 |
          |
|
|
April 7, 2002 (final edition, 11:00 PM) - NEW YORK/CHICAGO/WASHINGTON (APJP) - This was the third week that the Middle East mess essentially pre-empted political discourse.
But make no mistale -- there was a political undercurrent to the goings-on.
The present blow-up is largely seen as the result of forner governor George W. Bush not only having refused to get engaged, but "sending" his chief handler Dick Cheney to the region to get support for their wet-dream Desert Storm II: dealing with the Saddam Hussein problem once and for all.
The problem was that you can sell overthrowing Iraq to your average doofus at Free Republic, but trying to get other Middle Eastern countries to go along is another story.
So now Colin Powell is being "quickly" dispatched to the region to clean up after the Bush-Cheney mess -- but not before showing up on a few of the Sunday shows to pitch the trip, and seeing conservative pundits aligned with the Paul "Nuke 'em" Wolfowitz wing of the Smirk Administration (wishfully) forecasting Powell's failure.
So there you have it: no matter what Powell accomplishes, it just won't be enough, and his position will be weakened within the Bogus POTUS Circle of Geniuses (no matter that he's about the only member of the Shrub Administration that European and Middle Eastern leaders have any respect for).
Here's a sampling of this week's pap:
FAUX News Sunday
Road trip briefing with Colin Powell
Tony Snow took on his first guest, Secretary of State Colin Powell, in a not-so-subtly confrontational half-hour interview.
Tony pressed Powell about His Fraudulence's demand that Israeli Prime Minister Sharon bring an end to the offensive; Powell made a great deal of Sharon accelerating the offensive into Palestinian territory. Tony's spin: we're the US and we're in charge of the world, dammit -- Sharon had better heel! Powell's response: Israel is a sovereign state, Palestine has aspirations for statehood contingent on acting like a civilized nation, and the incursion is radicalizing a new generation of Palestinians - in other words, Sharon is a schmuck selling out his own nation. Israel, the US and international leaders, said Powell, must come together to tamp down the situation and help the Palestinians.
That last point is bound to infuriate the radically pro-Israel wing of Team Smirk.
How long will Powell be in the Middle East? Powell is not sure; he gave a partial itinerary, saying he would make a final determination once he hits Jerusalem a few days from now. Powell said his first priority is establishing a cease-fire; he does not expect a comprehensive solution, but a first step. Tony asked if Powell believes that Arafat wants a cease-fire, and Powell said yes -- but he has not made enough of an effort toward peace in the first place, and he cannot defeat Israel, so campaigns against Israel will only end up getting Palestinians killed.
This was a not-so-veiled warning to Arafat: you had best end the suicide bombing offensive by any means at your disposal.
Will Powell talk to Arafat? If circumstances allow, he replied. Tony pressed him on whether or not it depended on getting Israel's permission (translation: Sharon is going his own way and not playing by the Smirk rules). Powell slammed the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade as terrorists (to reinforce his warning to Arafat). Are there any steps Arafat must take to meet with Powell? Powell essentially said there are none but the situation is too vague; while Arafat met with Zinni, the situation is still not clear. So the problem is phone lines? (Ha, ha, ha -- the problem is satellite phone batteries, which Arafat should've had on hand in the first place!) Powell recounted the recent history of the region, ending with what at first sounded like a slam of Clinton's work to get a comprehensive peace, but turned out to be surprising praise for Clinton and his team for hiving put their "heart and soul" into trying to get a comprehensive peace.
Powell should have gone a step further and said that Clinton and other peacemakers have been cheated by the two "playas": Arafat has never been an angel, and Sharon certainly is not one. Powell should have also called both men on their continued lies that have led to killing on a mass scale.
Following the break, Tony asked if this is Arafat's last chance. No, said Powell, before explicitly reading Arafat the riot act: crack down on the militants and suicide bombers. Smug ultra-right loudmouth Brit Hume got Powell to criticize Arafat's management of the situation, and followed up with a comment on an op-ed circulated by Saudi Prince Bandar via the Saudi embassy slamming Sharon's "insane" policies and casting Israel as a terrorist state. Powell verbally slapped down Hume by saying it's not his place to tell Bandar what to say (translation: put a sock in it, Hume, I know you hate the Saudis but there are major changes going on in that regime and your bonehead blather is not helping the situation!). Powell then reiterated his goals concerning Israel and the Palestinians. Hume obsessed on terrorist attacks against Israeli citizens and -- catch this -- claimed that the Saudis refuse to acknowledge them. In very diplomatic language, Powell dismissed Hume's claim as nonsense and said that the statements are "reflections of the passions of these societies" -- and it is these passions that drive the violence and must be assuaged.
