a berlin blog
|
a berlin blog |
|
|
Thursday, October 30, 2003 Driving DrunkMarc over at Misanthropicity jumps all over Tom Friedman for his White House cheerleading, which is what this column amounts to in spite of his caveats at the end. I agree Friedman has lost the balance of mind he seemed to possess before the Iraq war. But he's probably right that the suicide bombers in Baghdad are more like the Khmer Rouge than the Viet Cong, meaning not patriotic Iraqi resistance fighters so much as angry Ba'athists and Al Qaeda meddlers who know what American success in Iraq would imply for them (irrelevance, death), and want us to fail — they're "not killing us so Iraqis can rule themselves," but "killing us so they can rule Iraqis."Marc's answer is: So what? "It's a distinction without a difference ... [because] we still have no valid reason for being there." But what would Marc do instead? We can't pull out. Like it or not, Bush has committed the U.S. to rebuilding Iraq. The protesters in San Francisco last weekend who shouted "end the occupation" were agitating for years of violence and chaos, not peace. In stabler parts of Iraq life has already improved, and anyone who replaces Bush next year had better understand that following through with his declared project of democratizing Saddam's poisoned yard is the only way to convince Muslims that we weren't pursuing empire, oil, or some kind of modern crusade. Which is the only way to avoid a general uprising of the Iraqi people — and in that sense Friedman's distinction does matter, because once Iraqis as a whole turn against the U.S. occupation, we're in a lot of trouble. I agree with Marc that watching the Iraq invasion was like riding in a car with a drunk driver. Bush and his friends exaggerated the weapons threat in order to nab a base of operations in the Middle East. To me the wide, screeching veer we took around the U.N. was the crucial mistake, because now Bush can't even bribe other countries to help us do a proper reconstruction. There was no hurry to invade, in retrospect, besides Bush's own re-election timetable. He lied, he was arrogant; and now we're all paying for it, from California to Baghdad. But it will be worse if he fails. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 9:31 PM Wednesday, October 29, 2003 So do we bomb Boston?A new Wahhabi-connected mosque will go up in Roxbury, according to the Boston Herald. For years the "Islamic Society of Boston" has been on Prospect Street in Cambridge, not far from where my friend Marc lives. (He edits for the Herald.) "Many mosques and Islamic institutions in the U.S. are funded by wealthy individuals and foundations in Saudi Arabia," says the report. "Those financiers are almost without exception followers of Wahhabism, a harsh Saudi-based fundamentalist interpretation of Islam, and they make sure the American mosques they bankroll adhere to the sect's anti-Western ideology ... The result, said some Muslim activists, is that many mosques in the U.S. are disconnected from the majority of the American Muslims they supposedly serve."'It has created this phenomenon of Muslims without mosques, and I would say the Islamic Society (of Boston) is no exception,' said one Muslim activist who declined to be identified. 'The mosque is being paid for with money from the Middle East and it's connected to a larger agenda.'" I wonder if Marc knows anything special about this. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 8:35 AM Southern California and FireThe South Bay Aesthetic (down in L.A.) reports litter from the fires reaching the beach cities: "Even though the fires were far off, the cars were covered with ash and the air smelled of burning wood. The grocery strikers all wore bandanas over their faces and looked oddly like out-of-work Sandinistas pacing back and forth on the sidewalks." This photo shows why. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 5:19 AMThursday, October 23, 2003 Memo to RumsfeldFrom: MSMTo: Sec Def Rummy — If you're wondering why we've had "mixed results with Al-Qaeda" so far, allow me to suggest it's because we expected to find some of them in Iraq. We — you and I — believed Laurie Mylroie when she said Baghdad was an Al-Qaeda state sponsor. Guess what, though? She was wrong! (I know, I know. You've known that for a while.) A few Qaeda members may have trained in Iraq. Some others might have been sent as envoys to Baghdad. Mylroie had a theory that these little links, or crystallizations, were the tip of a deep and treacherous iceberg. But now it's clear that no firm alliance existed between Saddam and bin Laden, at least not before the invasion, and your intelligence agencies should have known as much. In fact, they did