Right Wing Nut House

LIBERAL BLOGGERS DISCUSS THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES

I would like to take this opportunity occasioned by the arrest of the 6 obviously deranged, laughably incompetent dufuses who planned to shoot up Fort Dix (and who just happen on the off chance and by no special happenstance to be Muslims) to publicly and fervently thank lefty bloggers for their reality based approach to fighting terrorism in America.

What would we do without you guys? Keeping America safe from hysterical righties who see terrorists around every corner and terrorism in every “dog bites man” story must be taxing as well as boring work. Hardly a challenge for people of your intellectual acumen and discernment. After all, there’s a difference between being observant and alert to the danger of terrorism and being paranoid.

Just ask the airline security workers who let 3 of the 5 9/11 hijackers through their checkpoint at Dulles International airport even after they set off the metal detector.

“Frickin’ box cutters? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? These durn machines are a waste of time, dontchya think?” (Chuckling) “Move along, sir. And thank you for flying American Airlines.”

And making jokes about promoting the idea that an army of “John Does” can do more to stop terrorism here at home than the police, the FBI, and Karl Rove’s Super Secret Domestic Spying Machine and Pasta Maker put together is just your way of making sure that innocent pizza makers, convenience store clerks, and roofers (who just happen on the off chance and by no special happenstance to be Muslims) aren’t caught up in “terrorist fever” and unfairly branded as “radical jihadists hell bent on killing Americans.”

I’m sure that will come as a relief to Mohamed Atta’s flight instructor.

“Okay, lemme get this straight. You want to use the simulator to learn how to take off and fly a commercial jet but you have no interest in learning how to land? Well, that will save some time, won’t it? Here. Let me get you started.”

I think we should follow the example of FDL’s TRex who BRAVELY informs us that even without reading right wing blogs, he knows exactly what they’re saying:

You know that Debbie Schlussel is turning clumsy-ass cartwheels of joy that there’s finally some Hot Islamic Jihadi Action for her to write about. And of course, their semi-questionable citizenship status has Michelle Malkin melting through her Victoria’s Secret white cotton lady briefs. You can go look at their blogs if you want. I don’t have the stomach for it. They’ll be dining out on these six losers and their woodland paintball games all the way to the 2008 elections and beyond. The Muslim Fanatics are, like, totally among us right now!! Time to start rounding them all up, eh, Internment Girl?

Never mind that we’ve done this song and dance before with those seven losers in a warehouse in Miami that got arrested last year. Never mind that this is all suspiciously well-timed for the Bush Assministration, whose poll numbers are tanking and whose pet idiot will be making his second (and undoubtedly awe-inspiringly bad) testimony before Congress the day after tomorrow.

No, this time it’s different! This time it’s important! This time the threat was REAL!

(”Wolf!” cried the boy, “Wolf! Wolf!”)

So, expect this to be in heavy rotation in the media cycle over the next couple of weeks. They’re going to milk it for every last possible fear-mongering, freedom-squelching, race-baiting drop that they can squeeze out. You’re actually going to miss the Anna Nicole frenzy. You think I’m kidding, don’t you?

How could I have missed it? IT’S THE TIMING! IT’S THE TIMING! Jeez am I dense. Gonna have to recalibrate my Bush Headlong Rush To Dictatorship Meter or I may miss out on all the fun next time.

And TRex has this thing nailed. Why get our panties in a bunch over these fanatics? First of all, did you notice where 4 of them were from?

ALBANIA FER CRISSAKES! Albania? Quick - name something dangerous that ever came out of Albania. No, not Dracula. Close, but he was from Transylvania. Jesus, the most dangerous beasts in Albania are the goats - vicious animals who’ve been known to attack unarmed civilian carts without warning.

And after all, let’s face facts. It’s not like these guys wanted to shoot up innocent civilians. So what if they wanted to kill a few soldiers, right TRex? They probably would have died anyway once they were sent to Iraq, right? I’m sure you’ll agree that this way, we would have saved money having to ship the bodies back home.

But even more telling is that these guys evidently ran around the woods in New Jersey, whooping it up, shouting jihadi slogans and shooting paintball pellets at infidel trees. Give ‘em a pickup truck with a Confederate battle flag, fill ‘em full of white lightening, stick a chaw of tobacky in their teeth and they could be any group of fun lovin’, gun totin’, goober chewin’, bible thumpin’, cousin screwin’ militia men. Right, Dave?

