March 20, 2005
Potted Plants 1 and 2...
A friend notices this Thomas Friedman column in the NYT, where he suggests Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani should get the Nobel Peace Prize, and says:
Notice how Friedman reduces the liberators (Bushes I and II) to potted plant status who benefited mainly from good luck, while passing out Nobels to the liberated who demonstrated inspired cooperation and rational self-interest. Maybe they should give Academy Awards to theater chains for creative "movie selection."
It's gotta be hard to be Friedman right now. A liberal Democrat AND a Middle-East specialist. A lot of fancy footwork and smoke-blowin' is called for. And even if you manage to pass the credit to al-Sistani, that just calls attention to the the fact that Bush based his plans on the expectation that people like al-Sistani would emerge. That's what it means when you say that freedom is the gift of God. Rather than a largess of government given to the "little people," who probably won't appreciate it.
...The first person to vote in the [Afghan] presidential election, three years after the Taliban ruled that country with such barbarism, was a 19-year-old woman, an Afghan refugee, who fled her homeland during the civil war. Here's what she said: "I cannot explain my feelings, just how happy I am. I would never have thought I would be able to vote in this election." She's voting in this election because the United States of America believes that freedom is the Almighty God's gift to each man and woman in this world...Posted by John Weidner at March 20, 2005 02:05 PM
-- President Bush, October 9th, 2004
All that said, the committee that picks the winner for the Nobel Peace Prize could, and almost certainly will, do worse than Sistani.
However, he has no prayer of winning it. It would serve as a really annoying reminder that good things happened as a result of the war.
It has been said that we'll know that we have completely won in Iraq when the media starts to ignore it completely (as they have already done in Afghanistan).
Excellent point about poor Tom Friedman. As a Middle East expert he doesn't have that luxury. He's going to have to report on this shit for the rest of his life.
Posted by: Mike Plaiss at March 20, 2005 08:38 PMTarring al-Sistani with the deeds of al-Sadr's thugs is ridiculous. That's like saying that a person who bombs an abortion clinic represents all Christians.
Posted by: John Weidner at March 21, 2005 01:58 PMI don't know about you, but I'm fairly certain that *most* Christians condem abortion clinic bombings.
I have yet to hear islamic thugs be condemned by anyone inside any muslim country.
Have you?
Posted by: Rich at March 21, 2005 08:28 PMYou aren't paying attention. There have been many reports from Iraq recently of condemnations of terrorists, and anti-terrorism demonstrations. And when iraqis get a voice, such as the Iraqi bloggers, non of them seem to be terror supporters. And note the giant pro-democracy protests in Lebanon--none of those people seem to be spouting any of the usual pro-terrorist rubbish. They at last can talk about what they really are interested in.
But these things don't get any headlnes. Our news media are in close symbiosis with the terrorists and the tyrants--they all share a common interest in portraying the Muslim world as uniformly anti-American, anti-Israel, and anti-democracy. Remember how the press reported the Iraqi "election" back in 2002 as "news," with Saddam getting 99% of the vote? And were (and still are) uninterested in reporting on Saddam's atrocities and support of terrorists?
But now Bush has cracked things open, and we are discovering that there are other opinions we hadn't heard. There's going to be more of that coming...
Posted by: John Weidner at March 22, 2005 07:48 AM
