By embracing Islamists in Iran, President Jimmy Carter replaced one dictatorship with another. [Editor's note: Far worse than the Shah] The Bush administration's flirtation with Arab Islamists risks doing the same. Washington should push for democracy, but only work with groups willing to abide by democratic precepts.
Bringing to justice everyone directly responsible for acts of violence is important, but unmasking the full conspiracy is even more important from the standpoint of preventing terrorism. Lone extremists pose a challenge for law enforcement because they are difficult to predict. It's like searching every haystack for a needle. Perhaps we'd have better luck if we paid more attention to the needle factories. This is especially true now that militant Islamic terrorist groups like al Qaeda are adopting the model of leaderless resistance that our homegrown terrorists mastered so well.
Makiya makes a lot of sense. Such appeasement policies may be one reason why aggression against the US has increased, rather than diminished, since 9/11...
Makiya: The formation of the Fallujah Brigade [in April 2004] was an essential moment in the reversal of de-Baathification. It was by common agreement today a terrible idea and a failure. Its point was to recruit and co-opt former Iraqi officers, who were even allowed to dress up in Baathist uniforms. That kind of reversal had more to do with appeasement--with the vain hope that appeasing Baathists could curb the violence. But the exact opposite, of course, is true. Whether they were for or against de-Baathification, Iraqis recognize what a disastrous policy this reversal was. I expect de-Baathification to become a central plank of the new government.
This supersized souk (it's twice the size of most large grocery stores) has its competitors worried. And rightly so. In its first year of operation, Wegmans' first D.C.-area store did more business than the six area Harris-Teeter stores combined. Forbes wrote in 2003 that in an era when traditional grocers are being devoured by Wal-Mart, Wegmans isn't merely surviving, it's thriving. The grocery industry has lost 13,500 stores since 1992, Forbes points out, yet Wegmans continues to open new ones. That has the D.C.-area's traditional grocers worried. And so they're looking to government to keep their competitor at arm's length -- or at least across the river in Virginia.
The Gazette article reports that Marylanders are 'begging' for a Wegmans. Both the company and the Montgomery County council have gotten numerous letters pining for one. Unfortunately, their government isn't serving them. Montgomery County Executive Doug Duncan has introduced legislation making it more difficult for 'big box' stores like Wegmans (along with Target and Wal-Mart) to set up shop in the area. Duncan cites concerns about 'smart growth' policies, environmental concerns, and traffic as reasons for his proposal. The latter is rather peculiar. The philosophy behind big box stores is that they offer lots of things in one place, saving time, hassle and -- one would think -- gas and traffic congestion.
Nevertheless, when the progressive (read: big government) county council held hearings last summer on the new proposal, representatives from the two stalwart grocers in the area -- Giant and Safeway -- asked for tougher zoning laws, almost specifically tailored to the goal of keeping a Wegmans from opening in the county. Both cited congestion and infrastructure issues, but both also rather bluntly conceded that they were also worried about the competition. They were more than okay with using regulation to step on a competitor.
Where will it all end? Our choices are threefold.
We can wind down -- essentially the position of the mainstream Left -- and return to a pre-September 11 situation, treating Islamism as a criminal justice matter or deserving of an occasional cruise missile. This, in my view, would be a disaster and guarantee another mass attack.
Or we can continue to pacify Iraq. We then wait and see whether the ripples from the January elections-- without further overt American military action into other countries -- bring democracy to Lebanon, Egypt, the Gulf States, and eventually the entire Middle East. This is the apparent present policy of the administration: talking up democracy, not provoking any who might disagree. It may well work, though such patience requires constant articulation to the American people that we are really in a deadly war when it doesn't seem to everyone that we are.
Or we can press on. We apprise Syria to cease all sanctuary for al Qaedists and Iran to give up its nuclear program -- or face surgical and punitive American air strikes. Such escalation is embraced by few, although many acknowledge that we may soon have few choices other than just that. But for now we can sum up the American plans as hoping that democracy spreads faster than Islamism, and thus responsible government will appear to ensure terrorists and WMD disappear.
The above, of course, is what we plan, but gives no consideration to the intent of the enemy. As we speak, he desperately searches for new strategies to ward off defeat as jihad seems more likely to lead to ruin than the return of the caliphate.
For now Islamic fascist strategy is to make such horrific news in Iraq that America throws up its hands and sighs, "These crazy people simply aren't worth it," goes home, snoozes -- and thus becomes ripe for another September 11.
Or, in more human terms, it would appear that over the last 12 years the policies Mr. Giuliani put in place have spared New York perhaps 10,000 murders, 15,000 rapes and 800,000 robberies. This is clearly a humanitarian accomplishment of great magnitude.
When David Selbourne flew into America recently, he had good reason to feel he had arrived in the land of the free. His new book, The Losing Battle with Islam, was featured at New York's Book Expo, the US publishing industry's trade fair last week, after it failed to find a British publisher.
One glance at the title and it is easy to see why. The Losing Battle With Islam is a blistering critique of the West's response to Muslim militancy. Publishers in London were far too pusillanimous and PC to take it on, says Selbourne indignantly. But in America, a nation with greater intellectual vigour, Prometheus Books stepped into the breach and it will be published in September.
The manuscript has already been circulating in intellectual circles in samizdat form and it may yet find a British publisher now the Americans are leading the way. But the big brush-off is a prime example of Selbourne's thesis that westerners are displaying a misplaced and muddle-headed sensitivity to Muslim feelings that is not always reciprocated.
I caught up with him in Washington, where he was meeting think-tankers, policy makers and opinion-formers. "It's a relief to talk to people who are engaged in this matter," he sighed. "This is the front line of what matters in the world." He feels the non-Muslim world is ignoring at its peril the challenge posed by a resurgent Islam.
The fact that some of the worst Nazi war criminals, including Hitler (fascinating evidence for this coming from a book by Frederick Spott), were connoisseurs of music, visual art and architecture demonstrates that high culture does not necessarily have an ennobling effect on those who appreciate it. The writer George Steiner, who wrestled long and hard with this paradox, came to the conclusion that ultimately art cannot be justified by purely secular criteria — that it is essentially a religious activity, since the artist seeks a kind of immortality through his work. Carey will have none of this: “talk of the immortality of art, in the absence of a belief in God, is childish and self- deceiving”.
As the extra little cherry on top, all Moyers' nut conspiracy theories were being broadcast on PBS, subsidized by the U.S. taxpayer. Not only that, but Moyers takes a cut of every video of his show sold, and he has family members on the payroll. Let's see now: a corrupt, partisan demagogue and his family caught feeding at the taxpayers' trough. Let's just hope he never took a free golfing trip to Scotland!
When Ken Tomlinson, chair of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, suggested that PBS was maybe a smidgen left of center, Moyers began his lengthy public nervous breakdown. Already well-known as an insufferable jerk, it turns out Moyers is also a crazy megalomaniac, too.
In a recent speech to the the National Conference on Media Reform -- a conference dedicated to increasing liberal representation in the media from 94.6 percent to 99.8 percent -- Moyers responded to his critics by reading from his fan mail, reading favorable news articles about himself, and comparing himself to Jesus Christ or, as he put it, 'one of our boys.' If it were possible that he actually believed in God, PBS would be doing a special report on Moyers after a remark like that.