The right-wing blogosphere needs to take a shower or something. They’ve been positively creaming their jeans over the arrest of five suspected Islamist terrorists who are charged with plotting to attack soldiers at Fort Dix. Malkin, of course, is leading the pack, but it’s seen as Vindication Day throughout the whole “John Doe”/Jihad Watch right, including Little Green Footballs and Der Perfesser.

Funny how little attention any of them have paid to the mirror-image case down in Alabama involving the militiamen who were reportedly plotting to bomb and gun down Mexicans in a nearby town. In fact, the only place I could find mention of it was at Outside the Beltway, and that was a post questioning the need for the arrests.

Dunno. Sounds serious. Planning between gulps of Mountain Dew to “bomb and gun down Mexicans” is a crime in most of these here parts. Alas, it doesn’t appear to have been quite what our Davey is getting his panties in a bunch about:

The sergeant major turned out to be a government informant.

And the informant reported to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that the Free Militia was making and stockpiling grenades.

The indictment lists numerous other charges, including possession of a machine gun, a homemade silencer, a short-barreled shotgun, 68 homemade explosive projectiles and about 100 marijuana plants.

… The informant reported that Dillard tried to sell him some of the homemade hand grenades. He also reported that he and Dillard went to a military surplus store in Bynum to buy 12 grenade hulls and later packed them with powder and hid them under rocks by a dead tree in the woods.

The informant’s affidavit does not mention plans to attack Hispanic groups.

But at a bail hearing Tuesday, ATF agent Adam Nesmith introduced the idea that the Free Militia was planning to gun down Mexicans in the small town of Remlap northeast of Birmingham.

I QUESTION THE TIMING!

Um, no that’s not really right. But I’d ask Dave why he believes one branch of the government in one case (the ATF saying that the homegrown swag swilling yip yips planned on taking out a few of our darker skinned brethren) regarding a planned terrorist attack while another branch of government (the FBI saying that the Dix Six or the guys in Miami, or any other recent possible jihadi plans that have been thwarted) is to be considered suspect.

I guess I just don’t have that level of “discernment” necessary to be a true liberal. Not like the folks at Wonkette:

Ok. So, the plot was: six dudes from New Jersey buy some guns and storm Fort Dix. The Fort Dix that is full of lots and lots of Army reservists with way, way more guns. And, like, extensive military training and s**t. Yes, thank god these terrorists have been caught and locked up before they could be killed within minutes of deciding to carry out the dumbest f***ing terrorist plot we’ve ever heard of.

I heartily agree. No doubt that the dufuses would have been cut down in “minutes” - say, for the sake of argument, 5 minutes - which would have only resulted in a few needless deaths of soldiers who, after all, would probably have ended up in Iraq anyway and fallen victim to an IED or an insurgent bullet. Better they get murdered en masse here at the hands of fanatics (who just happen on the off chance and by no special happenstance to be Muslims) then killed over there at the hands of…fanatics?

Yep. “Dumbest f**king terrorist plot” I’ve ever heard of…

UPDATE

Hugh Hewitt also notes that the left is downplaying (as usual) this particular terrorist plan and links to Andrew McCarthy’s excellent piece in today’s NRO:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies — civilians and military — is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it[.] … This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, “and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,” and “fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God.”

The direction is to everyone. And he is not ordering that it be done because Osama says so, like the mafia does something because the don says so, or the army does something because the commanding officer says so. In bin Laden’s mind, he is merely the medium; the direction, he insists, comes from Allah. In fact, bin Laden plainly knows he is not enough of an authority figure to command terrorist attacks. He needs to cite scripture to convince Muslims that it is the ideology itself which announces these commands. Commands which this ideology compels every Muslim, not just every al Qaeda operative, to perform.

Until this singular fact sinks in on the left and among our elites, we will be fighting the War on Terror with one hand tied behind our backs. I’ve written extensively about the absolute need to get the western left fully engaged in this fight. But as long as they continue to use the War on Terror as a purely political issue or their own stupidity blinds them to the danger, we cannot and will not win.

A NOTE TO MY LOYAL AND FAITHFUL READERS OF THESE RECAPS:

I would once again like to apologize for the tardiness of this update. Sometimes, real life intrudes on blogging and there’s not much you can do. I humbly beg your forgiveness and hope that you can stick with me these last couple of weeks as we experience the pulse pounding action and drama that we all hope will unfold.

Ed.

