London Calling

Twenty seventeen won't be remembered as a year of love, what with the terror attacks in London and the growing bitterness in the campaigns for the parliamentary election in the United Kingdom this Thursday.  Prime Minister Theresa May's Conservatives, incidentally,  have slipped to a one-point lead in the polls over Leader of the Opposition Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party. 

May had been Home Secretary in the Cameron Cabinet, which put her in charge of counter-terrorism.  Now, after three terror attacks in Britain on her watch as Prime Minister, she's declared that enough is enough.  It doesn't look good for someone who should have dealt this problem long ago, and Labourites know it.

A Labour win on Thursday would be a huge upset.  It would not only be a rejection of Tory values and a loss of confidence in the Conservatives' ability to handle internal security, it would put in power a more progressive government that would work more in concert with continental Europe even as Brexit proceeds - and form a new paradigm of resistance against the United States.  

We all just celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the Beatles' Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, which kicked of the Summer of Love in 1967, but there's no love to go around fifty years later.  Islamic extremists hate the West, there's bad blood between Labour and the Tories in Britain (as well as between the Democrats and the Republicans in America), Europeans have learned to distrust the United States, and Trump has learned to hate them back - especially the Muslim mayor of London for how he's handled terrorism.  "Love trumps hate?"  Boy, was that slogan wrong.  But then, the Summer of Love itself wasn't so much a love fest, what with young soldiers dying in Vietnam and racial resentment exploding in American cities in the form of riots.

Phony Beatlemania has bitten the dust? :-O           

Trump Did WHAT?

Donald Trump revealed highly classified information to the Russian ambassador to the United States and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov when he met with them at the White House last week, according to the Washington Post.

It gets worse. The information he revealed to the Russian diplomats had been given to the United States regrading the Islamic State terrorist group, and the the source, identified only as a foreign partner, told the White House not to share the information with the Russians. The information is so sensitive that other foreign governments allied with the U.S. aren't privy to it.

It gets worse. MSN reports that Trump's decision to share this information with the Russians "risks cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of the Islamic State."

It gets worse. National security adviser H.R. McMaster, one of the few credible members of this administration, denied the story, saying that Trump "did not disclose any military operations that were not already publicly known," thus denying something that has nothing to do with the revelation that the Washington Post reported.

And congressional Republicans go la di da di da, da-diddy-diddy da, de da, la di da di da, da-diddy-diddy da, de da . . .

I should retire this blog and start a new one devoted entirely to popular culture. Commenting on current events is beginning to make my head spin.

They Got Him

So it turns out that the bombings in New York City and in Seaside Park, New Jersey were related.  And they got the alleged bomber - Ahmad Khan Rahami, an afghan-born American citizen who has live most of his life in the United States - within two days. Nice work by the authorities.  Rahami will be tried, but the evidence is pretty much against him. 

It appears, though, that the politicians were wrong about the bombings from the get go, as they originally saw no connection between them and no connection of either one to Islamic extremism.  Meanwhile, there was a knife-wielding attacker in Minnesota who was also an Islamic extremist.  Both of these guys were caught, but symptoms more merely treated.  The illness of terrorism is still there.

An Argument Against the Death Penalty

Ten years ago today, the federal government executed domestic terrorist Timothy McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995. It was the first federal execution since 1993. Then-Attorney General John Ashcroft declared that this should send a loud an clear signal to would-be terrorists that there would be a severe price to be paid for committing a attack on American soil.

That was June 11, 2001.

Ashcroft and other capital punishment advocates, of course, couldn't fathom they idea of a terrorist willing to kill himself in perpetrating an attack. Yet, three months to the day later, eight foreigners, in four pairs, trained as pilots, commandeered four planes and flew or attempted to fly them into various targets. Which leaves the obvious question: How does the death penalty deter suicide terror commandos???

You got me.

Why should we respond to any violence with . . . violence?

The War Is Over?

The United States military has pulled its combat troops out of Iraq. Aside from changing the discussion from the Islamic cultural center near the World Trade Center site, it signifies the end of one era and the beginning of another.

The combat phase of American involvement is over. But it will be awhile before we see whether today's events lead to a lasting peace. Bear in mind that when the armistice ending the Korean War was officiated, many were unsure if it would hold. Michael Dukakis, the 1988 Democratic presidential nominee, once said something revealing - though he had served in Korea after the war ended, he was aware at the time that a second war could begin at any moment. It took several years before it became apparent that a lasting peace had been established in Korea, even though the country remains divided into two political units. If today's withdrawal is the prelude to a lasting peace in Iraq, we will not know that for quite some time.

