Month: March 2010

Friedersdorf remembers Fouad al-Rabiah's case:

Ms. Cheney, Mr. Kristol, Mr. Thiessen and Mr. McCarthy assert that American lawyers who represent Guantanamo Bay detainees are helping the enemy in a time of war. Here is a case, however, where the Guantanamo Bay detainee was innocent, languished for years in custody without a lawyer despite official knowledge of his innocence, and ultimately achieved his freedom with legal help. Ms. Cheney, Mr. Kristol, Mr. Thiessen and Mr. McCarthy have no answer for people like Mr. al Rabiah and his attorneys — their poorly reasoned McCarthyite rhetoric is bankrupt because they are unable or unwilling to acknowledge the distinction between being accused of being an enemy of America in war time, and actually being an enemy of America.

They have never made a distinction between a terror suspect and a terrorist. Tragically, so many in Gitmo were guilty of nothing – as the Bush administration itself conceded – but being in the wrong place at the wrong time and at the mercy of bounty-hunters. But all of the torture lobby has revealed they give not a whit about due process, about the dignity of human beings, about the vital importance of the Geneva Conventions.

I don't really believe they back this proto-fascist philosophy out of much conviction. Here's Kristol defending his latest McCarthyism. It's not a defense that provides any principled argument for his position. It is an attempt to say the motives behind the attack – rather than being, from Ken Starr to Michael Mukasey – are just Democratic partisan panic at polls – presented by the Greenberg/Carville/Emanuel faction. For Kristol, it's always about the game for power. There is nothing else there.

Biden gets it:

“This is starting to get dangerous for us,” Biden castigated his [Israeli] interlocutors. “What you’re doing here undermines the security of our troops who are fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. That endangers us and it endangers regional peace.”

Johannesburg, South Africa, 2.08 pm

Matt Steinglass thinks that it is "physically impossible to learn anything substantive by watching cable TV news":

Television is fundamentally a terrible medium for communicating events and public affairs. The demand of keeping a constant narrative flow going in real-time is poorly matched to the way things actually unfold in the world. Back when broadcast TV was the only way to watch documentary video, people put up with the bad narrative-structure fit, because being able to watch people shooting at each other or tsunamis washing away villages is amazing. But now that you can put that video on the internet and make it accessible on demand, either on its own or as part of a well-constructed, coherent story, it's hard to see why anyone should have to put up with anchorpeople, or with "experts" shouting at each other from tiny split-screen boxes.

All I see of it now is on the web, The Daily Show or Colbert. I feel far more informed because of that choice. But I hold out hope that at some point, someone will bring honest journalism and analysis and debate back to that medium.

Walter Russell Mead is disturbed that we pay so much attention to Palestinian suffering. He alleges that "disproportionate reactions to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians constitutes a genuine scandal and pretty much proves that anti-Semitism did not die when Hitler shot himself underneath Berlin":

Whatever the wrongs of Israel’s occupation policy — and I agree that there are some — the Palestinians, especially in the West Bank but even in Gaza, live much better than many people in the world whose suffering attracts far less world attention — and whose oppressors get far less criticism. I would much rather be a Palestinian, even in Gaza, than a member of a minority tribe in the hills of Myanmar, or almost anyone in the Eastern Congo or Darfur.

Millions of children in Pakistan and Indonesia have less food security, less educational opportunity and less access to health services than Palestinians who benefit from UN services (to which the United States is historically the largest single contributor) that poor people in other countries can only dream of.

Greg Scoblete counters:

I think there's a very important distinction here that Mead skips right over: by virtue of its aid and diplomatic support, the U.S. is implicated in Israel's behavior in a way that it simply is not with other countries. So one can agree with Mead, as I do, that Israel's treatment of the Palestinians does not rise to the world-historical level and nonetheless still argue that American policy toward Israel needs to be considered on the basis of that treatment (or more accurately, the ramification that that treatment has for American security).

Agreed. Americans finance this mistreatment with $3 billion a year. And American security interests in a global war with Islamism would be served by a peace agreement, which this president has a unique chance to accomplish, in a manner that could transform our relations with the Muslim world and help move the moderate middle of global Muslims away from Islamism. 

(Photo: a Gazan child buried under the rubble of an Israeli military attack during the Gaza war a year and a bit ago. By Thair Hasani/Getty.)

