|
CounterPunch
March 15,
2003
CounterPunch
Diary
Jim
Moran and the Dixie Chicks: Never Say "Sorry," It Only
Makes Things Worse; Gridiron
Hacks Laud "Unrivaled Might;" Hitchens and Horowitz Tie
the Knot
by ALEXANDER COCKBURN
At last the leaders of the Democratic Party have
moved decisively, hauling out their ripest comminations and hurling
them at-no, not at George Bush. The man at whom they've been
leveling their fire this past week is 7-term US Rep James Moran
of Virginia. Moran, a former mayor of Alexandria, Va., is in
hot water over his head for having remarked in a March 3 town
hall session with his constituents that, as quoted in the Virginia-area
Connection newspapers, "if it were not for the strong support
of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not
be doing this The leaders of the Jewish community are influential
enough that they could change the direction of where this is
going, and I think they should."
The House and Senate Democratic leaders,
Nancy Pelosi and Tom Daschle, promptly denounced Moran's remarks,
and six Jewish House Democrats have taken it upon themselves
to advise Moran that he not seek re-election in 2004. Should
he do so, "we cannot and will not support his candidacy."
Moran has been forced to give up on his positions as Democratic
Party leader in the mid-Atlantic region, though not as yet his
committee posts on the Hill. The game plan is clearly what it
was with Hilliard of Alabama and McKinney of Georgia, both evicted
from Congress last year as conspicuous acts of retribution against
critics of Israel: Breathe a word about justice for Palestinians,
and you'll lose your seat. Moran says he'll certainly run again,
and the decision will belong to the voters of his district.
One reason Moran is getting whacked so
hysterically is that Jewish nerves are raw on precisely the point
he raised, the role of Jewish opinion here in pressing for the
attack on Iraq. It's one thing for Pat Buchanan to raise the
issue of dual loyalty in the American Conservative (as he has
just done), but when Tim Russert starts pressing Richard Perle
to assure us that he's advocating an attack on Iraq in the interests
of the United States, not some other power, we know it's perched
squarely on the front burner. Suddenly researchers from Nightline
(one called me on the matter) and other mainstream outfits are
rushing for copies of "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for
Securing the Realm," the 1996 briefing plan for Benjamin
Netanyahu prepared by such pro-Israel hawks as Perle, Douglas
Feith and others now high in the Bush Administration, advocating
attack on Iraq.
It's now OK for reporters (Robert Kaiser
in the Washington Post, for example) to describe the Jewish neocon
lobby for war, starting with Perle, Wolfowitz and Feith, and
heading on down the list to Elliott Abrams, now running the Israel-Palestine
portfolio at the National Security Council. The op-ed pages are
beginning to vibrate with predictable charges from people like
Lawrence Kaplan of The New Republic that all this talk of dual
loyalty and Israel's agenda is nothing but rank anti-Semitism.
To his credit, Michael Kinsley, editor of Slate, ran a piece
(subtitle: "If You're Going To Be Jewish And Powerful, You
Can't Whine When Someone Notices It") saying that uproar
raised by American Jews was probably evidence that Moran was
on the money, and that when it came to testimonies to the power
of the Jewish lobby, none was more publicly boastful on the matter
than AIPAC.
Moran is plummeting, whirling in the
familiar downward spiral of contrition and self-abasement. But
does his remark about "strong support" for attack on
Iraq in the Jewish community have any basis in reality? What
about American Jewish organizations?
Last fall the Forward reported that some
Jewish groups, such as the Workmen's Circle, were angry at the
way the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations
had been hijacked by the prowar faction and by its mad-dog president,
Mort Zuckerman, who was openly howling for war in his own publication,
U.S. News & World Report, as "the only appropriate and
acceptable course." In mid-September Michelle Goldberg began
a piece on this topic in Salon with "Once a pillar of the
American peace movement, mainstream Jewish groups and leaders
are now among the strongest supporters of an American invasion
of Baghdad."
