Clinton was going to give over 7,000 pages of documents to the 9/11 commission that the Bush White House withheld.

Wonder if they've found Hillary's billing records yet? Bush is probably embarassed because his notes on terrorism prior to 9/11 consisted of two missplaced memos and Saddam's private phone number scrawled on a beer napkin W and Dick used one "crazy" night for prank calls.

Bush Aides Block Clinton's Papers From 9/11 Panel
April 2, 2004

NYT
By PHILIP SHENON and DAVID E. SANGER

WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks said on Thursday that it was pressing the White House to explain why the Bush administration had blocked thousands of pages of classified foreign policy and counterterrorism documents from former President Bill Clinton's White House files from being turned over to the panel's investigators.

The White House confirmed on Thursday that it had withheld a variety of classified documents from Mr. Clinton's files that had been gathered by the National Archives over the last two years in response to requests from the commission, which is investigating intelligence and law enforcement failures before the attacks.

Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said some Clinton administration documents had been withheld because they were "duplicative or unrelated," while others were withheld because they were "highly sensitive" and the information in them could be relayed to the commission in other ways. "We are providing the commission with access to all the information they need to do their job," Mr. McClellan said.

APRIL FOOLS, the Jokes on us.

Query: If there were over 11,000 documents relating to terrorism comming from the Clinton administration, is it not sheer sophist propaganda to claim that all Clinton did was lob some cruise missiles and otherwise use ineffective "law enforcement" methods to deal with al Qaeda? The only person in that administration who even knew how to spell al Qaeda was the now vilified Richard Clarke.

Query: Must we to stay in Iraq? Not, how long until we can pull out our troops, but rather, can we get out now or in the immediate future? Why or why not? Even Al Franken believes that we cannot "cut and run." However popular wisdom is seldom either wise or pervasive. If that were so, and majority opinions were always the best way to go, then surely China and India must be fantastic places to live, look how many people choose to live there. Specious, isn't it?

I believe that it is a liberal tradition to question authority and conventional wisdom. This Socratic analysis invariably leads to a greater understanding and support for actions which are logically sound, regardless of political expedience; or rejection of bad policy. To disregard the exercise is intellectual dishonesty of the highest order.

There are variables to consider. Complete and utter withdrawal immediately is at the extreme end of the continuum. At the other extreme is a prolonged stay of a generation or more at a troop strength comparable to the present deployment. What may be good for the United States may be far different than what is most beneficial for Iraq, the region or the world. The solution that is most mutually beneficial may be entirely different than what may be best for either nation individually. The answer naturally is dependent on the stated goals of the endeavor.

This is not a prediction contest, but an attempt to make the best case for a reasonable disengagement timetable, if any. If you have a gut feeling about this, fine, state that as a thesis, but disengage yourself from the emotional attachment to your premise and attack it with a will. Either you reinforce your opinion, or shatter it but enjoy the revelation of a sounder truth.

I believe that if our goal is to transform the middle east in our image, we will never completely withdraw and never completely reach our goal. This is the goal of Empire, Pax Americana, which quite possibly will result in our being overthrown as the conquerors and usurpers the indigenous population will come to accuse us of being. I say this for several reasons, not the least of which is historical precedent.

The Middle East is where empires come to die at the feet of great Babylon. The Great Khans, Ceasars, Alexander and the Ptolemeic Kings all were bloodied into the reality of learning the limits of raw power there. Not to say these empires were unsuccessful by any means, however the cultural, scientific, legal and artistic jewels of the area, which I believe signal the flourishing of an empire as opposed to a subjugated state, come more from the evolution of homegrown kingdoms, not from without. The great empires of the region were the Babylonians, Persians and Ottomans. The architecture, music and literature of the Middle East reflect a uniquely southeast Asian flavor. Greek, Roman and Egyptian and even Mongolian influences pale in comparison to the prevalence of truly native culture, although the often overlooked and little understood Mongolians probably had most success spreading their ways around the Persian Gulf.

Americans might as well be Martians for all we have in common with these people. The Japanese would have no more success in assimilating their culture, so foreign are their ways and values. The Roman Empire was excellent for the Romans, not so good for the Visigoths, downright nasty for Judea. America may be the melting pot, representing and welcoming all manner of cultural, racial and religious diversity, leading one to suppose that we and the other western democracies have big enough tents too include everyone. This very diversity and acceptance is perhaps one of our biggest differences with their society, which in its homogeny is far less accepting of foreign influences and skeptical of the advantages of our vastly superior technological gains.

Historical analogies can only go so far. This is a unique time in history and things change. However it is utterly naive to presume that Democracy will spontaneously bloom in the desert because that's what the people want as they are about to witness the forthcoming Iraq miracle. Have they not seen the phenomenon of Turkish democracy? Iraq and Afghanistan are being democratized at the point of a J-DAM. Iran is struggling with a nascent democracy which seems completely at odds with its religious doctrine, and religion is everything in the middle east, as pervasive and powerful as cash is here.

Newsflash: The mullahs wouldn't be so powerful if they did not enjoy popular support. Democracy is evolutionary and revolutionary. It is the idea of a citizenry taking responsibility for themselves. Although I do not pretend to be an expert in Islam, but from what I can see, democracy, as we practice it here in the west, with its deference to majority rule and protection of minority and individual liberties is anathema to their religious practices.

