« Bush to Release Part of Inteligence Assessment (Updated) | Main | Berlin Opera Company Drops 'Beheaded Prophet' Opera »
September 26, 2006
'I did Not Lie to Wallace'
I've yet to comment upon former President Bill Clinton's tireade of 'Fox News Sunday' for a variety of reasons, namely because debating the past is as intellectual as trying to figure out if there is a personality trait that Coca-Cola drinkers have that Dr. Pepper drinkers don't have. In terms of the history of the United States pre-9/11, the facts are well presented and the political positioning done by Clinton during the interview is a stark reminder of why he was impeached in the first place.
The man doesn't know how to tell the truth and he doesn't know how to take his lumps; perhaps his pride gets in the way as it does with a good majority of us (as least us men). Pecan pie or not, Clinton's fact bending is sure to remind us all that's what he is best known for and why Al Gore ran away from him in the election of 2000.
Every single American should take a lump for 9/11. For that matter, every single person across the globe should too. No one fully saw it coming outside the comfy confines of Tora Bora. Some of us knew an attack would be forthcoming, but no one knew what Al Qaida had planned. Al Qaida was certainly a growing threat and one that was not comprehended by all U.S. politicians prior to 9/11. I contend it's still not fully comprehended, and that's what is so troubling.
Because one political party seeks to gain seats in the U.S. House and Senate through the ultimate strategy of attacking the Bush White House and attacking Bush's strongest issue, fighting terrorism, to secure their own political hide, they've made these discussions newsworthy and available for criticism. The events over the weekend have made reading Jim Geraghty's book 'Voting to Kill' even more interesting.
It's not necessarily the Democratic Party who I don't believe comes close to understanding the threat, but it's that the American Left has no clue who we are up against, even more so than the rest of Americans who don't read this site or others like it. Take for instance the following quote by Mohammad-Mahmoud Ould Mohammedou (apparently his parents wanted to really push his Islamic faith upon him) who is the Associate Director of the Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research at Harvard University (p. 242).
Sept. 11 was not an unprovoked, gatuitous act . . . Though dismissed widely, the best strategy for the United States may well be to acknowledge and address the collective reasons in which Al Qaeda has been true to its word in announcing and implementing its strategy for over a decade. It is likely to be true to its word in the future and cease hostilities against the United States, and indeed bring an end to the war it declared in 1996 and 1998, in return from some degree of satisfaction regarding its grievances.
Mohammedou might not be a part of the American Left even though his position within Harvard certainly suggests otherwise, but it's this thought that presides over us all. So what are Al Qaida's grievances? U.S. soldiers in Saudi Arabia, support for Israel, support for dictators, 'soaking' the Middle East out of resources (i.e. world trade), our culture of tolerance, the U.S. is not an Islamic nation, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Kashmir and any other grievance Al Qaida will throw out there for debate.
Mohammedou suggests we should capitulate on a few of those to win peace, but he uses the wrong framework and shows how little he understands of Al Qaida. Contrary to Mohammedou's writing, Al Qaida has not been true to its word over the past decade as evidenced by increasing attacks on the Muslim populace and less attacks on the so-called Infidelian West among many, many other similar examples.
Even if we are to conclude AQ would keep its word, which ones of the above would make AQ happy? The simple fact is that we would have to do everything AQ argues against, and that would ultimately conclude with Sharia in the United States. The AQ ideology is based on the writings of Muslim Brotherhood philosophy Sayyid Qutb who wrote, in part, the demonic culture of the United States was a growing threat to Islamism. We would have to curb our culture too.
But enough about Mohammedou because certainly every reader of this site realizes now more than ever you can be an idiot and still be a professor at Harvard. Geraghty notes several similar calls and instances within 'Voting to Kill' that come from our elected officials. I have not run across one from Clinton yet, though I suspect there is one included as there simply has to be.
And that's what makes Clinton's suggestion he did everything to get OBL while he was in office so damn funny. We know that's not true and anyone who isn't looking at the 1990s through Clintonian eye glasses realizes this. During the 1990s, combatting terrorism was largely a police matter. We'd investigate after an attack and then decide if there was enough evidence to militarily respond. Under Bush we attack first, hoping to prevent terrorist attacks. Both methods have had their successes and failures and both methods need to be used, but the American public would not have sat by and allowed an invasion of Afghanistan during the 1990s because no case was ever made for such an invasion.
We can learn a lot from the history of this nation not responding to terror that dates all the way back to the Carter years up through to 9/11, but let us not re-write history to try to save our legacy. It's just a fact he didn't do everything he could to prevent it and that he did worry about legal ramifications before national security. I fault Clinton for a few things, but I do not fault him more than any other leader for failing to prevent 9/11. I fault my own negligence just as much as anyone else's for that date.
And by the way, Geraghty's book, 'Voting to Kill,' really is eye-opening. Even for someone that follows the exact information Geraghty writes upon, there is so much that I have missed. From what I have read thus far, I highly recommend it.
Posted by Chad at September 26, 2006 4:06 PM