Tony then asked if one of Powell's goals is to persuade Arab allies to pressure Arafat to condemn terrorism in Arabic, and Powell acknowledged that was indeed a goal. Tony, in a surprisingly "fair and balanced" shift of gears, then asked about claims of atrocities committed by the Israeli military -- and Powell's non-answer was that Israel has not declared war but is engaged in a campaign against terrorists in Palestinian territory, Israel will not vanish, and even the Arab League understands this, having made such a statement the very day that one of the most outrageous suicide bombings occurred (the "Passover Massacre").
Tony's final question centered on Smirk and British Prime Minister Tony Blair talking about Saddam Hussein. Powell said unequivocally that there has been no decision to pursue a military operation against Iraq -- and the present mess in the Middle East "complicates" such a decision.
"Below the Fold!" Tony slammed Paul Begala's terrific one-on-one with BuzzFlash (talk about your free publicity), and got a laugh out of the Southern Baptist convention boycotting Howard Johnson's -- for hosting an S&M convention!
A full-fledged, double-barreled, half-hour panel time began. Tony got the group to speculate about demands on Israel and Arafat; Mara said they'd be ignored, Powell seemed to be preparing the world for a failure of diplomacy, and that there is a need to spell out what is needed. Bill Kristol, claiming to be an "insider", said that there would possibly be a "tactical retreat" by Israel and cited Big Time Dick Cheney's recent trip (one of the biggest diplomatic failures on the part of the US in the last 25 years, we would point out). Juan Williams made the point that any sympathy for Israel in the wake of the Passover attacks has evaporated -- and many Israelis feel Sharon has brought them no security. Brit Hume tried to spin the interception of a car bomb by Israeli forces as some sort of huge success; Juan pointed out that Israel has set itself up to be in a permanent defensive posture, and this undermines hopes for peace; Hume again forecast failure.
Hume's view is emblematic of the hopes -- yes, hopes -- of the nastiest hawks on Shrub's team: let's have a war, let's allow Sharon to whip those god damn Ay-rahb troublemakers into submission and teach them who's boss, let's sell dozens of F-16s in the process -- and let's make damn sure that diplomatic wussies Colin Powell fails! If we can't make money on oil, we'll make it on guns!
Hume kept saying that the Palestinians don't want peace, and Juan heatedly replied that Palestinians are filled with rage for good reason (hint to Juan - the same kind of blind rage combined with cult-like behavior resulted in the attacks of Sept. 11th, and it wouldn't hurt to remind the reactionary Mr. Hume of that fact). Tony said Israelis are also filled with rage (true, Tony - but now some of it is aimed at that thug Sharon - good, we say). Kristol said that both sides are enraged and Powell has to tamp it down -- then slammed Powell for adopting the Clinton-Albright view of the region! And following the break, Brit "amplified" on the point, calling it "moral equivalence" (a favorite and basically meaningless right-wing buzz-phrase) and sneering at the idea of negotiating peace. Juan mocked Brit for trying to "Clintonize" the debate, and pointed out that all the hawkishness and talk of taking out Saddam Hussein in Iraq has hurt America's stature and trustworthiness globally. Mara said that now that Powell has engaged, we need to push for more than a ceasefire -- and Hume asked, "More WHAT?" Mara said imposing an American peace with teeth; Juan said that means including Arafat; Bill said that Powell is following the Albright model but in a more pro-Palestinian version. Juan feels that international peacekeepers may become targets.
Here's the truth: Powell was in fact praising Clinton's team for giving it what they say as the right approach and their best shot. Kristol and Hume were not just engaging in Clinton- and Powell-bashing; they were not just shilling for the Perle-Wolfowitz faction; they were telegraphing that pro-Israeli hard-liners should work to UNDERMINE Powell by labeling him a Clintonite!
Well, Bill and Brit, we've got news for you: the rest of the civilized planet is Clintonite. Those that know what Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz and all the other Israel-biased hawks are up to know they are wrong on so many counts it's impossible to determine where to begin. They've had it with chauvinistic American hegemony, which has done almost as much as Sharon to throw a wet blanket over the global sympathy toward Israel for the thuggish, evil Passover bombings.
And you're just driving home that point by trying to hobble Powell, the one decent member of Commander George W. Bunny-Pants' cadre.
-- Dave "Doctor" Gonzo
McLaugh-In
Super-Martyr Sunday with "Pope" John!
Issue one on John McLaughlin's daffy rant-o-rama: "Arafat, Super Martyr!" The caffeinated pundit ran a video clip of Maddy Albright's comment, following up with a critique of Ariel Sharon as "the terrorist" and Israeli and other TV images of the Holy Land crawling with Israeli armor, attacking civilian communities. John even called Smirk's rebuke of Sharon "striking." Ultra-Catholic John couldn't resist quoting the Pope himself, who denounced Israel's moves. And diplomats and journalist have been blocked; Israel has shot at least three journalists; Mubarak has spoken out against Sharon's policies. Now the question becomes whether or not Sharon is a partner for peace.
Whom did Israel's "Operation Protective Wall" isolate?
