstan (for more on this and all democratic movements throughout the world see Publius Pundit). Those former Soviet states mentioned experiencing popular protests are Belarus, a couple of states within Russia, and, in the far east, Mongolia. Here is a map.




Excerpts:

Some experts see a common thread among these upheavals that began 17 months ago when Georgians overthrew Eduard Shevardnadze in a peaceful revolt and continued with Ukraine's "Orange Revolution" late last year.

"Every situation is different, but a single process is unfolding," says Valentin Bogatyrov, a former Akayev adviser and director of the International Institute of Strategic Studies in Bishkek. "Kyrgyzstan is a kind of trigger that will spread this unrest to our neighbors, and beyond. We are witnessing the second breakup of the Soviet Union."

----

Some argue that it's only a matter of time before the revolutionary tide sweeps over Russia. Several of the country's 20 ethnic republics have a similar political profile to Kyrgyzstan, with a long-time ruler monopolizing power and often extending corrupt tentacles into business. "Events around the former Soviet Union have raised the possibility that similar things can happen here too," says Andrei Piontkovsky, director of the independent Center for Strategic Studies in Moscow. "The situation in several of our republics, including Tatarstan and Bashkortistan, look very much like Kyrgyzstan."

Hadley Arkes on Schiavo

For what it's worth, Hadley Arkes has opined in the Terri Schiavo legal fiasco, joining Hugh Hewitt, Scott Hinderaker, and Stephen Bainbridge on one issue and Bill Bennett on another.

He agrees with the former that Judge Whittemore read Congress' act in a "crimped way." And that Jeb Brush, on this basis, could seek, as Bennett says, to enforce a new trial, as Congress required.

The Governor can make it clear—if he is asked—that he will not accept any orders handed down by Judge Greer, for he has the responsibility to direct the marshals and police in Florida, and he feels obliged to direct them according to his earnest understanding of the requirements of the Constitution and the mandate of Congress, an understanding rather at odds with the understanding of Judges Greer and Whittemore.

Journalist Michael Malone: "Newspapers are Dead"

A high-tech journalist of newsprint for 25 years, Michael Malone, writes today that he has given up reading newspapers. This is not too surprising given the development of the Internet's myriad news resources but also the general shoddy reporting, plagarism, and rampant even virulent bias of newspaper media. But it is interesting to hear a print journalist says these things. Some key excerpts:

I've been involved with newspapers, in some form or another, for a quarter century. If I don't see a compelling reason to read them, why should anyone else?

And I'm not alone. In talking with some of my colleagues, men and women who had spent as many years, if not more, than me in newspapers, most of them have also admitted to rarely opening a paper anymore. One friend sheepishly said that he didn't even read the newspaper at which he had shared two Pulitzer Prizes.

---

In any other industry, a product that lost 1 percent of market share for two decades -- only to then double or triple that rate of decline -- would be declared dead. The manufacturer would discontinue it and rush out a replacement product more in line with the desires of the marketplace. So, let's finally come out and say: Newspapers are dead. They will never come back. By the end of this decade, the newspaper industry will suffer the same death rate -- 90-plus percent -- that every other industry experiences when run over by a technology revolution.

---

The last redoubt for the survival of newspaper was, in my mind, accessibility. Hopping from section to section, story lead to story jump, just seemed so much easier than crawling through a long story on a computer screen. Then I saw the first links embedded in blogs. There was simply nothing in the physical world that could ever hope to match the ability to leap through cyberspace from story to story, file to file, with almost infinite extension.

Looking back, it was then that I stopped reading print newspapers.

---

Needless to say, I still read the news, much of it coming from the newspapers I used to religiously read. But I am not reading the "paper," either literally or figuratively, that the publishers want me to read. Throughout the day, I construct my own newspaper in cyberspace, a real-time assemblage of wire service stories, newspaper features, blogs, bulletin boards, columns, etc.

Courtesy of No Left Turns.

