Month: October 2005

It’s a good sign that the president seems to see the real threat this could pose to the country and basic civil order. I’m leery of using the military to deal with it, though. Maybe it’s useful to have that option available so we don’t have some kind of paralysis as we did with Katrina. Stockpiling sufficient amounts of Tamiflu and other means to ameliorate those infected might help. It’s also a good idea to stock up on canned goods and other survival items in case the worst happens and you end up in a quarantined area. Still the president is reassuring that he is on top of this. Or at least he says he is:

I take this issue very seriously, and I appreciate you bringing it to our attention. The people of the country ought to rest assured that we’re doing everything we can: We’re watching it, we’re careful, we’re in communications with the world. I’m not predicting an outbreak; I’m just suggesting to you that we better be thinking about it. And we are. And we’re more than thinking about it; we’re trying to put plans in place, and one of the plans — back to where your original question came — was, if we need to take some significant action, how best to do so. And I think the President ought to have all options on the table to understand what the consequences are, but — all assets on the table — not options — assets on the table to be able to deal with something this significant.

Notice also that Bush has been reading about the 1918 pandemic. I’ve thrown enough criticism his way lately. Time for some praise on this potentailly catastrophic scenario.

LINGUISTS UPDATE: The complete total of Arabic and Farsi linguists dismissed by the Pentagon from 1998 to 2004 because they were gay is 26.

Gay activists in London protest the Iranian regime’s hanging of gay youths. Where are the American gay groups?

An emailer writes:

Regarding your link to Peter Berkowitz’ article on funding Arabic education, I just want to make the point that it’s even more ridiculous than you think that the US government doesn’t provide more scholarships for studying Arabic. There’s already a program, the National Security Education Program, that funds up to a year of study of “less commonly studied” languages; the recipient must work for at least a year in a defense/intelligent/security position in the US government in return. Their website is here. Yet probably less than 100 students get grants each year, and only a fraction of them go to the Mid East. Why can’t the government just increase NSEP’s funding? It would be so easy and wouldn’t even require creating any additional programs. And yet…
(If it’s any consolation though, there are about 40 students enrolled in second year Arabic class here at Yale, and those students who do take Arabic are quite enthusiatic about it. So there’s hope yet.)

I might also add that six trained Arab linguists in the Pentagon were fired by the Bush administration in 2002 – for being gay. Hey, you gotta have priorities …

Bush-worshipper Hugh Hewitt clashes with principled conservative Stephen Bainbridge. Fight! Fight!

GAY VERSUS GAY: The case of Paula Ettelbrick, a lesbian “activist” and head of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, who has some questions to answer with respect to human rights abuses in Iran. I.e. why is she so craven toward the mullahs?

“With three years left in a lame duck presidency, with an exhausted and beaten-down administration that has pushed the envelope on several fronts with mixed success, I don’t think it should come as a surprise that the President might have considered this vacancy an opportunity to remind his bunch that he remembers and rewards loyalty and fidelty. ‘I know it’s 2005,’ you can imagine him telegraphing, ‘I know we are in a tail spin, Katrina hurt, Iraq hurts, our domestic agenda is stuck in the mud. But don’t give up. Don’t be tempted to leak, to leave, to surrender. Stick with me and you, too, will earn your reward.'”

AN AMERICAN HERO: The story of Captain Ian Fishback – and the most pressing moral issue in politics today. My newest column in the Sunday Times of London.

Johann Hari points out that the Darfur genocide is ending. There are, apparently, no more black people to kill or cleanse. Money quote:

The National Islamic Front government has culled over 400,000 ‘Zurga’ – a word which translates best as ‘niggers’ – and driven two million more from their homes in its quest to make western Sudan ‘Zurga-free’. Their racist Janjaweed militias would love to carry on rampaging and raping, but the black villages have all been burned down and the women have all been raped with ‘Arab seed’ to ‘destroy their race from within’ – what’s a poor militiaman to do? The first genocide of the twenty-first century has proceeded without a hitch, and the genocidaires have won.

Johann is always worth reading.

“I’m not softening my position a bit, in spite of the emails. I’m sorry, but the Republicans richly deserve to lose control over the House and the Senate in 2006. There is no excuse whatsoever for their profligate spending, and no excuse for Tom Delay’s absurd claim that there is no fat in the federal budget. Every American should be disgusted at this spending spectacle.” – libertarian radio host, Neal Boortz, sticking to his guns.

The one thing that Roberts and Miers immediately seem to have in common is complete judicial deference to the executive branch in wartime. An emailer makes the following important point:

I believe that the Roberts and Miers nominations reflect the Bush administration’s overriding preoccupation with preserving the prerogative to torture. As you know, it’s the only issue on which Bush has seriously threatened to veto congressional legislation (the McCain proposal that would outlaw cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment). Roberts’ decision in Hamdan shows that he will give the administration carte blanche when it comes to the treatment of detainees. Miers’ close relationship to Bush and her role as White House Counsel (the position Alberto Gonzales had when he gave the torture policy his legal blessing) points the same way.

Hard to disagree. I think this president understands the gravity of his own legal decisions permitting cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of military prisoners, even those clearly meriting Geneva protections. And he knows there’s a paper trail. My emailer points out that the war on terror is one of the GOP talking points:

Ken Mehlman, chairman of the Republican National Committee, yesterday held a conference call with conservative leaders to address their concerns about Miers. He stressed Bush’s close relationship with Miers and the need to confirm a justice who will not interfere with the administration’s management of the war on terrorism, according to a person who attended the teleconference.

The Miers appointment is completely compatible with the need to maintain the president’s approval of detainee abuse – against potential legislative checks and judicial oversight. The war for America’s soul continues.

Here’s an interesting story. Back in 1989, Harriet Miers gave answers to a questionnaire on gay rights when she was running for the Dallas city council. She didn’t favor repeal of anti-sodomy laws, but she did say yes to the question:

“Do you believe that gay men and lesbians should have the same civil rights as non-gay men and women?”
She was noncommittal on several other questions, saying, for example, that she would be willing to discuss the need for a law prohibiting discrimination in housing or public accommodations against people who had AIDS or were HIV-positive.
Asked whether qualified candidates should be denied city employment because they are gay or lesbian, she said, “I believe that employers should be able to pick the best qualified person for any position to be filled considering all relevant factors.”

I’m not sure what to make of this, except to say that this was 1989, and that her refusal to endorse discrimination against gays and lesbians on those grounds alone speaks well of her. (Hey, this was Texas in 1989.) Her view that people could be arrested for private consensual sex, however, was and is alarming. But a whole lot of people have changed their minds on that in the last decade or so. Maybe Miers is one of them. I think it’s a fair question to ask of her at the Senate hearings: “Do you believe that gay men and lesbians should have the same civil rights as non-gay men and women?” And: “What do you understand by the term ‘civil rights’?”

The Ten Commandments judge is running for governor of Alabama. I have a feeling we haven’t heard the last of him. Here’s a profile that’s about as good as it gets.