Pat Puke-KKKanan said Sharon has isolated himself and set up a confrontation with the Chimp-in-Chief (which he won't be able to break). John said that Israel has stepped up military activities rather than backing off as Smirk demanded. Eleanor Clift said the world now sees Israel as a pariah, Osama has won a victory here, and this becomes an election issue in '02 and '04 -- Smirk's demands were "mere words" (ha, ha). Tony Blankley, who remains the most nattily-dressed pundit on American television, claimed that the Oslo accords were doomed because Arafat never intended to pursue peace, and our international friends "were hysterical this week" so Powell is being sent to assuage them -- and to fail. There is also, he added, a plausible chance that Jordan's government will fall (and sadly, the rotund ultra-conservative may have a point here). Mort Zuckerman said that the present flap started with a wave of what he described as Sept. 11-style attacks against Israeli citizens, and Arafat has not been cooperating in rooting out suicide bombers and terrorism. Pat said Shrubbie is in for a confrontation that will determine the fate of his presidency. Tony thinks Sharon will give way; Pat thinks Smirk will back down; Eleanor said that Arafat is old and sick, and wants to go out in a blaze. Mort said that Arafat has turned down a sweet deal on control of Palestinian land; John said that the refugee issue is still unresolved, and Clinton deserves credit for trying to resolve this most contentious of issues.
Will Powell be able to achieve a cease-fire?
Pat: Maybe -- and not lasting.
Eleanor: A cool-down -- but not lasting.
Tony: Not a meaningful cease-fire.
Mort: Using Clinton as an argumentative recourse? You're desperate, John!
John: Smirk should never have distanced himself from Clinton. Sharon must buy some time from Powell -- and he must get at least a temporary cease-fire.
Our jaws just about hit the ground, especially coming from a pundit whose sole sponsor is a company that is a leader in high-tech weapons systems production. It looks like a Middle East war is NOT the preferred outcome for GE -- and in this instance, Clinton-bashing is, as John himself would shout, WRONG!!
Issue two: DC weed! Turning to a Beltway story guaranteed to outrage viewers with a 1950s mindset, John fretted over the possibility that the District of Columbia "could soon become the District of Cannabis" if a medical marijuana referendum is passed -- over video footage of dope-smoking paraphernalia in use (whether the "weed" being smoked was the real thing or a harmless substitute like, say, tobacco was not revealed). Activists, said John, argue that marijuana alleviates pain in patients with serious illness -- and none other than Rep. Bob Barr (R-Paid for abortion) has been blocking the referendum for years using amendments to legislation. One Judge Sullivan struck Barr's efforts down. Did he make the right legal decision?
Tony: probably not on the law, but he made the right decision.
Mort: it is a very tricky issue.
Eleanor: it passed a couple years ago -- and I thought Barr was a libertarian!
Pat: A Nixon staffer got medical marijuana for a sick relative, and hats off to him!
Will it pass? A unanimous yes.
Predictions:
Pat: an Israeli spy ring operating in the US makes the news (probably on ScaifeMax, WashingMoon Times, or ScaifeNetDaily).
Eleanor: Smirk's approval numbers drop (she's saying to under 70% -- but some unbiased polls have him at less than 60% already).
Tony: Carter will go to Cuba -- and make foolish comments.
John: The US and global economy will rebound.
-- JJ Balzer
Displace The Nation
The economy is still swirling despite the almost daily blitz of "The recession is over!" articles in the pre-purchased media. The evidence is mounting that high-level Bush misadministration SS officers not only helped pilfered Enron 401Ks but also may be on the take from the very Chinese that they used to try to embarrass the last actually elected President. The GAO is suing the executive branch.
So, naturally, the only topic discussed by the Sunday spin-dits is war.
The bad news, of course, is that people are dying. The silver lining is that the wheels are coming off the Bush Junta's efforts to distract with the refrain of "pay no attention to those suicide bombers behind the curtain."
And Bob Schieffer gave us a front line seat.
First up for Bob was Sweet Condi Rice, the Bush clan's answer to Henry Kissinger. Seriously, someone has to tell Condolleeza to drop the Star Wars helmet hair look; bad image for a (p)Residential "advisor."
Bob went for the kill kind of early this time, saying that Bush The Wonder Dog told Israeli PM Sharon to stop the incursion against Arafat and Palestine, but Israel has shown no sign of pulling out -- what now?
Condi wanted to make sure we understood that all is well, and that President Chimp is fully in charge, saying that Bush had a conversation with Sharon yesterday, Colin Powell had one this morning, and Zinni had one scheduled for later today, with a single, consistent message: screw you, and quit rocking the boat!
No, not really, but wouldn't it be nice if they had the cajones to actually speak the truth? What they actually said was that Israel is our friend, and "this friend of Israel is saying it's time to begin withdrawal without delay because the fundamentals of peace are at risk." Junior is delivering the message, and expects results.