"Thus saith the Judge"

Related to my post immediately below, is Jonathan Last's post, "Slaves to the Law," on the "easy faith" of some liberals--but also some religious conservatives, as I heard on Hugh Hewitt's show yesterday--to take the ruling of the court (in this case, Judge Greer's findings of facts regarding Terri Schiavo) as the voice of God.

A reader sent Last an extended excerpt of Lincoln's debate with Douglas, in which Lincoln points out the sole basis for Douglas' support of the Dred Scot ruling:

because a decision of the court is to him a "Thus saith the Lord."

Lincoln goes on to say that Douglas refuses to judge the merit of the case on it own grounds. Indeed, for Douglas, neither reason nor faith address the right or wrongness of the Supreme Court's decision regarding the humanity of slaves.

This is, of course, extraordinary. Any liberal today would rightly denounce such a position as immoral or patently untrue. However, as Last points out, this is what they are doing regarding Judge Greer's decision on Terri Shiavo. They mistake the decisions of a judge (and or court) as the highest authority, above which there is no other arbiter. This casually overlooks, and in so doing, demeans the relevance, indeed, the relative importance of the American citizen's conscience and our understanding of right and wrong.

As some anonymous reader, in the comments under Last's post, says:

The law is a human construct, and it's failures are self-evident to any person who doesn't think Marbury v. Madison was revealed to Moses as an appendix to the Ten Commandments. Whenever the laws and courts fail us, as they are doing with respect to Mrs. Schiavo, the response isn't to shrug our shoulders and bloviate about Judge Greer and the wisdom of the Florida Supreme Court. The response is to change the law, or change the judges. Either one will do in this instance.

And change them we must.

Tyranny of the Judiciary

Barbara Boxer at a Moveon.org rally (17 March):

Why would we give lifetime appointments to people who earn up to $200,000 a year, with absolutely a great retirement system, and all the things all Americans wish for, with absolutely no check and balance except that one confirmation vote. So we're saying we think you ought to get nine votes over the 51 required. That isn't too much to ask for such a super important position. There ought to be a super vote. Don't you think so? It's the only check and balance on these people. They're in for life. They don't stand for election like we do, which is scary.

Hugh Hewitt pointed out Boxer's amazing admission that the liberals actually do want a super-majority votes for the confirmation of the President's judges. Evidently, the Constitution's provision for a mere majority is not good enough. But instead of offering arguments and motions to amend the Constitution, the Democrats offer instead to make use of the filibuster in an unprecedented, systematic way for all the judges that they deem out of the mainstream of America.

But I wonder whether if this doesn't show another important liberal position.

The reason that such a "super important position" needs a "super vote" now is that judges are indeed more important now than they were in the Founders days. In fact, set in the context of America's recent cultural and political history--a mainstream which is moving slowly, incrementally but definitely to the right--is that, according to its conservative nature (as Boxer notes, because of the appointment for life), the judiciary is the last federal institution to follow these recent changes.

We have seen the change in the other two branches of Federal government: the House in Gingrich's so-called revolution of '94, the Senate also recently, and the moderately liberal Democratic presidency of Clinton and conservative George W. Bush. I think it helpful to also throw in the long-term trends of the MSM's (Main Stream Media) loss of influence, culminating in the recent discrediting of CBS in "Rathergate"--and, one can add this week's revelations of ABC's making hay out a doubious Republican Schiavo memo (courtesy Powerline).

The line in the sand for the judiciary has been drawn for several years, I suppose. But, it now appears to have escalated: the Democrats have invested themselves, like the Texicans in the Alamo, in such a desperate way. This desperation over the nominations to the judiciary is in fact their last position of power (even if only slight) in our country. Through the judiciary, the Supreme Court in particular, they maintain the legitimacy of their important social and political decisions--among other things, abortion on demand being one of the most important--not to mention the looming questions, "gay marriage" primary among them.

In other words, this recent appeal for a "super majority" vote is an attempt to preserve their tyranny of the judiciary. They can no longer (at least as recently as November, '04) can win a majority of support, so they fall back to their last stronghold and pull up the drawbridge of change to the judiciary, a simple rule of the majority, the means of change available to every other branch of federal government.