At last! After several weeks of somnolence and even boredom at times, the show finally switched gears - with a vengeance. High octane action coupled with the re-emergence of the compelling early threads featuring Jack’s family has the show now coming full circle and geared up for the final 3 episodes. Couple this with Jack’s naked ambition to take revenge on Cheng - out in the open now after Jack admitted to Nadia that “of course I want revenge” for what Cheng did to both him and Audrey - and you have the ingredients for the kind of action and drama that the show has rightly become famous for.

I’ve written before about Jack’s highly evolved sense of honor and how Bauer making a promise is not quite the same as when you or I do so. For Jack, a promise is a blood oath. And he will die willingly rather than break it. For that reason, when Jack informs Nadia that he promised President Palmer that he wouldn’t let the circuit board fall into the hands of the Chinese, your typical CTU commanding officer would have handed Jack a gun and simply pointed him toward the Chinese, trusting that Jack will do whatever is necessary to make good on his word. Instead, Nadia, still unsure of herself as the head of CTU, refused Jack’s request to go with Doyle to where they thought Cheng was hiding out. Of course, as it turned out, this was a necessary part of the plot. Jack had to be stuck at CTU when the Chinese assault took place.

And that assault reminded us all why we watch the show. I’m sort of a student of film and what’s known in the biz as “production values” - lighting, lens filters, editing, set design, etc. - reaches its zenith on television in 24. It’s obvious that great care was taken in bringing that sequence to life. And the way everything came together, it gave the viewer the eerie feeling of being right there in the midst of a terrifying attack. No show spends more time and effort on these production values and it shows.

I know you’re as glad as I am that the show is showing signs of life and heading for a big finish. After several disappointing weeks, it’s good to know that 24’s ability to entertain and shock us hasn’t been completely lost. Speculation in the comments here (or by email from my FSM readers) is more than welcome. I plan on doing a post next Sunday featuring the best of this speculation so why not throw your two cents in? You may end up being featured in the article.

SUMMARY

After Audrey leaves CTU with her father’s admonition not to to see her ever again still ringing in his ears, Nadia pays Jack a visit. He certainly has been a busy lad, hasn’t he? Cold cocking a couple of CTU’s worthless security guards after escaping from custody - arrested as we recall for stealing the Russian circuit board that was the key to their national defense. All in all, Jack has probably violated a good dozen CTU protocols not to mention breaking 2 dozen more federal, state, and local laws.

But that’s just par for the course. We now have to watch Jack as he tries to talk Nadia into letting him tag along with Little Ricky so that he can get his hands on Cheng. This ultimately, is Jack’s objective. Yes there is honor in keeping his promise to the President not to let the board fall into enemy hands. But to watch Jack beg - literally beg Nadia for a chance to redeem himself is a little out of character for our Jack. That is, until you remember how much he truly wants to get back at the Chinese for what they did to both he and Audrey.

Nadia’s not biting. Indecisive as she is, in the end she plays it safe and tells Jack that if he wants to help at tactical, she’ll take it up with the new head of CTU who is on his way over from division. For just a moment, Jack thinks about taking out the guards and making a break for it. But these fellows actually look like they might be paying attention so Jack sits back down, stuck in the holding room, frustrated and angry.

Back on the floor, Milo can see that Chloe is upset. Helpfully, Morris tells him about their breakup, announcing it much to the embarrassment of Chloe who we thought could never be embarrassed about anything. Milo agrees to say no more about it.

After giving the TAC team a pep talk on their way to the copper plant to apprehend Cheng, Little Ricky and Nadia have a casual conversation about the mission that Milo sees and interprets as more proof that his main squeeze may have more than professional feelings for Ricky. One wonders if Milo has ever had a girlfriend before. He looks like one of those geeks in high school that everyone picked on and that no girl would ever give a second look. He is so paranoid about Nadia and Ricky that if I were Nadia, I’d drop the guy before he goes postal.

Meanwhile, Cheng has assembled a gaggle of what appears to be a cross between an Asian version of the Mexican boy band Menudo and the worst of the Triads. They’re armed to the teeth and loaded for bear but we don’t know where they’re going, do we? How many of you guessed CTU headquarters? That many, huh. I will say that I thought for sure the target was Chloe .

Back at CTU, we finally are re-acquainted with the dearly departed brother Graem’s wife Marilyn and her son Josh (who the forums and boards are still furiously speculating is Jack’s son). Josh looks about a year older from the last time we saw him and still can’t get used to the idea that his daddy was a traitorous wretch who deserved a helluva lot worse than he got. Marilyn suggests they try and get some sleep when Chloe shows up. Informing Marilyn that 1) Jack is in custody, and 2) that Audrey is alive, the only woman who has loved Jack who has not died, become catatonic, or betrayed him wants to see Bauer.