On October 11 the Forward reported that
a draft resolution of the fifty-two-member Conference supported
"measures necessary to ensure Iraqi disarmament." Jack
Rosen, president of the American Jewish Congress, was quoted
by the Forward as saying "the final statement ought to be
crystal clear in backing the President having to take unilateral
action if necessary against Iraq to eliminate weapons of mass
destruction." Abe Foxman of the ADL called the resolution
"a consensus document," and the Forward cited him as
saying he would support a position that backs the President in
"whatever he decides he needs to do."
Of course there are Jewish groups, not
least in the big peace coalitions, that are strongly and effectively
antiwar. In January the American Jewish Committee released a
poll claiming that a majority of American Jews-59 percent-approve
of US military action against Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein from
power. Thirty-six percent opposed such action. These findings,
the AJC also emphasized, were comparable to the attitudes of
the general American population.
It's at the elite level that the Jewish
voices one hears are overwhelmingly pressing for war. The Forward
for October 18, 2002 reported that on the resolution granting
GWB license to conduct a war against Iraq, which passed 296-133
on October 10, 81 Democrats supported it, 126 opposed and one
abstained. Of 23 Jewish Democrats in the House, 16 voted in support
of the resolution, while seven voted "no," In recent
weeks, fearing backlash, some Jewish groups have been carefully
downplaying their support for Bush and the war. Some probably
think the assaults on Moran may have been too much of a good
thing. Who needs Colin Powell on tv denying that the war is being
pressed in Israel's interests.
Back once more to Moran. What is the
nature of his supposedly "anti-Israel" record that
the rabbis in his district are now seeking to avenge? In a speech
to the American Muslim Council, Moran, who has traveled extensively
in the Middle East, said Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
was coming to Washington "probably seeking a warrant from
President Bush to kill at will with weapons we have paid for."
True enough.
In a 1996 Jerusalem Post op-ed, Moran
described an Israeli border policeman beating an unarmed Palestinian.
"The unarmed youth was held on the ground while police officers
armed with guns and clubs climbed over each other's backs to
land their own blows on his body," Moran wrote. "Most
of the witnesses to this scene said it happens all the time.
When Israeli police and Palestinians are concerned there is no
justice or fair play. Might makes right. I witnessed the police
laughing and making self-congratulatory gestures after the beating."
How encouraging to know that an elected US representative has
the sinew to describe such a scene. How chastening to realize
that such indignation, in Nancy Pelosi's words about Moran's
recent remarks in Virginia, has "no place in the Democratic
Party"-or, given the broader Christian evangelical alliance
with Sharon, in the Republican Party either.
Dixie Chicks
Don't Blink
Moran, now being put through the never-ending
rituals of self-abasement should take a leaf from the songbook
of the Dixie Chicks. The chicks are getting stick from some in
the country music crowd after lead singer Natalie Maines stuck
it to Bush in some remarks to a London audience last week.
"Just so you know," Mains said,
"We're ashamed the president of the United States is from
Texas." The group later released a statement Thursday saying
they have been overseas for several weeks and "the anti-American
sentiment that has unfolded here is astounding. While we support
our troops, there is nothing more frightening than the notion
of going to war with Iraq and the prospect of all the innocent
lives that will be lost."
In a separate statement Thursday, Maines,
said, ``I feel the president is  ignoring the opinion of many
in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world. My comments
were made in frustration, and one of the privileges of being
an American is you are free to voice your own point of view.''
Way to go, Natalie, who went to UC Berkeley for a year. She knows
how to keep it short and simple. It doesn't even sounds as though
her manager rushed in some fancy lawyer to draft her statement.
The Dixie Chicks will kick off a U.S.
tour in support of their multi-platinum album "Home''
on May 1 in Greenville, South Carolina, not noted as a bastion
of antiwar sentiment, at least when I was there a couple of months
ago. CounterPuncher Jim Fahey of Arcata writes, "I'd love
to see this group pick up support from unexpected sources, since
it's a cinch they're going to lose a lot of their expected support."