Is this 'World War IV' serious?

This article by Norman Podhertz is most likely worth our time, judging by what people I trust say.

I first posted on the idea and renaming the "War on Terror" WW IV here, a year plus ago now. There I proposed that WW 4 started, not with the attacks of 9-11, but with the first of radical Muslim terrorist attacks on the West at the Olympics in Munich, Germany, September 5, 1972.

That they attacked and killed 11 Israelis was not necessarily new or an omen for the West. That they killed Israeli Olympian athletes and did this at the Olympics, the western venue for good will and good natured but spirited competions between the respectable nations of the world, is the first manifestation (as far as I can see) of their opposition to the West, indeed the rest of the world.

Chrenkoff:Iraq's Progress (Pt. 18) and Tsunami Update

If you ever find yourself at point when the MSM is depressing, and you want to get a bird's eye view of progress in Iraq, the best place to go is Chrenkoff (listed in right-hand column). He posts mammoth, comprehensive digests of the progress in Iraq. Here is the latest. Others are usually listed in his right-hand column.

If that wasn't enough--this guy is amazing--he puts together, or has been since the Tsunami struck, Tsunami updates, which, again, are exhaustive. Here is the latest.

I think Chrenkoff might be unemployed....

Bernard Lewis discredited?

To which Martin Kramer replies "Fie!" More?

Misreading Lewis. Newsweek senior editor Michael Hirsh has a silly piece on Bernard Lewis in the Washington Monthly, claiming Lewis fathered the idea of imposing democracy on Iraq. So read this reporter's summary of a Washington lecture Lewis delivered a few months before the war: Lewis "said flatly that the idea of third parties producing and applying modern institutions in the Arab Middle East is 'unrealistic'. If the initiative is viewed by Arabs as a 'forced change by an external force', Lewis said, it is doomed to backfire, particularly if the democratizing initiative is accompanied by a prolonged U.S. military presence. Lewis said that Israeli forces were initially warmly welcomed as liberators in South Lebanon, but before long, the perfumed rice and flowers that were thrown at them turned into rockets and bombs." Hirsh missed that because he relied exclusively on Lewis's critics, who read Lewis selectively and with malice.
Tue, Nov 9 2004 5:36 pm

Our Memorials

Rightfully thinking of honoring our fallen soldiers, Hugh Hewitt proposed the other day that we encourage Congress to build a memorial in Shanksville, PA, in the field of the first American resistance. Then I read Jonathan Last's response. Evidently, he has visited Shanksville (written up here), and he says that that would be a horrible thing. It seems that Americans (and non Americans) have, spontaneously, been building a memorial, have been making a sort of pilgrimage and leaving behind signs and symbols of gratitude and memory. The local folks maintain and monitor the site. A big, planned memorial would ruin what has sprung up there. (I wish we had pictures!)

There's more. Tonight, Powerline pointed out a website, Fallen Heroes Memorial, dedicated to listing each of our fallen soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq--with circumstances of death, home, and a place for comments for each soldier individually or a bulletin board for all. It is moving, especially comments of friends or comrades of the fallen. Much, if not all, is hard to read. It is gratifying though to see the graditude and good faith of non-Americans' (again) and many of our American youth.

UPDATE: Jonathan Last has kindly left links to photos in the Comments section.

James C. Bennett's Anglosphere

In light of the continuing unraveling of the United Nation's relevance and creditibility, I think it is increasingly important to talk about the alternatives. James C. Bennett's Anglosphere is one of those. I suppose that another would be something called "a coalition of the willing," something that, while it isn't a permanent, formal relation whose existence would stretch beyond the conflicts that sire them, is currently in operation in two places in the world.

I like Bennett's idea, however, because it is not a collective built around race of Anglos, as it is one built upon English ideas of governance, law, and freedom. So, it can (and does) include people other than Anglos. Here's Bennett's book, now available, and he has website too. Also, his essay on it is still available here.