Sadly, not one of Junior's brothers does, in fact, head up the Middle East, so this one might be a bit more complicated than Florida turned out to be.
Bob pointed out that so far, there have been no results, even with Poppy's favorite little presidential son speaking out for the last few days. Condi once again mentioned that Bush and Sharon had a "good conversation" yesterday (hopefully Junior only asked "so does that mean no pork rinds either?" once or twice), and that the Chief Chimp understands the difficult situation Israel finds itself in and strongly supports its right to defend itself, but that the methods Israel is using put long-term peace at risk. Apparently Boy Bush asked Sharon to "listen to me as a friend, think about the consequences, and act without delay." According to Condi, Bush several times yesterday used the word "now" -- although she failed to point out that he was incorrectly reading "know" off his cue cards and the sentences came out incomprehensible.
Bob pressed Condi for a timetable -- or consequences if Sharon continues to take his cue from most of the rest of the American public and ignores Bush. Condi, in a brilliant burst of honesty for anyone paying attention, actually spoke the truth when she claimed that the administration doesn't want to get into "hypotheticals about what happens next." That seems to be the entire basis for our foreign policy, which explains quite a bit about how we got into this mess in the first place. She insisted that the clear message to the Israelis is that we understand an operation of this size can't be undone in moments, but it must begin now; a lot is at stake, and "Israel can't defend itself alone."
I wonder if the Israelis caught the underlying threat?
Gloria Borger broke in to ask Condi if Israel must begin now, and if so when does it have to end? When does the withdrawal have to be done? Gloria was fairly sharp today, probing this question with most of the guests, but she absolutely insisted on addressing Condi as "Dr. Rice" in every single question she posed. I wonder if it's in Condi's contract? Condi again said they would not set a timetable, of course making it that much easier to weasel out of actually having to do anything when Sharon continues to ignore them, and said we simply must "change the dynamic." Refuting the idea that Bush only speaks when she presses the big red buzzer she secretly keeps in her pocket, she said that Junior spoke on Thursday because he believes we're at a "tipping point", and he wants to "go forward and get back" (that part I actually believe he said himself) to more hopeful circumstances of a week ago, when we were assured Zinni was on his way to a ceasefire; we either get back on the path, or spiral downward.
That's why Bush spoke, and that's why he sent Powell.
Gloria went in for the kill, asking "Dr." Rice if she believed that the misadministration had to get permission from the Israeli cabinet for Powell to meet with Arafat. Condi replied that Powell "hopes to meet with whoever he needs to carry out this mission" (boy, that sounds like we're ready to step in, don't it?), and noted that the Israelis facilitated Zinni's meeting with Arafat. She also said, however, that we need their cooperation for Powell to meet with him, and that the U.S. expects to get that cooperation. Gloria was so excited she almost couldn't get the next question out, but it brought up a point that, much to the consternation of the Bush team, is being discussed publicly more and more: what is Israel doing that doesn't adhere to the Bush "doctrine on tairism", which calls for rooting out terrorism wherever it exists (the implied question being how can we self-righteously tell them to stop doing what we've been doing for 6 months now to Afghanistan?).
Condi said "of course" you have to root out terrorism where it exists, and that the Chief Chump has supported Israel's right to do that, but that the "Bush doctrine" (Jesus, when did this guy's ad-hoc, flighty, reactionary claptrap become a "doctrine"?) recognizes that you have to fight the evildoers along a broad set of fronts, such as choking off their financing, and have a consistent message on terrorism, not incite it.
Like bombing the hell out of a country that has never actually raised arms against us because of other people hiding in their hills; apparently the "consistent" part has to do with only doing this when oil is in question.
Bob asked at what point we decide not to deal with Arafat anymore; what does he have to do to disqualify himself? Condi took the opportunity to let us know that Junior has been "very disappointed" with Arafat, and wants him to stop "stoking resentment", stop talking as if people who blow up teenage kids (what if they're teenagers themselves, Condi?) are martyrs, and deal seriously with terrorism. If Arafat can't do that, others in Palestine will have to. It's time for the Arab states to stop showing him sympathy and call him to account.
Sound advice; too bad Americans won't do the same thing with Bush.
Bob welcomed his next guest, Benjamin Netanyahu, now an "official spokesman" for Israel. Junior expects Powell will get cooperation; will the Israeli cabinet give him permission to see Arafat? Netanyahu started by correcting Bob; he is not an "official spokesman" for the government; he's just another hawk who offered his services to Sharon in presenting Israel's "most basic case."
Netanyahu and Israel are now ready to use Bush's own ill-conceived strategy against him: after praising Bush as a "courageous and bold president" who has "taken on terror", he insists Israel is simply following in our footsteps and exercising their right to defend themselves from terrorism. It's just a coincidence that "terrorism" can pretty much always be defined as "anyone who pisses us off."