I have heard the canard that you could argue that Catholicism of the middle ages was incompatible with democracy. However, even given the fact that the Pope was an elected elder, who received homage from secular rulers throughout Europe in a political as well as religious sense, the change from catholic monarchies to democratic states took centuries. By the time democracy becomes the fervent desire of the common man or woman in the region, our militarily enforced security apparatus will be what the Iraqi people will revolt against.

Celebrate that conundrum. True freedom in the middle east will be freedom from us. The foible of bureaucrats throughout this country: "We're from the US Government, and we're here to help." But anything less than staying the course is considered political cowardice and shamefully cutting and running.

I would readjust our thinking on this question. We don't want to become the enemy of the democratic ideals we cherish and we don't want to stay there indefinitely. Since we really don't like to think of ourselves as a conquering nation, and have not plundered and enslaved the Iraqis (not our style, we buy our wealth, we don't steal it) let's keep an eye towards events which will give us an excuse to leave at the earliest opportunity. It doesn't have to be a fantastic or sound excuse to leave, we didn't have one of those when we invaded. As for what is best for the Iraqis, let them decide.

Mark W. Adams, Esq.
Attorney at Law
--Bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny-- Edmund Burke
Blog me

We Will Beat Bush - Archives Calling All Bloggers THE POINT by Peter Daou Issue 14- March 31, 2004 Calling All Bloggers I've been writing "The Point" since December of 2003. This is the 14th issue, and I'd like to open this space on the Kerry blog to members of the online community for thoughtful commentary on the nexus between politics and technology. Dick Bell (Kerry blogmaster) and I are extending an invitation to bloggers and other members of the online community to write brief (300-500 words) commentaries and to submit them to ThePoint@johnkerry.com. If we pick your submission, Dick or I will follow up with you for any editorial changes. I'm happy to announce that our first guest writer is Cameron Barrett (CamWorld, Clark campaign). Reference: John Kerry for President Blog

Reference:
The Almanac - (United Press International)

In 1997, a federal judge in Washington ruled the Line-Item Veto Act of 1996 was unconstitutional.

I humbly stand corrected. Ara Rubyan is a true scholar.

But this doesn't make sense. I figured they would at least wait until W tried to use it before slapping him down. Damn, so much for that 27 point headline. Must have been that old separation of powers thing that Reagan always complained about.

Top Focus Before 9/11 Wasn't on Terrorism (washingtonpost.com)
Rice Speech Cited Missile Defense

By Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 1, 2004; Page A01


On Sept. 11, 2001, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was scheduled to outline a Bush administration policy that would address "the threats and problems of today and the day after, not the world of yesterday" -- but the focus was largely on missile defense, not terrorism from Islamic radicals.

At least before Pearl Harbor, FDR & Co. new that Japan was our biggest threat. Thank god our carriers were moved and weren't stuck in that bay like all our battleships. I know, sour grapes, but, ugh, how frustrating.

Veto Threatened on Highway Bill
New York Times
By CARL HULSE

Published: April 1, 2004

WASHINGTON, March 31 -- Taking a cue from Ronald Reagan, President Bush is threatening to cast his first veto on a popular highway bill filled with pet projects of Congress members eager before the election to win highway money for constituents stuck in traffic back home.

Bush must finally have read that note Clinton left in his desk.
"Dubya:
The office now comes with a line item veto, my little gift to you.
Enjoy.
Bubba"

"Animal House" certainly ranks as one of my all time favorite movies. Remember when Bacon is flattened by the crowd. "Remain Calm!!!" The Bush administration (and most other adminstrations) seem to return to this "Don't Worry, Be Happy" meme on a daily basis. If they would just stop telling me that everything's honkey-dory, I'd probably stop feeling this twisting sensation in my stomach.

News Analysis: U.S. Optimism Is Tested Again After Ambush Kills 4 in Iraq

::It's OK Mark. We're from the government. We're here to help.:: I get visions of a plastic quansit hut being erected over my home and men in MOP 3 suits searching my den for ET.

The American Spectator
TAS Live
Deficits Don't Matter
By Brian S. Wesbury
Published 3/30/2004 12:07:11 AM

Read to the end of the article before you make up your minds about this one. Those two little entitlements, Medicare and Social Security, are the 400 pound gorrila and two-ton elephant laughing at Wesbury's attempt to do his best Kevin Bacon impression from "Animal House."

"Remain Calm! Don't Panic!!"

Ever been stampeded by an elephant being ridden by a drunk ape?

How many holes can you punch in this piece of literature fromThe American Spectator?

Campaign Crawlers
Kerry Gasses
By George Neumayr
Published 3/31/2004 12:06:06 AM

"If he had his way, our nation’s cars would run on biodegradable ketchup. It’s all in his record. "

The winner gets (limited*) authoring privileges on this blog.


[* Hey, it's still my blog, duration of privileges are subject to my omnipotent arbitrary capriciousness.]

Interesting story, pure speculative fiction, but Kaplan usually has decent instincts, and he does use the occasional fact in his anaylsis.

Slate: war stories -- Military analysis.

The Dogs That Didn't Bark - Why Colin Powell and George Tenet aren't bashing Richard Clarke. By Fred Kaplan