Gridiron
Singsong
While the Chicks were standing tall for
peace, the Washington Press corps was lauding "unrivalled
might". This year's Gridiron dinner ended with the white-tied
guests rising to their feet (at the request of the host) to sing
a song written by journalists covering the Washington scene.
The tune was that of Do You Hear the People Sing? from the Broadway
production of Les Miserables. The lyrics were written by the
members of the Gridiron Club. The closing stanza read: DO
YOU HEAR THE PEOPLE SING? AMERICA'S SONG FOR ALL MANKIND IT IS
THE MUSIC OF OUR NATION ONCE UNITED WE WILL FIND HOW TO USE UNRIVALLED
MIGHT TO STOP THE BEATING OF THE DRUMS SO THAT THE WORLD WILL
LIVE IN PEACE WHEN TOMORROW COMES.
The Washington Post described this as
"a moving anthem" and those singing it sang it with
their right hand on the heart, with the exception of a few churlish
foreigners who failed to stand. (And we all know where THEY can
go...)
Hitchens:
The Jampot Files
(Just Another Middle-Aged Porker of the Right)
The long-awaited nuptials took p[lace
Friday morning, March 14. On that solemn day Hitchens was the
guest of the Wednesday Morning Club in Hollywood, a front for
David Horowitz's Center for the Study of Popular Culture. Its
web site is part of the Center's web site and has links both
to his old magazine, Heterodoxy, to his website FrontPage, and
to something called the Individual Rights Foundation. Out of
curiosity CounterPuncher Jeffrey Blankfort called the number
to make reservations for the breakfast with 323-556-2550, "and
ask for Tony." He reached Horowitz's Center for the Study
of Popular Culture and the Individual Rights Foundation. 
This is from its web site: "The
Wednesday Morning Club seeks to bridge the gap between Hollywood
and Washington by introducing entertainment community leaders
to national political leaders in an environment conducive to
intellectual growth and understanding.
"The Wednesday Morning Club's guest
speaker list is unequaled by any other Hollywood political group.
"The idea for the Wednesday Morning Club was conceived the
morning after the 1992 elections, hence the name. The Wednesday
Morning Club does not necessarily meet in the morning, nor on
Wednesday." Some of its past speakers: Bill Kristol, Fred
Barnes , William Bennett, Judge Robert Bork, Joe Lieberman, Trent
Lott, Dick Cheney, Tom DeLay, Larry Elder, Newt Gingrich, Dore
Gold, Henry Hyde, Ben Wattenberg, J.C. Watts.
On the topic of the Barstool bombardier
we are in receipt of a note from James Graham of Lexington, Virginia,
advising caution on the matter of Hitchens and Korsakoff's Syndrome,
noting that "it is a relatively rare and very severe neurological
disorder that appears in 'chronic' alcoholics, people so far
gone in the addiction that they are long since incapable of functioning
in society. It would not be found in a person who makes frequent
appearances on television. He could not find his way to the studio."
Graham suggests "temporary amnesia" as typical of boozers
in the early and middle-stages of their drinking careers. Graham
also sent his book "Vessels of Rage, Engines of Power: The
Secret History of Alcoholism", which we've been dipping
into. One central thrust: big boozers have a very great need
for ego satisfaction, which is certainly true of Hitchypoo. Eric
Fine noted in a review of the book that Graham is correct ion
noting that "when alcoholics stop drinking, many of their
symptoms persist including, in many, the pathological need for
power. Unless significant changes are made in the personality,
particularly the ego, many alcoholics remain severely problematic."
This brings us back to G. Bush.