At the White House, Lennox and Daniels hatch their plan to fool the Russians into thinking that they’ve recovered the chip using the slut Lisa in a disinformation campaign against her lover Bishop. Laying out the scenario, Lisa starts to get cold feet, saying that she doesn’t think she can lie to Bishop convincingly. Daniels, in one of the best lines of the entire season whispers savagely into her ear, “Why not? You’ve spent the last year lying to me no problem.”

Indeed.

At CTU, Chloe charms her way past the guards with Marilyn so that she can see Jack. For those of you who do not believe this is possible, I would call your attention to last year when Chloe almost charmed the pants off of a traveling salesman in order to help Jack. She has her womanly ways and can display them when the job demands it.

Anyway, Marilyn apologizes profusely for telling Jack Audrey was dead, when she really wasn’t dead only for all intents and purposes she probably should be considered dead since it highly unlikely we will see old Needle Nose anytime soon. Jack doesn’t feel much like talking about it but promises Marilyn he will see Josh before they go. You just get the feeling that Graem was not the boy’s real father and that it might be, could be, Jack’s long lost son. I have a feeling we’ll find out the truth next week.

Still not revealing the target, Cheng tells the Thug-in-Chief Zhou that their entry point will put them in perfect position to grab “the package.” The Menudo Boys get moving.

Doyle and CTU TAC enter the copper factory but find it empty. What they do find is chilling; boxes and boxes all empty of heavy weapons, ammunition, grenades - everything a bunch of thugs would need to assault a fortress. Wonder what the target is…

Zhou and his men close in, using the sewers. I must say those are the cleanest sewers I’ve ever seen - you could almost have a picnic down there. I’m sure Los Angeles residents are proud of the way the city maintains them.

More angst from Chloe and Morris with Mr. Snark confessing that he really wasn’t mad at Chloe for chiding him about arming the bomb but rather it was his own humiliation for doing it that caused their break up. When Chloe says, “You’re wrong” Morris shoots back “You know me very well, right? When am I ever wrong?” No comeback from Chloe to that one.

Back with Lennox and his Disinformation Squad, they’ve arrived at Bishop’s apartment with Lisa still a bundle of nerves. Lennox gives her a stark alternative; succeed or be tried for treason. The writer of the first English language dictionary Samuel Johnson said it best: “The prospect of hanging tends to concentrate the mind wonderfully.” Lisa pulls herself together and goes inside.

But it is apparent from the get go that Lisa is not only a traitorous slut but a poor actress as well. Bishop knows something is wrong and Lisa can’t seem to get into the swing of things - even when the Russian spy keeps her from leaving the room (thus giving Bishop access to her PDA and the false info that we’d recovered the board). He throws her on the bed and (deleted due to the family nature of this site).

Nadia finally gives the starving Milo some attention, telling him that she just doesn’t know how she feels because the day’s events have been so trying. Bravely, Milo says that if she wants to play slap and tickle with Little Ricky, he won’t stand in the way.

What a dork.

Cheng’s own super geek accesses CTU’s entire computer network using a security code that we don’t know how in the world he got a hold of. He begins to deactivate CTU security section by section.

First to go are the phones. Nadia can’t reach Little Ricky and all outside lines are dead. A glitch in the server? Morris says no, that in fact he can’t access the servers because all the permissions have been changed. Just then, Chloe finds the vehicles the Chinese escaped in from the copper plant. She begins tracking them using the satellite.

We finally learn that CTU is the target. And just below their super duper, impenetrable fortress of an office, Zhou and the Menudo Boys blow a sewer grate and climb into the building.

Chloe tracks the Chinese to an intersection only six blocks from CTU. Just then, Milo gets a call from security informing him that all the surveillance cameras are down. Finally putting two and two together, Nadia tells Chloe to initiate a “Code Red Lock Down.” But too late. Menudo is already on stage and performing.

Three CTU expendables go down in a hail of bullets from the well armed thugs. Desperate, Jack convinces his guard to let him out. Obligingly the guard opens the door only to get shot for his trouble. While the Chinese thug checks another room, Jack grabs the guards gun and kills two intruders immediately.

And that’s just the beginning. Jack goes on a rampage, making his way through the CTU complex, an Angel of Death to terrorists and all boy bands alike. He will take out four more bad guys making this his bloodiest episode in memory. Armed now with an assault rifle, Jack moves toward the main floor.