Bob again asked if Powell will be "allowed" to meet with Arafat; Netanyahu said he doesn't know, and that there are "larger issues", but Bob broke in to ask if the cabinet *should* allow it. Netanyahu danced around the question by insisting that Powell is "always a welcome visitor", and saying that there "has not been a friendlier team around the President towards Israel."
Translation: "We've finally found someone who hates Arabs as much as we do."
Netanyahu did say that as far as he's concerned, he hopes Arafat is "removed from the area", that not only hasn't he done enough to stop terror, but that he's done everything to foster it; he signs checks for explosives, calls every night for "one million human bombs" to be detonated against Israel, and as long as he's here, there will be no move towards peace.
All of which is probably true, but it really underlines the quagmire that Bush has gotten the U.S. into: by effectively announcing a "hands off" policy towards the Middle East when he took office, Bush precipitated the escalation of hostilities, to the point that both sides are now enmeshed in a moral morass, without a "good guy" to back anymore. Now that Bush has been forced into the very situation he abandoned, he's in the embarrassing position of telling Israel to quit doing what we ourselves are doing, and telling Palestine that they should apologize while their elected leader is holed up in a building being bombed.
Clinging to one last chance to use the words "Dr. Rice", Gloria said that Condi couldn't have been clearer that Chimpy wants the incursion stopped now: isn't Israel defying that? Netanyahu fell back on the "it takes time" mantra, pointing out that it's taken the U.S. 7 months and we still haven't "finished the job" in Afghanistan, while Israel has only been at this latest campaign for 7 days. He also said that Israel is "doing it slowly" to save civilian lives caught in a crossfire, a mild rebuke of the Bush team's "bomb 'em all and let God sort 'em out" policy. He reminded us that Junior says that "tairists" can hide behind civilians, but it doesn't give them immunity, not in Afghanistan and not in "Arafatistan." When pressed by Bob how long he thought it would take, Netanyahu said that the army thought it would take 4 weeks; Israel is "doing what the President says democracy can do" in the face of terrorism.
Expect this song to be sung as long as we press Israel, or any other country such as Pakistan, to quit making trouble, namely, "hey, *you're* doing it." It's the natural result, predicted here and in many other places, of waging an undefined "war" on undefined "terrorists."
Bob finally welcomed an actual non-Israeli Middle Eastern representative: Jordanian Foreign Minister Marwan Muasher. How dangerous is the situation in the Middle East; we saw "demonstrations in your country by Palestinians there." Muasher said it is "very dangerous", and spilling over, "radicalizing the whole Arab world." The latest incursion has brought "outrage of millions around the Arab world" -- we need to do something, not just to take care of the current Palestinian/Israeli affair, but settle the entire problem.
Muasher said that peace won't come through terror, but that it also won't come through "humiliation and military might." The time has come to start the political process and end the occupation, and "the time is now, not a week from now." When asked about Netanyahu's belief that Arafat should be expelled, Muasher insisted that he's "the elected leader of Palestine, a symbol for Palestinian aspiration, and is a hero among the whole Arab world because of the incursion. Talking about an alternative to Arafat is a nonstarter, and like him or not, he's the leader of Palestine."
Again, as bad as Arafat is, Israel's current handling of him is doing nothing but converting the neutral to Arafat's side. The smartest thing Israel could do right now is to "remove" Arafat, then turn around and give the Palestinians their land. Anything else will simply make Arafat stronger, either by letting him weasel out of the net, or making a martyr of him. If he's out of the picture and Israel then immediately concedes the land (which they'll most probably eventually have to do anyway), it will completely lessen the impact of his removal. I wonder if they've thought of this yet.
Muasher believes that Powell must meet with all the key leaders on his trip, including Arafat; that it would be absurd to meet with everyone but him. He said that Arabs are ready to do everything in their power to bring peace, but that the US must "show leadership" to convince people we are serious about peace. The Arab states have "moved forward in the summit, put together an initiative that offers collected commitment to end the conflict", plan to give security guarantees to Israel, and have "agreed to a solution to the refugee problem." They have "stepped up" and need everyone else to be equally committed.
Unfortunately, he'll have to make do with Bush.
Bob's Final Word concerned Voltaire's big question: "From whence this evil comes; if God is loving, how can it come from God, but if God is all powerful, why hasn't he stopped it."
Voltaire's final belief was that "evil is eternal", but understanding it is beyond human comprehension; it is only important to "confront it", not to necessarily understand its origins. When criticized that if evil is eternal, why bother confronting it, Voltaire said that it's like weeds in a garden: "...to conclude not to pull them because they come back means there is no garden." Bob concluded that the question for the Middle East is not who is right, but how to confront the killing and stop it - "once again, the U.S. must tend the garden; we have little choice."