Joe Biden was kicked in the balls as he came to Israel with a simultaneous "fuck you" by the Israeli government announcing new settlements – 1600 houses – in East Jerusalem. The immediate spin was that Netanyahu was blindsided by the actions of his Interior Department and was embarrassed. But Haaretz reports today that these 1600 are just the beginning:

Some 50,000 new housing units in Jerusalem neighborhoods beyond the Green Line are in various stages of planning and approval, planning officials told Haaretz. They said Jerusalem's construction plans for the next few years, even decades, are expected to focus on East Jerusalem.

Most of the housing units will be built in predominantly Jewish neighborhoods beyond the Green Line, while a smaller number of them will be built in Arab neighborhoods. The plans for some 20,000 of the apartments are already in advanced stages of approval and implementation, while plans for the remainder have yet to be submitted

to the planning committees.

But Laura Rozen, always worth reading, sees skepticism in Israel:

Many observers were skeptical that Netanyahu was as in the dark about the plan as he claimed to Biden.

“Either one believes Netanyahu and his friends in government (saying it is all misunderstanding and bad timing),” wrote Jerusalem Post blogger Shmuel Rosner. “In such case, one should be concerned by Israel's chaotic decision-making process on delicate matters.”

“Or, one might choose not to believe,” Rosner continued. “One might think Netanyahu isn't telling the truth, or that [Interior Minister] Yishai is bluffing. If it's the former, one will conclude that Netanyahu has no intention of seriously exploring the just-announced peace negotiations. If it's the latter one will realize that Shas and Yishai are strong enough to toy with Netanyahu as much as they want – as much as embarrassing the American [Vice President]! – without paying a price. Not an encouraging thought.”

I cannot read Netanyahu's mind. But I can observe Israel's actions. They intend to occupy and colonize the entire West Bank for ever.  They may allow some parceled enclaves for Palestinians, but they will maintain a big military presence on the Eastern border of West Bank, and they will sustain this with raw military power and force. I certainly cannot see any other rationale for their actions these past few years that makes any sense at all. Many Israeli politicians now use the term "apartheid" for this future. 

(Map via Juan Cole.)

One of our Iranian readers writes:

Mustafa Taj-Zadeh was released today after 9 months in jail. This guy is a big deal. Breaking him was a personal wish of the highest ranking officials in the coup government. Taj-Zadeh played a major role as deputy interior minister in the first term of Khatami's presidency. He was a champion of  opening up the political process. He oversaw few of the freest elections Iran has seen since in her history. His commitment to fair and free elections in the face of constant harassment of the anti reform forces made him a hero and one of most admired men of Khatami's cabinet.

The conservatives came after him and finally used the judiciary to cook up phony charges and finally forced him out of the office. He then joined Khatami"s brother and other prominent reformist individuals in their party, Mosharekat (Participation front) – the main political party that supported Mousavi. He was famous for taking part in panels and bluntly confronting politicians and destroying them with his directness and detailed knowledge of political history. In his last speech, 4 days before the election, he said: there is only one way Mr. Ahamdi Nejad can win this and that is a coup.

His arrest came hours after the polls were closed, as they wanted him out of the way right from the start. They would have loved for him to break under intolerable conditions, but he resisted. His famous letter to his wife from Evin prison on the anniversary of their marriage became a turning point in breaking the taboo of expressing love to your wife in public. She wrote an open letter back and expressed even more love. It was an amazing moment. Here you have one of Iran's most prominent reformist politicians fighting the interrogators inside the jail and making the bravest political statements and then at the same time taking advantage of this opportunity to break social taboos and advance the cultural and social cause of the Greens as well. All via open love letters to his wife.

To let someone like him go after 9 months is an admission that pressure, torture and detention has miserably failed to break the back of the symbols of the green/reformist movement.

(Photo: Khatami visits Tajzadeh this morning.)

Continetti plays defense:

The business consumption tax would be passed on to the consumer, making it regressive. But Ryan notes that Americans indirectly feel the consequences of the above-average U.S. corporate tax rate today, through lost wages and higher prices. And these effects are regressive, too. Unlike the current situation, Ryan goes on, the business consumption tax "is cleaner, simpler, and it's on paper." It would also make American exports more competitive than they are today. "I believe it's a better deal," he says. Most important: "It's more uniform. You can't play social engineering."

She claims that Rasmussen is "pretty much solidly middle of the pack, and occasionally kinder to the Democrats" on health care reform. Really? Here is Rasmussen's polling on support healthcare reform since last June:

And here is everyone else without Rasmussen:

Give me a break. Also odd: Rasmussen doesn't seem to have polled this at all when reform was much more popular.