Iraq in 2010 is different from Korea in 1953, though. Korea had two established governments on either side of the armistice line, for example; Iraq can't even form one. Moreover, Iraq is prone to different factions trying to undermine each other. Sunni and Shiite militias can be expected to fight for any kind of advantage, even as politicians in Baghdad try to form a coalition based on the parliamentary election results from March. Plus, there's the obvious threat of al-Qaeda's presence. Meanwhile, the fifty thousand American servicemen remaining in Iraq may be restricted to helping to train the national police force and the military and advise whoever ends up governing the country, but the scenario of them having to fight terrorists and factionalists in self-defense remains a possibility. As attention focuses to Afghanistan and as President Obama hopes to make sure Iraq is stable, it's important to remember that while the war may be over, the peace has yet to be won.

Scare In the Square

The recent arrest of Faisal Shahzad, the by a naturalized American citizen of Pakistani birth who attempted to plant a bomb in Times Square in New York City, could have been foiled by the federal government's own missteps in handling he case. Shahzad's name was immediately placed on the no-fly list when information about the sport utility vehicle parked in Time Square with a bomb inside it linked him to the vehicle, but he was able to buy a ticket on Emirates Airlines to Dubai. EA somehow failed to check the list, but federal authorities managed to stop the plane from taking off from John F. Kennedy International Airport and arrest him. As far as I'm concerned, the system worked.

Nevertheless, right-wingers are complaining that the Obama administration should be held accountable for the fact that Shahzad still got on the plane or that a bomb was ever planted there. Do they really expect Obama to micromanage the New York Police Department? Or do Emirates Airlines's job of checking no-fly lists? Anyway, Shahzad proved to be rather incompetent in his execution of the plot. The bomb was poorly made, the timers were haphazardly installed, and the SUV was a 1993 Nissan Pathfinder bought off Craigslist. Why would anyone want to buy a seventeen-year-old SUV - a Nissan, no less - with cash and with no bill of sale?

The bomb didn't have to work, apparently, to have an effect. The fact that it was planted in one of the busiest urban intersections in America was enough to scare the Shinola out of everyone. By that criterion, the plot was a success. Similarly, it turned out that terrorists didn't have to launch an attack anywhere in America during the 2004 presidential election campaign to make us elect George Walker Bush to a second term and give Osama bin Laden a recruiting tool for four more years. All bin Laden had to do then was make a tape of himself.

Pacem In Terris

Not since Pope John XXIII issued his landmark encyclical on the subject of world peace, Pacem in Terris, forty-seven years ago this month have the need for a better understanding and more negotiation between nations and the dignity of all humankind been so relevant in light of President Obama's nuclear weaponry summit in Washington. Obama and the leaders of 46 other countries reached wide-reaching agreements on the need to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorist groups like al-Qaeda and the goal of reducing and eliminating the national stockpiles of nuclear material. Mexico and Ukraine have agreed to slash production of high-enriched uranium, and Russia has pledged to close a plutonium-processing factory. President Nicolas Sarkozy of France has proposed an international effort to crack down on elicit uranium trafficking, thought he has not committed to reducing the French nuclear arsenal any further.

The Summit on Nuclear Security has been a success for Obama because he has put the United States in a constructive partnership with containing nuclear proliferation and keeping such weapons out of the hands of terrorists, he has formed a greater consensus on pressuring Iran for its own nuclear weapon program, and he got commitments from various nations on further cooperation. Obama clearly wants to change the trajectory of American foreign policy that recognizes its limitations as a major power and seeks a leadership role among, rather than in opposition to, other countries. Because al-Qaeda and state-sponsored terrorism have been at the crux of these agreements, it should be hard for the Republicans to find any flaws in Obama's approach, and I don't really expect them to.

Rudolph The Long-Nosed Republican

My jaw almost dropped when Rudolph Giuliani appeared on ABC-TV and insisted to George Stephanopoulos that we had had no terrorist attacks under George Walker Bush, completely forgetting that the September 11, 2001 attacks happened on Bush's watch. Many people found this ironic, given that Giuliani was mayor of New York when the 9/11 attacks happened and has used the event to buttress his own national security credentials. Stephanopoulos apologized for not calling Rudy on the mistake, but Giuliani continues to insist that President Obama has done nothing to make us safer.