Bob apparently would prefer to ignore the fact that a gardener has a much better chance of controlling the weeds when the gardener understands where they come from, and prunes everyday instead of only when the problem flares up; alas, such forethought is beyond the grasp of an administration that, in the words of Condi Rice today, "doesn't like to get into hypotheticals of what might happen next."
-- Art Layman
Completely Depressed
Tell me what they want, what they really, really want. Timmy leads by posing that question of the parties in the Middle East loon-fest. (The fact is, they probably want the same thing, but can't get past their hatred to see it.)
Tim's big score today was Colin Powell. Russert wants to know what the hell Powell's mission was on his trip to the Middle East.
Powell smoothly responded that he was to consult with "our Arab friends" as well as meeting in Morocco with Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia to discuss Abdullah's proposed peace initiative. Then Powell's off to Egypt to give a shout out to President Mubarak, then on to Spain to "talk to our European Union friends", including the Russian foreign minister and UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.
Well, perhaps everyone is "friends" now, Colin, but will they be after this trip? Governor Smirk has allowed you out of your room, so let's hope you so you can ease the parties' anxieties by assuring them that no one really takes Chimpy seriously -- even you.
And all hail Russert, king of ridiculous questions: guess he feels he's got to ask them, or maybe they're spoon fed by his corporate owners and he asks them to kiss ass. I really can't figure it out.
Tim asked Powell if his goal is a cease-fire (unlikely) or a "permanent peace agreement." HA, HA, HA! Stop it, Timmy! I'm going to lose control of my bladder if you keep this up! "Permanent peace agreement"!! Oh, that's a ripper!
I can imagine Powell saying in a hushed conspiratorial tone, "Oh, YEAH Tim! Listen, I've got this can't-miss plan, see, that will result in PERMANENT PEACE between Israel and everyone else! Yep, Timmy, just remember you heard it here first. I'm coming home in a week or so and we'll have PERMANENT PEACE in the Middle East! They'll never be any trouble related to Israel, ever again."
Short of moving Israel (and everyone in it) to the desert in Nevada, this just ain't gonna happen. Though that move would probably be less expensive to U.S. taxpayers than the current multi-billion dollar U.S. tax dollar transfers to Israel.
Colin responded by explaining to Dim Tim what would be obvious to a dog (even a particularly stupid one): until there's a cease fire, or at least evidence that both sides are seriously trying to halt the violence, that you're never going to get to a place where a "permanent peace" can even be though of.
Powell, forced to revert to a simplistic level that even Russert can understand, then continued by saying that as long as the violence continues, there can be no talks, and that the only chance at peace is through a political solution whereby both sides can live in peace in separate states, namely, Israel for the Jews, and Palestine for the Palestinians. This is the goal of the U.S., said Powell.
Russert then played the super patriot by indignantly saying that Israel is IGNORING the "president" of the United States by continuing their intense aggression.
Ignoring Smirk is not exactly a sin, Timmy.
Colin says that the fraud in chief "expects" to see some action from Sharon. Powell then finessed the question by saying that he'd spoken to Sharon just this morning. He said the Dimwit in the White House wanted Israel's "operation" to end "sometime soon."
Oooo! That Smirk is SUCH a tough and macho leader!
Powell said that there was no doubt in Sharon's mind about what Smirk expected. This is not news. Of course Sharon knows what Chimpy says he wants. That doesn't mean he's going to do it.
When Tim asked if Sharon had given any assurances that he'd withdraw from Palestinian territory, Powell said Sharon is trying to wrap up his "operation" (read: The destruction of the Palestinian Authority) as quickly as possible, according to Powell.
Then Russert let fly with another howler, saying, "General Powell, you're a military man...", with his trademark gesture of holding his hands up in front of him and looking oh-so-serious. "When the President of the United States says withdraw without delay, and General Sharon says, 'Well, we'll begin to expedite things,' Is that insubordination?"
What the -- !!???
This wad suggests that because the moron in the White House had commanded Sharon to stop his "operations", Sharon was guilty of -- "insubordination"?? I couldn't make this stuff up!
Now right wingers like Russert think that when this fraud of a disaster of a dim bulb of an illegitimate resident of the White House tells a leader of a sovereign foreign country to do something, that if they don't jump immediately, that they're being "insubordinate"??!!
And he prefaces the question by mentioning Powell is a military man, as if to suggest that Sharon is a member of the U.S. Military??!!
Well, why pretend, huh? It's obvious that many elites must think that Israel is a wholly owned subsidiary of the U.S., which it actually is. But these were the same morons that scoffed at the notion that our support for Israel had any connection with what prompted the September 11th attacks!
And they've now gone so far as to think that Sharon must follow orders from the Chimpster -- and not only follow them, but obey immediately, or be considered "insubordinate"!
Just consider the word insubordinate. What it means is that someone is guilty of NOT being SUBORDINATE, or below or inferior to their legitimate superior! From the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition is: "disobedient to authority."
