That's how it looked to me, too--despite today's Washington Post story claiming there has been a shift in the White House position.
Today's page one story had a quote from an unnamed State Department source who said that Kurtis Cooper's first response, to condemn the cartoons outright, was motivated by a belief that it would help to calm things down.
Bush has made a calculated decision to focus on the violence in recent days, according to White House aides. The administration's initial reaction, delivered last Friday by the State Department, was to sharply criticize the drawings. "Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable," State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said at the time. Cooper was repeating talking points provided by higher-level officials when the controversy erupted. "We hoped it would be a calming influence," a State Department official said.Bad call, I'd say. Very bad.
First, the Post should find out who made that call, then publish the name of the person responsible--Karen Hughes perhaps?
Since it didn't calm things down, as appeasement breeds agression (one of the few iron laws of international relations), the person who designed the US response to the Danish Cartoon crisis should then be asked to resign at once. Enough damage has been done.
Saying nothing would have been better than what the US has done so far. The US doesn't have to have an opinion on cartoons published in obscure regional Danish newspapers. If Bush couldn't bring himself to side with Denmark, he could have stayed out of it.
But to kowtow, as his administration has done, is just plain demoralizing. Every sign of weakness fans the flames of fanaticism. And the Bush administration looks very weak indeed--Bush actually sounded scared to me, his voice was trembling in the news clip with Abdullah.
Any rational person would ask: Why King Abdullah? What does Jordan have to do with this story? Why not the Danish ambassador?
Oh, where o where o where is Rudy Giuliani when we need him?