And it is there that the main drama of the evening plays itself out. The terrorists easily make it into the nerve center of CTU with Zhou demanding everyone get on the floor. When he calls out for the commanding officer, Nadia hesitates ever so slightly giving Milo a chance to be a hero. Without so much as a by your leave and thanks for the memories, Zhou cuts Milo down with a single shot to the forehead.

In the lounge, Marilyn and Josh hear all the gunshots and see a pair of Chinese heading their way. Not able to block the door, the Chinese take them into custody, one of them notifying Zhou that they have the boy Josh - obviously the “package” they were looking for. But their triumph is short lived. Jack shows up and blows the two enemies away.

Taking Marilyn and the boy, the trio traverses the labyrinthine maze that is the innards of CTU with its corridors and store rooms. Finding a room with a fan leading to the ventilation system, Jack uses the assault gun to stop the spinning fan and sends the boy into the ductwork. But the Chinese have been hot on his trail and they burst into the room as Jack runs out of ammunition. Josh is free but his mother and Jack are now prisoners.

Back on the floor, one of Zhou’s thugs is monitoring communications and notices that Little Ricky has been trying to get in touch with headquarters. Calling out Nadia who he now realizes is the true commanding officer, he orders her to talk to Doyle and tell him everything is fine. Nadia plays it straight but either gives what CTU calls a “duress code” or else Little Ricky figures things out for himself. He knows that things are not quite right at headquarters.

Brought to the main floor where he sees another old friend dead on the floor, Jack demands to know what they want with Josh but is given a rifle butt into the solar plexus for his trouble. Zhou gets on the intercom and tells Josh that if he doesn’t show himself by the time he counts to ten, he can kiss his mom goodbye. Making the right choice, the kid makes his way back to the ventilation room just as Zhou gets to 9. Informed that Josh is in custody, Zhou calls Cheng.

Cheng is pleased. He then calls another old friend we haven’t seen in ages. Philip Bauer, having supplied the Chinese with CTU access codes, is busy repairing the damaged circuit board for Cheng. It is he who wants Josh. For what purpose, we aren’t told yet. All we know is that Philip wants to talk to Josh as soon as he can and that Cheng and the elder Bauer will rendezvous in 20 minutes to make the exchange.

BODY COUNT

Pretty tough night for CTU. They lost 3 expendables and Milo. Jack took out so many of the Menudo Boys they’re going to have to hold nationwide auditions again just to fill the ranks.

TOTALS:

JACK: 31

SHOW: 417

The electrician and his infernal meddling have left the broadcast studio/bedroom/cat perch so I am pleased to announce that The Rick Moran Show will be broadcast live as scheduled.

Join me at 3:00 PM Central time when I interview Thomas Lifson, Editor in Chief of The American Thinker. We’ll discuss presidential politics, the conservative movement, and other vital issues. Tom will also enlighten us about the fascinating story of Airbus and their gigantic gamble in building the A-380. The behind the scenes “inside business” information that Tom has on the story I guarantee will pique your interest.

You can access the stream here. And if you’d like to call in during the show and ask a question, you can dial 718-664-9764.

A podcast will be available shortly after the show is over.

UPDATE

Success! At least this week, Tom and I were both able to access the stream and talk for a good 50 minutes.

For the podcast, go here. Enjoy.

My humble apologies, but this time, it is not my fault.

We have a serious electrical problem with our old house. The fuse that controls all of the outlets in the kitchen keeps going off and on (that’s right; the house is that old where we still have the old fashioned fuses in a fuse box). The electricity will go off for a few minutes or hours and then come back on without warning. Yesterday, it was off for about 5 hours before suddenly coming back on. In the meantime, I moved the entire contents of our fridge to the one we have in the garage.

New fuses don’t help. The electrician believes there is a short - in the wall. I don’t have to tell you what kind of fire danger that poses. So the electrician will be here any minute and will have to turn the electricity off for at least a couple of hours. Obviously, I won’t be able to post my recap of 24 - probably not until noon.

I appreciate your patientce and apologize for the delay in posting - especially after the series seemed to get back on track last night. I’ll have all the details later.

UPDATE

Back up and running at 10:15. Should be around 1:00 PM for post time.

Electrician says that if we’d let it go a few more days, the chances were excellent that the house would have been on fire and we would have been the last to know it. Fires that start in walls don’t generally trip the smoke alarm until they’re out of control. He’s going to recommend to the owner a major rewiring of the house, replacing the fuse box with circuit breakers.