Well, that explains it. Not only do Tim and his ilk expect all Americans to blindly follow orders from Commander W. Bunny-Panties and his henchmen, but now, apparently, they expect the ENTIRE WORLD to accept this dullard as their leader.
That's beyond sickening.
To his credit, Powell guffawed and gave Russert a look that plainly said, "Are you freakin' NUTS?"
Powell again had to patiently explain the way the world works to Russert, who -- like most of the administration -- has apparently somehow made the mental break into thinking that someone appointed the U.S. to literally rule the earth.
Powell explained that Sharon was the "elected leader" (unlike Powell's boss!) of a democratic sovereign nation, and that Smirk's command was only a "suggestion" and that he's certain Sharon will take it seriously.
After that trip into Neverland, Russert then got to a topic that IS very relevant and pertinent to the situation: namely, the 2.7 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR that we, as U.S. taxpayers, give to Israel. I'd also suggest that this is against the will of a great majority of those paying the taxes, and that same majority is disturbed the fact that this carnage and destruction was being accomplished with U.S.-made military equipment.
Tim wanted to know if we'd consider cutting off this massive flood of cash to Israel until the incursion was stopped. (Hell, cut if off for a few weeks and you could fund free pediatric health care for children in poverty for a year. Guess we have other priorities, though.)
Sadly, Powell dismissed probably the only real way to stop this bloodbath by simply reporting that "we are not considering cutting back or holding up aid." I could almost detect a note of disappointment in his expression as he said it though.
Will we go to the UN Security Council and ask that Israel comply with the UN resolution calling for them to knock it off?
Powell gave a rambling answer that basically said no and did a deft balancing act between wanting Israel to take a chill and acknowledging Israel's rationale for its aggression.
Russert tried to ask Powell if he'd meet with Sharon if Israel is not withdrawn by then. When Powell answered that he plans to meet with him on the trip, Russert pulled one of his raised eyebrow moments and interrupted with "EVEN if he's not withdrawn?" Yep.
What about Arafat? Powell said he's met with Arafat three times in the past year, and that Admiral Zinni had met with him. Significantly, Powell said that "if circumstances permit, and the opportunity presents itself", he'd meet with Arafat.
With a strong note of dejection, Russert said, "So you'll meet with Arafat." You moron, Tim! Don't you listen? So of course, Powell had to repeat himself.
Bringing hope to the situation, Powell asserted that you can't find peace if you don't talk to both sides of the conflict. This, again, is obvious to a child, yet there are many such as Dick and Dork, that seem to think you can solve problems while, ignoring, isolating and marginalizing one side of the conflict.
Then Powell said he would like it if Arafat would make some broadcast, "if he gets out and by powered light or candle light" and make a plea for an end to Palestinian violence.
Lord! Yeah, that's what a leader wants to do. Completely overrun, reduced to standing in a room surrounded by enemies, and then go on air and ask his people to give up the fight. That would surely go over well with the Palestinians. It would be worthless.
But this is just another example of the hopelessly blind and simplistic belief that Arafat has some sort of magic and God-like power over all Arabs, and that all he'd have to do is give the word and there'd be no more reprisals against Israel.
This is beyond stupid, yet it seems to be the only premise relied upon by those seeking to justify Israel's actions. In other words, they actually try to have us believe that this is all Arafat's fault (debatable) and that he could stop it at any time (obvious baloney).
But the weirdness didn't stop there.
Russert trotted out all the bizarre arguments against the PLO and Palestinians that require one to turn a completely blind eye to Israel and our own government. One after another, these complaints and assumptions come out that stem from a mindset that we are great and good and incapable of misdeeds, and the same goes for Israel.
As with the cognitive dissonance involved in our own bizarre justifications over the "war" on terrorism, this all argues from a position that is itself logical crap.
There's the effort to brand Palestinians as terrorists. OK, one could do that. But one could do that to Israelis or the U.S. just as easily. Of course, you must ignore that fact.
Powell points out that the PLO are not the Taliban, as they also represent a population that are not terrorists (so did the Taliban, Colin) and that there has been an ongoing effort to achieve a political solution to the situation.
Not exactly a convincing argument, but hey, what else are you gonna do when your foreign policy is so uneven, hypocritical, and the only guiding principle is how much profit will result from military action?
It's like asking the school bully how come he beat up the rich kid and stole his lunch money for looking at him funny, but didn't beat up the poor kid next to him. There's no principle involved. The rich kid just had something he wanted.
Another thing that Powell couldn't admit is that the U.S. people would not stand for direct U.S. involvement in the slaughter of innocent Palestinians. The U.S. has always preferred to simply PAY the Israelis to do that themselves. That way, we can sit by and pretend to have nothing to do with it.
Some might call it economic terror.
Then there's the other hypocritical and willfully blind canard being trotted about: other Arab nations have contributed money to compensate the wounded and the families of those killed in the struggle against Israel, including suicide bombers.