Giuliani has since said that he meant we'd had no terrorist attacks in the United States since September 11, 2001 under Bush. Okay, I'll give him that, because I'm a charitable sort of guy, but even that remark isn't entirely true. How about the 2001 anthrax attacks? Okay, so Giuliani meant there had been no Islamic terror attacks under Bush after 9/11, and pointed that out as much. "[A]s far as we know," he said of the anthrax attacks, "that was not done in the name of Islamic terrorism."

Even if you grant that, you have to consider the SUV attack at the University of North Carolina, where a Muslim inspired by Muhammad Atta intentionally hit nine people with his sport utility vehicle to punish America, as well as the 2002 Washington, D.C.-area sniper attacks orchestrated by one John Allen Muhammad, a member of the Nation of Islam, as an act of jihad. If Giuliani were to insist that he was only referring to foreign Islamic terrorism, I couldn't grant any benefit of the doubt there. Too many qualifiers. But that still wouldn't be true, as an Egyptian militant shot up a El Al (the Israeli national airline) ticket counter at Los Angeles International Airport in 2002. All of this happened under Bush.

Giuliani isn't the only Republican to try to imply that 9/11 was not Bush's fault. Bill Clinton was blamed for 9/11 by right-wingers almost since September 12, 2001, on the grounds that he left Bush a flawed national intelligence network . . . and also because he had failed to capture Osama bin Laden. So had Bush. And Bush didn't seem too serious about bin Laden even after the August 2001 memo indicating bin Laden's desire to strike inside the United States. This is all part of an orchestrated attempt to paint the Democrats as soft on terrorism, even as Obama demonstrates his own seriousness in dealing with the issue. What's appalling about Giuliani is that he built his post-mayoral career and political prospects on the idea that he's a security expert who knows how to combat enemy commandos bent on acts of war against American citizens. He's not. He did a great job keeping New York City together on September 11, 2001 and in the weeks after, but he didn't do anything that might have enhanced the security of New York City. If anything, he did something that weakened it by keeping the city central command center in the original 7 World Trade Center building after David Dinkins, his predecessor, advised him to move it to Brooklyn when Giuliani took over the mayor's office in 1994. The advice was ignored.

Even Larry King, not exactly a hardball interviewer, caught Giuliani rewriting history. Giuliani complained about Obama waiting three days to address the would-be "underwear bomber" on that Christmas Day flight into Detroit while Bush waited twice as long to address Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber," on that flight into Boston. Giuliani insisted the Reid incident happened before 9/11. It happened three months after 9/11.

George Stephanopoulos was deeply ashamed of his lapse of journalistic professionalism, and he made that clear. Giuliani, by contrast, has no shame.

The Truman Show

President Obama took full responsibility for the lapsed intelligence that allowed a Nigerian terrorist to board a Detroit-bound plane in Amsterdam on Christmas Day and almost blow it up. In ordering changes to the nation's anti-terrorist system, such as adding air marshals to flights and expanding CIA name traces, he took the approach Harry Truman always had as President - accepting blame for anything going wrong on his watch. Or, as Truman always liked to say, "The buck stops here."

This is a refreshing change from previous administrations, such as that of Ronald Reagan (who would always say that "mistakes were made") and George Walker Bush, who would subject underlings who screwed up to receiving a Medal of Freedom. Obama has likely to earn himself a fair amount of good will with his tough stance on correcting the mistakes of his administration in the struggle against al-Qaeda and the commitment to fighting the terror network, even if sending more troops to Afghanistan isn't really the way to do it. He also admitted that the system can run perfectly well and still not be entirely foolproof (like Truman, he told the truth), but that should not stop the country's efforts against al-Qaeda. Will this help Obama with his critics?

Not a chance.

As sure as the Cheney family is ready to put out another press release attacking the President, congressional critics are likely to press for a greater investigation. And if the Republicans had the opportunity, they'd get a special prosecutor to see if there are grounds for impeachment. Because Obama is not likely to win a lot of trustworthy allies by doing or trying to do the right thing. As Truman also famously said, "If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog."

New GOP Reign of Terror

It didn't take long for Republicans to politicize the attempted act of terror Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab aboard a Delta Air Lines plane on Christmas Day, even though it was due to a foreign security failure and it was stopped by the passengers, and even though President Obama - vacationing in Hawaii - has expressed anger over the warnings about Abdulmutallab that could have been heeded. One Republican congressman from Michigan is using this to raise money for his gubernatorial campaign for next year in his home state, former Vice President Dick Cheney said that it showed how clueless President Obama is about the fight against terror, and some Republicans have voiced dislike of the fact that Abdulmutallab is being held and given his rights as any criminal suspect and that Obama is on vacation.