Perry Anderson's War
Talk
Amid mounting world ridicule for US arguments
for war, the barstool bombardiers are gratefully passing from
hand to hand the London Review of Books, which contains New Left
Review editor Perry Anderson's disingenuous hailing of Bush's
rationales for attacking Iraq as "ironclad", and his
haughty put-downs of the antiwar movement for loose argument,
(although Anderson fails to provide any antiwar ammunition matching
his own exacting standards). We are very
proud to feature Peter Linebaugh's eloquent riposte to Anderson
on this site this weekend. Peter is one of our favorite historians,
and the Many-Headed
Hydra, coauthored with Marcus Rediker should be at every
CounterPuncher's elbow.
Meanwhile, D. Monroe writes to us as
follows:
Perry Anderson's "Are We Sure We
Can Get Away With It This Time?" is truly strange.
It is, on the face of it, a plea to anti-war
activists to find a more "principled" set of arguments
for opposition to War Plan Iraq. To illustrate why this is necessary,
Mr. Anderson takes us carefully through a series of arguments,
counter-arguments and alternative arguments.
He assures us that we'd best find a better
reason for protesting than the possibility of disaster because
".war, if it comes, will not be like Vietnam. It will be
short and sharp".
This is not unreasonable; there are moral
reasons for opposing war (or, more generally, uninvited intervention
of any sort) that have nothing to do with whether or not it will
succeed or fail.
Nevertheless, Mr. Anderson's apparent
confidence that the war will be brief and the occupation error
free - even resulting in the reconstruction of Iraq - is truly
strange, and gives me pause regarding the value of his observations
overall.
Indeed, at various points in his essay,
he (speaking ostensibly through the voice of a Bush Admin official
answering anti-war arguments but seemingly Mr. Anderson's POV
as well) tells us that terrorism is not really all that important
an issue - this is only represented by Al Qaeda and "its
leadership [was] killed off in Afghanistan" so nothing to
worry about there - Israel has prevailed over the Palestinian
uprising and Afghanistan is being rebuilt by the UN.
These are truly extraordinary claims,
indicating a nearly complete lack of attention to the situation
we face. Just to take Afghanistan as an example, if, as Mr. Anderson
seems to believe, the UN is doing such a marvelous job of rebuilding
the country, why did Mr. Hamid Karzai recently travel to Washington
to plead that Congress not forget his people?
You would think all the clinic constructions,
road re-building ceremonies and school openings throughout the
country would have kept him too busy to travel and too confident
of his international friend's generosity to feel a need to travel.
Sadly, the President of Kabul appears to have a calendar free
of too many such events.
Mr. Anderson appears to know nothing
of this.
Yes, he makes some interesting points
but, all in all, the underlying premise of his position is that
US power is unchallenged and unchallengeable - so, if you're
going to argue with it, you'd best have a nicely packaged, logical
and "principled" argument because any discussion of
potential disaster will look foolish once our armed forces succeed.
As they've done spectacularly across
the globe to international acclaim.
I cannot take his arguments seriously
if he can't even see the disastrous consequences that are in
plain view.
D. Monroe
And since we're burrowing through our
mailbag, this just in from the United Kingdom.
To CounterPunch:
While knowledge is power, the ignorance
of the many enables the corrupt few to amass absolute power.
Thus the few who own and control the general media shape our
perceptions. Thus it appears from this (UK) side of the Atlantic
that George and Donald speak and act for the whole American people.
How refreshing then to find a website such as yours, that presents
an alternate to the hysterical rhetoric favored by much of the
media and the government.
Your site provides much needed counterbalance
and intelligence in an otherwise homogenous and shallow debate.
It does credit to the American people and to the freedoms that
you cherish that is under assault from the right.
In turn, let me assure you that Tony
does not speak for us. He has proved to be a right-wing cuckoo
usurping the cradle of liberal democracy that is the Labour party.
The vast majority of the British people seek a peaceful disarmament,
not only of Iraq, but also of Israel and North Korea. I have
little doubt that common sense will prevail and we will ditch
"the poodle" in due course.