Great. More downtime coming, I guess.

UPDATE: BAD NEWS

The electrician is back and needs to turn the power off again!

AAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHH!

He says it may be a couple of hours which is double bad news since it bumps into my radio show that starts at 3:00 PM. He assures me that he will have the power back up by 2:30 PM at the latest so keep your fingers crossed.

As for the post? God knows. A this point it will be late afternoon or early evening before it’s blogged. For that, I can only humbly beg your pardon and plead with you to understand that circumstances beyond my control has left me with no options.

Forget the surge. Forget the Democrats and their idiotic timetables and benchmarks. Forget that the President is once again mishandling the delicate political situation in Iraq. This news from the Iraqi Vice President about the Sunnis simply up and leaving the government is the crisis of the war:

Iraq’s top Sunni official has set a deadline of next week for pulling his entire bloc out of the government — a potentially devastating blow to reconciliation efforts within Iraq. He also said he turned down an offer by President Bush to visit Washington until he can count more fully on U.S. help.

Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi made his comments in an interview with CNN. He said if key amendments to the Iraq Constitution are not made by May 15, he will step down and pull his 44 Sunni politicians out of the 275-member Iraqi parliament.

“If the constitution is not subject to major changes, definitely, I will tell my constituency frankly that I have made the mistake of my life when I put my endorsement to that national accord,” he said. (Watch al-Hashimi express anger over lack of power-sharing )

Specifically, he wants guarantees in the constitution that the country won’t be split into Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish federal states that he says will disadvantage Sunnis.

Al-Hashimi’s cooperation with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s government is widely seen as essential if there is to be a realistic chance of bridging the Shiite-Sunni divide in Iraq — one of the key goals of the Bush administration.

Al-Hashimi is no fool. He can see as well as I or anyone else who has bothered to pay attention that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is not making a sincere effort to address the issues that would facilitate reconciliation between Sunni and Shia and start the process of making Iraq a whole country again. The oil revenue sharing bill has been languishing for months in the Iraqi Parliament with no sign that the objections of the Kurds or Sunnis are being addressed much less that the Shias are anxious for the bill to become law in the first place.

Some of the other vital issues that Maliki is either avoiding or approaching in a half hearted manner guaranteeing failure include the proposed de-Baathification board that would allow those Sunnis who worked for Saddam but did not participate in the atrocities to work for the government - an important economic measure for the Sunni community where unemployment is rampant and where many thousands are prevented from police and army duty by their past affiliation with the regime. And Maliki’s reconciliation plan - submitted to Parliament with great fanfare last June - seems to have slipped through the cracks with nary a word heard about it in months. A Reconciliation Conference held last spring was a spectacular failure as most of the Sunni invitees refused to attend. And why should they? Until amnesty for insurgents is put on the table, what’s the point?

There are other issues that al-Hashimi and the Sunnis are concerned about including the above mentioned changes in the constitution. Outnumbered, outgunned, and nearly out of time, the Sunnis need those constitutional changes to salvage what’s left of their community. With nearly 2.5 million refugees outside the country and 750,000 internally displaced citizens (the vast majority of them Sunnis) the Sunni population has declined by an estimated 15% and is only getting smaller. They must have hope that there is a place for them in the new Iraq. And Maliki and the Shias are spitting in their face by not addressing any of their concerns.

To be sure Maliki finds opposition to these plans at every turn. Some of it almost certainly inspired by an irrational desire on the part of some Shias and Kurds for revenge. That, after all, is why Iraq is in a civil war. But there also appears to be some calculation involved on the part of both Maliki’s Dawa party and the largest political party in Iraq, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). Dragging their feet in Parliament and in the Cabinet council can be seen as a deliberate attempt to effect exactly the outcome al-Hashimi is threatening; a Sunni withdrawal from government which would give these Shia elements the excuse to either “ghettoize” the Sunnis by confining them to central and western Iraq or worse, it would give some of their more radical members a pretext to begin slaughtering the Sunnis wholesale in order to bring about a “Sunni-free” Iraq.

But if al-Hashimi and the Sunnis leave the government, it begs the question: Just who or what is Maliki in charge of in Iraq? The answer is not too damn much. Hence, a Sunni withdrawal would make the Maliki government nothing more than an empty shell, not even in charge of many Shias especially in the south where rival militias are already clashing in earnest in an attempt to gain control of towns and villages.