The Democrats could point out that Richard Reid, the British "shoe bomber" was similarly treated by the Bush administration in 2001, while Bush was on vacation during the Christmas season in his home state of Texas, and that Republicans hadn't objected. Except for Representative Eric Massa (D-NY), they have so far chosen not to. True, the White House did put out a blistering counteroffensive against Cheney's remarks - but in the form of a press release that took too long to read.

The Democrats try to act fair and civilized, even though American politics is neither of those things, and it never ceases to amaze me how the party demonstrates a chronic inability to play hardball, and as a result, its base has been getting sold down the river for thirty years. And the Republicans haven't made America any safer or stronger. Some Democrats apparently believe that the Republicans' past rhetoric speaks for itself and, so, they don't need to dignify the Republicans with a comment. Yes, the Republicans' past record speaks loudly, but the Republicans' present rhetoric speaks louder.

Not that the Democrats are given any fair shake by the media. One pundit actually said that Obama can't point to Bush's vacation during the shoe bombing attempt as an act of hypocrisy because Bush was vacationing in Texas - considered a part of "the real America" - while Hawaii seems foreign and exotic, even though it's been a state for fifty years. Well, it had been a foreign country at one time and it's a state in which non-Hispanic whites are the minority, not like Texas.

Oops! Correction: Texas was an independent republic between 1836 and 1845, and non-Hispanic whites slipped into minority status sometime between 2000 and 2004.

Well, Hawaii is certainly not a state that conservatives feel comfortable in - fancy food, exotic art, large concentrations of Asian-Americans . . . just ask Sarah Palin. No right-winger would be caught there.

Except Rush Limbaugh, who has been vacationing there this past week and suffered chest pains that required him to go to the hospital.

Wonder if he was hanging out on the beach with Obama?

No Control?

Barack Obama went on five television news shows - including one on Univision - to explain his health care reform goals and other items on his agenda, and media pundits have been having a field day analyzing the President's gambit. After he laid low for much of the summer, President Obama is trying to regain control of the health care debate. Instead of being accused of not speaking up enough, though, he's now being accused of saying too much and making himself too available -as if an alternative to the imperial presidency of George Walker Bush (patterned after Richard Nixon's) is somehow bad for our democracy.

Maybe the pundits could have spent more time looking into the arrest of an Afghanistan-born U.S. resident, Najibullah Zazi, who may have been involved in a plot to bomb subway stations and perhaps Grand Central Terminal in New York. The New York Police Department and the federal Bureau of Investigation were both investigating An NYPD informant, a New York imam, may have been involved in alerting Zazi after surveillance on Zazi was somehow uncovered, although the details of how this could have happened are sketchy. Either this is a major coup by the NYPD and FBI are just another phony plot thought up by a gang of incompetents who couldn't shoot straight. But for the time being, the quickness in which the case was prosecuted may have averted a possible terrorist attack.

In the meantime, mass transit systems are on a higher state of alert as a precaution.

Contradictions

President Obama should be credited for releasing the CIA memos involving torture in the Bush administration. It sheds light on some of the most cruel and inhumane practices ever committed in the name of the United States under the guise of protecting the homeland.

However, Attorney General Eric Holder is all wrong when he says he declines to prosecute the CIA agents who were involved in the torture of suspected al-Qaeda combatants. I've heard all of the reasoning and rationale for this decision - the nation had just been savagely attacked on September 11, 2001, we didn't know what al-Qaeda was capable of, information involving future terrorist plots had to be extracted post-haste, the CIA agents were acting in good faith based on legal reasoning, and so on. None of them measure up. By treating these prisoners with the same cavalier attitude al-Qaeda showed toward the victims of 9/11, we descended to their level. We violated several of our own laws and likely violated international law, and we made ourselves hypocrites in the eyes of the world. These agents need to be prosecuted, and their superiors - those who approved the use of torture - should be given justice. Even an attack as horrible as 9/11 doesn't justify or excuse this policy.

Twenty years from now, Obama's decision not to prosecute CIA members for torture and simply move on and not do it again may be seen in the same light as Gerald Ford's pardoning of Richard Nixon for Watergate, but I doubt it.