Yours Faithfully,
Raquib Shamsad
Yesterday's
Features
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream (Interview)
Jason Leopold
Rumsfeld and Bush Sr. Opposed 1989 UN Investigation of Saddam
for Human Rights Violations
Josh Ruebner
An
Open Letter to My Former Dean, Paul Wolfowitz (and Other "Court"
Jews)
Mitchel Cohen
The
Gulf War 12 Years Later: Why Class Matters
Carlos Fuentes
The Insulting Insinuations of the Bush Regime
Fareed Marjaee
The Road to Jerusalem Goes Through Baghdad
Rick Giombetti
The Savagely Soft Underbelly
of the Anti-War Movement: Misquided Faith in the UN
Rich Procter
Rove Memo: How to Launch a War
Ritt Goldstein
Oil
War: the Smoking Guns
Website of the Day
Give
War a Chance: the Anti-Peace Anthem
Keep CounterPunch
Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
CounterPunch Available Exclusively
to Subscribers:
- Turkish Delights: a Pre-War Diary by Tariq Ali;
- The Plot to Frame the
Zapatistas: Talkers
and Cowards;
- Drugging Kids: The Plague of Neuroleptics;
- The Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal:
a New Investigation.
Remember, the CounterPunch website is
supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide
web audience is soaring , with about seven million hits a month
now. This is inspiring, but the work involved also compels us
to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make
a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe
Now!
home / subscribe
/ about us
/ books
/ archives
/ search
/ links
/
|
Take a Bite Out of Phil Knight's Bottom Line: Buy No Sweat Apparel!
March 8 /
9, 2003
Edward Said
Who's
In Charge?
Bruce Jackson
Elegy
for Two Giraffes and a Zebra
Perry Anderson
The Casuistries of Peace and
War
Joanne Mariner
Patriot
Act II's Attack on Punishment
William Lind
A Warning from Clausewitz on 4th Generation Warfare
Sam Husseini
Why
So Long for Iraq to Comply? Follow the Policy
Forrest Hylton
Business as Usual in Bolivia?
David Lindorff
Race and the Death Penalty in Pennsylvania
Ben Tripp
Is There
a Eurologist in the House?
Anthony Gancarski
W's Personal Jesus
Jon Elmer
An Interview with William Blum
Douglas Valentine
The Clash of the Icons
Norman Madarasz
Radical Politics and the Writer:
Maurice Blanchot
Gordon Solberg
There's
Got to be a Better Way
Poets' Basement
Guthrie, Engel, Bernard
Weekend Website
The
White House
February 28,
2003
Alexander
Cockburn
Meet
the New Yorker's Chief Hack: Jeffrey Goldberg
Saul Landau
Now
It's Personal
Michael Neumann
A Plea for Hysteria
Karima Bennoume
The UN: Tool for Peace or War?
The Black
Commentator
The Rev. Sharpton and the Soul of the Democrats
Jennifer Loewenstein
Don't Turn Off the War
Richard Levins
Cuba's Biological Weapons: Why the World Needs More of Them
M. Shahid Alam
Is This a Clash of Civilizations?
Clay Conrad
Juries
and Judges: What's Relevant?
Ben Tripp
Speaking in Tongues: a Guide to Gibberish in the Age of Bush
Eliot Katz
To Declare Preemptive War is to Declare a Bankrupt Imagination
Kurt Nimmo
Paying Through the Nose to Kill Iraqi Kids
Matt Vidal
George W. Bonaparte
Mark Zepezauer
Why the Right Hates America
Mickey Z.
The Anti----War Talk I Never Gave
Jerry Kroth
Jung and the Space Shuttle Revisited
Shyam Oberoi
Chronicle of a War Foretold
Ron Jacobs
What If the Firebombing of Baghdad Were a Nightclub Fire?
Poets' Basement
Eliot Katz and Jim Cohn
Website of
the Weekend
Defense
Tech
Read
Whiteout and Find Out
How the CIA's Backing of the Mujahideen Created the World's Most
Robust Heroin Market and Helped to Finance the Rise of the Taliban
and Osama bin Laden
Whiteout:
CIA, Drugs & the
Press
by Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
|