Maliki seems paralyzed, unable to face the facts regarding what must be done to save his country. Here’s al-Hashimi on the consequences of a Sunni withdrawal from government:

The withdrawal of the Sunni bloc would unravel months of efforts to foster political participation by Sunnis in Iraq’s government. It also would further weaken al-Maliki just weeks after Shiite Cabinet ministers allied with Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr bolted from the government.

Al-Hashimi’s Iraqi Islamic Party was key in getting Sunnis out to vote in the December 2005 election. Sunnis had been reluctant to take part in the political process, and many were only convinced to do so with the promise of changes to the Iraqi Constitution. Al-Hashimi said the United States co-signed those changes, and now a year and a half later nothing has been done.

Without a change to the constitution, he said, “The situation would be a disaster for Iraq.”

He added, “I would like to see the identity of my country, in fact, restored back.”

Meanwhile, the President has been ineffective in his jawboning the Iraqi Prime Minister, failing to get Maliki to face up to his responsibilities:

On Monday, the president held a 25-minute videoconference with al-Maliki, the White House and the prime minister’s office announced. In Washington, White House spokesman Tony Snow said political reconciliation efforts were “the focal point of those conversations.”

Al-Maliki talked about getting leaders of Iraq’s major factions together “to sit down in a very practical way and say, ‘Let’s get this stuff fixed,’ ” Snow said.

“What you got was a very clear sense from the prime minister that it was important to be making progress,” he said.

It may be “important to be making progress” but one wonders to who; Bush or Maliki?

Al-Maliki’s office said Bush will dispatch a senior administration official to Iraq to rally support for the government, while the prime minister “reaffirmed the importance of continuing cooperation and coordination” between U.S. and Iraqi troops now trying to pacify the capital.

The importance to Maliki that the Capitol be pacified is that if the Americans leave, he’s very like to find himself on the short end of a very long rope. So he will try to keep the Americans pacified by saying all the right words about reconciliation and power sharing while doing nothing to affect the former and actually try and sabotage the latter.

What to do? The Administration efforts in the political sphere have failed miserably to this point. Might it be time for Bush to bite the bullet and give Maliki the heave-ho, replacing him with some kind of government that would do what everyone agrees is necessary but that no one seems willing to work for?

It would be like taking all of those purple fingers raised in triumph following the election and cutting them off at the knuckle. But it may be the only way to save the country. This would be a last resort, the last arrow in Bush’s quiver and he may not use it anyway. Perhaps he’d rather see Iraq disintegrate than give up on his personal dream of promoting democracy in the Middle East.

There will be efforts to entice the Sunnis back into government if they leave. But I am absolutely convinced that Maliki, as with every other promise he has made to us, will do only the minimum necessary to bring that about. Al-Hashimi probably senses the same thing which is why he is willing to walk out in the first place.

This is without a doubt the crisis of the war. How the Administration handles the delicate matter of trying to keep the Sunnis in the government while putting pressure on Maliki to get busy with reforms will tell the tale of whether or not Iraq can be put back together again or whether it will fly apart at the seams.

UPDATE

Allah is back at Hot Air blogging about Iraq. He has the story of Sadrists guarding a Shia shrine - at our request. Trenchantly, he fleshes out the pros and cons.

He also comments briefly on al-Hashimi’s threat:

I’ll leave you with a report from CNN about Iraq’s Sunni Vice President, Tariq al-Hashimi, threatening to pull his MPs out of the government unless the constitution is amended to prohibit partition. He’s worried about Anbar being shunted off into its own country where it won’t get any of the oil revenue from the Shiite areas, but a report from Iraqslogger last month says he might have something even bolder in mind:

What is more interesting in Az-Zaman’s lead story is the fact that the Iraqi Vice-President, Tariq al-Hashimi, is attempting to construct a new coalition, similar to [Iyad] ‘Allawi’s in several ways and carrying a comparable “anti-sectarian” agenda. Az-Zaman said that al-Hashimi has also entered talks with the Fadhila party and that he is engaged in a race with ‘Allawi to gather allies for a bid for the Prime Ministership.

A Sunni prime minister? When the current president and speaker of parliament are also Sunnis? Not anytime soon, pal.

With both Allawi and al-Hashimi waiting in the wings for a call from the Americans, one would think that Maliki would get the message and get moving on reform. But Maliki has his own card to play; a Shia uprising if we toss Maliki and his Shia brethren.

And that, my friends, would be game, set, match.

UPDATE II

It doesn’t necessarily worry me when lefties agree with me. But re-reading my post, I was a little uneasy that I had perhaps taken too dark a view of Hashimi’s threat.