Of course this is an outrage to Israel, and it's not hard to understand why. But the argument has two glaring problems. One, they argue that payments to the families of people that have blown themselves to atoms in bombing attacks is an "incentive" for more attacks. I suppose that it's some small comfort to a person that is going to blown him or herself to shreds in knowing that their family will not starve. But something tells me this is not exactly an incentive.
I don't think anyone can honestly say that a person that has been in training for these missions for some time, and who has long ago made the commitment to do it, would somehow take a pass on it if they found out their families would not get aid after their deaths.
I suggest that the presence of support after their deaths has little or nothing to do with whether these fanatics would continue on their deadly missions. So that argument is very weak at best.
The second one, and the most alarming, is that the people making this argument apparently have never stopped for a moment to realize that they're in essence condemning Israel, and by extension, all U.S. taxpayers at the same time.
Who pays the Israeli soldiers? Who pays for benefits to their families if they meet their death in this struggle? Who pays for the tanks, the attack helicopters, the rockets, the bullets, the assault rifles, the armored bulldozers to demolish families homes? Who pays for soldiers to stand guard over the ever-increasing settlements that the Israelis build over demolished Palestinian homes and on land that they've pushed Palestinians from?
To a large extent, it is us -- the good 'ol American taxpayer. No one asked us if we wanted to pay for this, but we do nonetheless. To question it is to be branded some sort of terrorist lover.
It's impossible to say who has the moral high ground here, but it's clearly disingenuous to say that one side is evil, and the other good, no matter which side is talking.
The strident voices that have been raised against the Palestinians by parties inside the Smirk Misadministration and elsewhere can almost always be applied equally to the Israelis. I've yet to hear one that could not.
When you have an "eye for an eye" bloodbath such as this, how could it be any other way? The arguments come down to a pitiful "he hit me first" level quickly and consistently. To say that they ring hollow is an understatement.
And of course, a key element of the entire Bush non-strategy in the region is to blame the problems on Clinton, thus attempting to cement the true chump status forever. The whining, never-worked-a-day-in-his-life fraud in the West Wing is genetically incapable of ever taking responsibility for anything he's ever done -- and his pious crap about expecting America to take personal responsibility while he simply cannot and will not makes it even more sickening.
Even Powell had to get on board by saying, falsely, that the Smirk crew has been working on the crisis since stealing power, and that "despite Clinton's best efforts," he had failed in the Middle East.
Who in their right mind believe that this escalation of violence and aggression would have EVER happened were Clinton still on the job? It is impossible to say, but anyone with more than five firing brain cells knows with conviction that it would never have come to this.
Yet, the right continues with their utter devotion to the theory that if they tear down Clinton enough, it will somehow build them up, or at the very least excuse their utter failure.
When will the country see this? It simply can't get any plainer.
Of course Russert had to find some piece of print tripe to "put up" for us viewers: an op-ed piece in the Washington Post by Prince Bandar. None of the cowed and controlled US press would dare say this. But if you want the naked truth, this is it:
"America's world-wide interests are victims of the Israeli occupation. The policies of the Israeli government continue to prove that Israel's a strategic burden on the United States in times of crisis of the Middle East. Israel's policy of violence against 3 million Palestinians is seriously jeopardizing the extent to which U.S. policy can succeed in its declared war in international terrorism, which has enjoyed the support of the Islamic world, from Pakistan and Central Asia to Morocco on the Atlantic Ocean. Israel's actions are changing the equation."
Leaving aside the endless haggling over who's right and who's wrong, the facts above cannot be disputed. Meanwhile, our own "royal" burden, Little Prince Snippy, has himself a "sitcheeation" here that he can't lie and weasel and spin and bomb his way out of. Herr Rove is about to lose that golden boy image in a hurry.
Bush is left making his empty, ridiculous sounding tough-guy demands to Sharon -- and Sharon is telling him, "Kiss my ass, moron!"
It's a shame that this long overdue rebuke of this fraud has to come at the expense of continued death and destruction, but it's very sweet. And not only that, you knew in your heart that it is inevitable that Bush would stumble and stagger into causing more death and destruction world-wide than we've ever seen. To see it happening shouldn't be that great a surprise. How long has it been predicted and ignored?
Do to my inability to cover this show without veering off into editorial comment, I've pretty much reached my limit and covered only a portion of the show.
My apologies, but I'm afraid it can't be helped.
"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." -- H. L. Mencken
-- Dash Riprock
JJ Balzer is a former television news producer. He lives in New York City.
Dave "Doctor" Gonzo is recording/video producer and media marketing guru. He lives in a heavily fortified apartment compound in Manhattan.
Art Layman is a media junkie and political activist.
Dash Riprock is a freelance smart-aleck based in Moline, IL. Reach out and bludgeon him about the head and shoulders at dashriprockapj@hotmail.com
Copyright © 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998, 1997, 1996, American Politics Journal Publications, Inc.