THE quality I most admire about President Bush is that he isn't afraid to lead. Buoyed by election triumphs first at home, then in Iraq he made his State of the Union Address a trumpet call for freedom and democracy. Above all, our president did one thing that I've longed for him to do: He called on the Saudi royal family to give their country's citizens a voice in their own future. It was an enormous step, discarding decades of diplomatic practice. Our government long ignored Saudi complicity in turning Islam into a creed of irresponsibility and venom. The Saudis spread money on both sides of the aisle in Washington, buying silence. The Bush family itself has long and friendly ties to the House of Saud. But Wednesday night our president put the Saudis on notice: Freedom's not for sale. Not even for oil.
His words were carefully chosen. But the Saudis must have been stunned. For all of our concerns about an Iran with nuclear weapons, the Saudi threat cuts deeper. From the Black Sea to the Indian Ocean's extremities, I've seen how Saudi wealth funds the spread of intolerance. Thousands of Saudi-sponsored mullahs blame the United States and Israel for the Islamic world's home-grown ills. Saudi money and bigotry created the terrorist movements we face today. And the Saudis are still funding hatred. When the monstrous House of Saud collapses as it is bound to do we may not like the immediate results. But the longer the reckoning is delayed, the worse the blowback will be. Better to side with the people now and take our short-term lumps. We have dues to pay for supporting those hypocritical princes at the expense of our noblest principles.
Likewise, Bush called on Pharaoh Mubarak to allow democracy on the Nile. For far too long, the United States has rationalized and subsidized authoritarian rule in Egypt while Cairo encouraged the people to blame us for their every misery. We cannot permit the current pharaoh to inflict his son upon his captive state. Let the Egyptian people vote in free elections, as courageous Iraqis have done. Give them real choices, not a dynasty. As with Saudi Arabia, we may not like the early results, but the current state of affairs is unsustainable and appallingly unjust.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: tipper ||
02/04/2005 10:38:03 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11130 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The mark of a good leader is to select the objective, and the right time, place, and people to pursue it. Flailing about because the leader has chosen to do everything at the same time doesn't accomplish a damn thing.
#2
For all of our concerns about an Iran with nuclear weapons, the Saudi threat cuts deeper.
What I've been saying for a while on RB (not that I know what to do about it though).
#1
Good as always. He does a remarkable job in ridiculing the left without being deliberately mocking, simply because he's got logic, facts, and rationality on his side.
Posted by: The Doctor ||
02/04/2005 12:04 Comments ||
Top||
#2
What explains this automatic censure of the United States, Israel, and to a lesser extent the Anglo-democracies of the United Kingdom and Australia? Westernization, coupled with globalization, has created an affluent and leisured elite that now gravitates to universities, the media, bureaucracies, and world organizations, all places where wealth is not created, but analyzed, critiqued, and lavishly spent.
In war, mistakes happen and innocents are often killed. For journalists covering the action, the risk is extremely high. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, 36 were killed in Iraq between 2003 and 2004, some unfortunately as a result of U.S. fire. But were any of these journalists targeted for death, as CNN chief news executive Eason Jordan recently suggested?
At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, during a discussion on media and democracy, Mr. Jordan apparently told the audience that "he knew of 12 journalists who had not only been killed by U.S. troops in Iraq, but they had in fact been targeted," according to a report on the forum's Web site (www.forumblog.org). The account was corroborated by the Wall Street Journal and National Review Online, although no transcript of the discussion has surfaced. Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Christopher Dodd were also present, but calls to their offices were not returned in time for publication.
In any event, it's an assertion Mr. Jordan has made before. In November, as reported in the London Guardian, Mr. Jordan said, "The reality is that at least 10 journalists have been killed by the U.S. military, and according to reports I believe to be true journalists have been arrested and tortured by U.S. forces."
This is very serious stuff, if true. Yet aside from Mr. Jordan's occasional comments, there's no evidence to support it. Mr. Jordan's almost immediate backpedaling seems to confirm this. In a statement to blogger Carol Platt Liebau, Mr. Jordan said, "To be clear, I do not believe the U.S. military is trying to kill journalists in Iraq. I said so during the forum panel discussion. But, nonetheless, the U.S. military has killed several journalists in Iraq in cases of mistaken identity." He added, "three of my CNN colleagues and many other journalists have been killed on purpose in Iraq." He didn't elaborate by whom.
According to information on CPJ's Web site (www.cpj.org), between 2003 and 2004, 12 journalists were killed as a result of U.S. fire. None was from CNN. At least a few of those were instances of mistaken identity. In one case, Terry Lloyd of ITV News was in an SUV at the start of the war in March 2003. As CPJ notes, an investigative report in the Wall Street Journal cited accounts of U.S. troops who recalled firing upon cars marked "TV" since it was believed suicide bombers were using them to attack U.S. troops. It appears, however, that Mr. Lloyd's vehicle was caught in a crossfire. Aside from this one dubious case, none of the other reported deaths even remotely resembles intentional targeting by U.S. troops.
Doubtlessly, Mr. Jordan's unsubstantiated comments play well for CNN's international anti-American audience, who grasp at anything damaging to America's reputation. If the CPJ information is wrong, however, we'd like to see the evidence from Mr. Jordan. Otherwise, how can CNN justify keeping on staff someone who maligns our troops with rumor and innuendo?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
02/04/2005 8:04:01 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It is about time a newspaper published this. The New York Crimes and other members of the MSM will not touch this story unless they are forced to.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.