know it, and told you so. The trouble was that Mylroie's theory never had a good public shakedown. You guys went on using it (quietly, persuasively) to help justify a pre-emptive war, while in the meantime a Wall Street Journal reporter had his throat cut for exploring a far more treacherous alliance, the one between Al Qaeda and Pakistan. (The one between Al Qaeda and the Saudis I don't even have to mention.) Under the massive-weapons-and/or-links-to-Al-Qaeda rationale we used for Iraq, those two nations should have been invaded instantly. So if you're wondering why our swift and efficient war in Iraq has done so little to undermine Al Qaeda, and in fact gives the enemy a strong reason to recruit, worldwide, try reviewing your own memos from the past six months. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 8:08 AM Wednesday, October 22, 2003 HayseedThe idea of President Bush as "stupid" is awfully popular in San Francisco, but I've always found it kind of naîve. Now I have support: In Daniel Ellsberg's newish (okay, year-old) memoir Secrets there's a description of John McNaughton, Ellsberg's boss, who was Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs during our first big escalation in Vietnam. Ellsberg describes McNaughton talking to the press:"As he got into areas where he had to be especially untruthful or elusive, his Pekin, Illinois, accent got broader till he sounded like someone discussing corn at a country fair or standing at the rail of a riverboat. You looked for hayseed in his cuffs. He simply didn't mind looking and sounding like a hick in the interests of dissimulation. My future boss in Vietnam, Edward Lansdale, had the same willingness to appear simpleminded when he wanted to be opaque, as he did with most outsiders. In both cases it was very effective. Reporters would tell me how 'open' my boss was, compared with others they ran into, this after I had listened to an hour of whoppers. It became clear to me that journalists had no idea, no clue, even the best of them, just how often and how egregiously they were lied to." posted by Michael Scott Moore | 8:01 PM Tuesday, October 21, 2003 Sullivan Feels Californians' PainAndrew Sullivan poses as a man of the people in order to bash Joan Didion over the head about the car tax. In a Salon interview, Didion expressed her surprise that the "car tax" was such a major force behind recalling Gray Davis. "It's just so insignificant," Didion sniffed. Now, I admit the woman has some gall acting superior to California after keeping away from the state for so long; but Sullivan spreads his partisan guts on the table when he calls her a "limo-lib" for that remark. "A big hike in a car tax is, for most people, not exactly 'insignificant,'" he scolds. "On a $30,000 car, the difference is between $195 before the hike and $600 after."True, Andrew! But the fee hike — which really did get California voters in a lather — was not a symptom of Democrat Tax-Like-Mad Disease. Davis lost his job over this myth, along with several others (plus his own gray self). According to Michael Lewis in The New York Times Magazine: "The 'car tax,' which kicked in more or less automatically when the state ran out of money, simply raised the annual fee car owners already paid from 0.67 percent to 2 percent of the assessed value of their cars, which happened to be exactly what it was during the [Republican] Wilson administration." posted by Michael Scott Moore | 8:54 AM Monday, October 20, 2003 HmmmA Maryland kid named Nathaniel Heatwole is the main suspect in the Southwest Airlines box-cutter mystery. If he's guilty, and the feds lock him up, something only sort of like justice will have been done. He conducted an embarrassing hack on our airline-security system, which is supposed to be a lot more secure since the government took over. Obviously, it's not. I had a Swiss Army knife confiscated by guards at Oakland Airport just after the new security people were hired last year. The guards were confident, efficient, cool-headed, and stern. They made me feel furtive and guilty, even though it was an honest mistake. Jen and I had simply left the knife in the backpack after a camping trip a few weeks earlier. I was impressed and a little intimidated by the new security regime until we got to L.A. It turned out that we'd brought two knives camping — and the second one was still in same pocket of the same backpack, undiscovered by the guards.This semi-permanent Radio Free Mike cover story is about another weird, but still unsolved, premonition of airline disaster. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 7:34 PM Tuesday, October 14, 2003 L.A. readingI'll read from the novel this Wednesday at the Borders in Torrance. Since the Manhattan Beach Barnes & Noble has quit doing author events, this will be the nearest thing to a local, hometown whistlestop.Wednesday, October 15 Borders Books & Music 3700 Torrance Blvd. Torrance, CA 7:30 pm ALSO: Here's a nice review of the book by Steve Nester, radio host of Poets of the Tabloid Murder, who interviewed me a few weeks ago. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 9:18 AM Poor George PlimptonThis half-baked Economist obituary reminds me of Sherwood Anderson's famous complaint about having your books reviewed, and panned, in prose you yourself would be ashamed to publish. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 8:35 AMNo he didn't. Yes he did.Whether or not you believe Saddam had a peace-threatening nasty-weapons program depends, these days, entirely on political feeling. Krauthammer says the fractured manufacturing set-up we've discovered is as good a reason for the war as vast vats of anthrax (which we still might find). Josh Marshall twits Krauthammer for predicting in April that we'd have a "credibility problem" if no real weapons were found by, oh, say, right now. Baseball Crank adjusts his opinion of Clinton. Sullivan argues about the word "imminent."But come on: We know what happened. The Bush hawks thought of Iraq as a well-situated, easy-to-occupy base of operations for the terrorism war and for democratic reform in the Middle East. They needed a reason to invade that didn't sound too cold-eyed and strategic. So they used weapons of mass destruction as a talking point. That strategy backfired in Europe before the war; now it's backfiring at home. True, the hawks did not lie, exactly (and they never used the word "imminent"). Our reasons for war were not fraud; merely a matter of emphasis. But the pro-war right did go out of its way to blow steam about the WMD threat, and now the same people are trying to wave away the steam and pretend the terrifying djinni of a massively-armed Saddam was an illusion cooked up by the left in order to make the right look stupid. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 12:11 AM Thursday, October 09, 2003 "Power Grab" BluesThe recall was not, in the end, a power grab — or really it was a failed power grab by Darrell Issa. The numbers here show that Arnold received more votes on Tuesday than Davis did in 2002. (Matt Welch has more.) Direct democracy in action. Fair enough. My trouble with Arnold is that I think he's a fake. He's not special-interest-free, and the notion of electing a guy who avoided all but one debate before election day — and turned in a lukewarm, question-dodging performance at that — is silly. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 6:30 PMRetro ChicMarc Levy blogs from Massachusetts about the California recall, and throws in a (qualified) prediction about Wesley Clark. I should point out the link in my blogroll to a swell Wesley Clark web site. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 1:42 AMWednesday, October 08, 2003 Matters of TasteEarly this week I complained about Gray Davis' utter lack of taste for using Van Halen's "Jump" as a campaign song. Bobbie Allen asked if Twisted Sister was any better (scroll to Oct. 6), and, frankly, yes, it was. At least it showed a sense of humor. But this column points out that the Arnold camp also used "Jump" at a rally yesterday. Bloody typical. And people think he'll be a breath of fresh air.The reading last night went well, by the way, though I did have to give a concession speech. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 6:06 PM SchwarzieLook, I'm all for a socially liberal, fiscally conservative guy who can kick butt in Sacramento without being in thrall to special interests. Our new governor-elect is not that sort of person. The surreal irony is that Davis got whipped partly over the energy-deregulation fiasco, which was Pete Wilson's fault. Now Wilson is one of Schwarzie's advisors, while Arnold, in the meantime, has met with Enron crooks. This story's potentially very bad. How come none of the pro-Arnold bloggers — Sullivan, Mickey Kaus — has even touched it? posted by Michael Scott Moore | 5:13 PMTuesday, October 07, 2003 BordersMike reads tonight from the book at Borders Union Square, 400 Post St., starting at 7pm. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 9:37 PMInstant Recall NewsI just got this frantic e-mail about a mysteriously shut-down voting precinct. It somehow captures a mood:"On the corner of 19th and Guerrero there is a precinct closed. Its the yellow building on the south side on the corner. "Scrawled in big letters in black magic marker is 'PRECINCT CLOSED FOR NO APPARENT REASON 'GO TO 19TH AND CHURCH VOTE PROVISIONAL (YOUR NAME WILL NOT BE ON THE LIST) 'CALL 554 4395 TO COMPLAIN 'REMEMBER FLORIDA'" It's like the Wild West out here today. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 9:28 PM Yea! Heavy and a Bottle of BreadThe Dylan Pool is offering Too Much of Nothing as grand prize in its Fall Tour 2003 contest. Members try to predict what Bob will play from show to show, and the most consistent winner gets a signed copy. This makes me a "prominent member of the Dylan community" -- which is more than I hoped for while writing the book. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 9:03 AMMonday, October 06, 2003 Van Halen?This detail in a last-minute Mercury-News piece about the recall may explain, more than anything, why so many Californians feel such a powerful aversion to their own governor. He has no taste, at all:"Before taking the stage to the pounding beat of Van Halen's 'Jump,' Davis issued a statement to reporters about Schwarzenegger's alleged groping." Good God. Still, a deep lack of taste is no reason to recall the guy. Neither is mismanaging the economy. (If it were, George Bush would have to be impeached.) Vote no on the recall, please, and write in my name if you have to vote for somebody. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 7:11 PM Too Much of NothingGets a nice review in the Boston Herald. J.L. Johnson calls it "a cool-handed debut. The style is simple, the language everyday -- but the details and dialogue cut glass-sharp and often bone-deep." Aw, shucks. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 5:41 PMSaturday, October 04, 2003 Extra CreditNo one has gotten this right, maybe because it isn't even on Google. "They really are blazing duffers," is what George Bernard Shaw said about critics — after years of being one himself — when they criticized his plays. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 7:33 PMThursday, October 02, 2003 Why we went to war 2Michael Ignatieff's September 7 article in the New York Times Magazine also has this passage: "As Paul Wolfowitz has all but admitted, the 'bureaucratic' reason for war -- weapons of mass destruction -- was not the main one. The real reason was to rebuild the pillars of American influence in the Middle East." The PNAC plan, in other words. Ignatieff and Zinni seem to agree on this point, but some people still have trouble with it. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 10:54 PMWhy we went to warRetired General Anthony Zinni's TV interview on Iraq earlier this week should be devastating for the Pentagon. "The case that was made to the American people for going in," he said, "was exaggerated," he said. "And I think that's dangerous. We've been down that road before. If it was to take down Saddam because he is bad and evil, if it was to improve things in the region, if it was a strategic decision based on some strategic assessment, it should have run on its own merits."I can think of plenty of good reasons for the U.S. and its allies to replace Saddam with a democracy. But we never had that debate, not properly, and one result was a grave lack of planning. "There was no secret as to the conditions that these [government] institutions might be in once you ripped out the leadership, once you dismantled them," said Zinni. "I think that should have been anticipated. I think the tensions in the Sunni triangle should have been anticipated. I think the potential for civil war, the potential for outsiders, Jihadis coming in to see this as a potential battlefield, seeing this as a place where if they can defeat us and make us fail, their stature in the region improves. That should have been seen clearly." He stops short of naming Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld. But they're responsible. Zinni also hedges about who, exactly, is to blame for getting the weapons intelligence on Iraq so desperately wrong, but I think the CIA got screwed around by this war's architects, which may account for the current mess in Washington. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 8:10 PM J.M. Coetzee... just won the Nobel Prize. In his generation of South African writers, I think Athol Fugard should have gotten it first, but it's nice to see the Nobel committee paying attention to them as a group. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 8:05 PMWednesday, October 01, 2003 Extra creditA green foil star next to the name of anyone who can attribute the sentence, "They really are blazing duffers." You won't find the answer on Radio Free Mike, or by following any links: You just have to know. posted by Michael Scott Moore | 6:56 PM | |
|
|
 Too Much of Nothing, a novel  Politics and Prose  about our editor 
The Underground Grammarian  current Berlin blog page  |