Kevin Drum, a reasonable liberal, echoes my sentiments:

The October 2005 deal has served its purpose admirably: it got the constitution passed and it gave everyone some breathing room. But eventually the Shiites and Kurds were going to have to come through with some changes, and no real progress has ever been made on that. Just stalling.

So what happens next? Prime Minister Maliki might be able to buy himself some more time, but probably not much. Eventually it’s going to become clear that the Sunni amendments aren’t going to be proposed, or if they are proposed, that they aren’t going to pass. That day is looking ever closer, and all the battalions in the world aren’t going to help Iraq if the Sunnis irrevocably pull out of the government. Stay tuned.

Reasonable people can disagree about the extent of this crisis. But I have to make an effort to come up with something worse.

Coming from a family of 10 children, I can just imagine my sainted Mother’s reaction to the news that it should be considered an environmental “misdemeanor” to bring more than two children into the world:

HAVING large families should be frowned upon as an environmental misdemeanour in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a 4×4 car and failing to reuse plastic bags, according to a report to be published tomorrow by a green think tank.

The paper by the Optimum Population Trust (OPT) will say that if couples had two children instead of three they could cut their family’s carbon dioxide output by the equivalent of 620 return flights a year between London and New York.

John Guillebaud, co-chairman of OPT and emeritus professor of family planning at University College London, said: “The effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do, such as switching off lights. An extra child is the equivalent of a lot of flights across the planet.

Maybe the parents should promise that their extra kids will hold their breaths a lot. Or promise not to fly 620 times between New York and London.

Even in her day and age when families were huge compared to today, my mother had to put up with the occasional tut-tutting from some buttinski who thought it was their business how many children any family should have. In those instances, she would smile and return the gross insult with a pithy comment about the advantages of being able to field a complete baseball team or some other bon mot that made the lout feel about 2 feet tall.

Grace under fire was one of my mother’s strong points.

But that kind of ill mannered behavior really didn’t come to the fore until the 1970’s when the “population bomb” was all the rage and panic rippled through the left that we were going to run out of food by 1985, that there would be mass starvation in India and China, and that hordes of refugees from the teeming cities of Central and South America would stream into the United States desperate for food.

Well - they were partly right about that last, anyway. The teeming hordes may not be desperate for food but they sure are streaming in and not much effort is being made to stop them. But of course, the left has changed their attitude about these “refugees.” Now they are “undocumented workers” and therefore subject to the tender ministrations of the leftist nanny state.

But that’s another story, another issue. This latest effort by eco-terrorizers has little to do with food but everything to do with carbon. And what makes this such an idiotic, shallow, and self defeating criticism - to the point that we now have international eco-arbiters who have taken it upon themselves to police the manners and customs of everyone else in search of “green” violations - is that it fails to take into account the potential contributions and even eco-pluses of those extra human beings to the human race. This is what happens when you stop thinking of human beings as living, breathing, thinking, caring, loving organisms and instead look at them as metrics on a chart who either consume resources like food, or raw materials or belch carbon.

I shudder to think what this world would be like if my mother was “shamed” into not having any more than two children. First of all, I wouldn’t exist which in some quarters would be considered a tragedy. Others, not so much.

But I think of the contributions of my other brothers and sisters and think of all the lives they have touched outside the family and wonder what the world would be like if they had never existed. To my mind, it is easy to see that this planet would be a poorer place, a less interesting place. The 35 years child #3, my brother Jim has spent teaching by all accounts from his students and fellow teachers has positively impacted the lives of hundreds if not thousands of people. And the contributions from my other siblings - both their personal impact on this planet as well as the impact made by their own children - cannot be quantified and reduced to how much carbon they may be adding to the world’s warming problems. That’s a silly, stupid way to judge the value and worth of someone’s life.

What should be an environmental “felony” is giving any credence whatsoever to busybody eco-procurators who find it pleases their own warped sense of self-importance to tell others that the most personal and private decisions human beings make - the size of their families - are subject to their elevated sense of eco-morality.

It is despicable. And worthless.

UPDATE

Michelle Malkin has some interesting thoughts from the commentariat. And she correctly identifies “Public Enemy #1.

Tough looking desperado…

Say what you want to about those insufferably arrogant, lazy-ass Frenchmen. When it comes to Presidential elections, they have the right idea.

Turnout at an astonishing 85%. A relatively short campaign season. Lots of intrigue and backstabbing for us political junkies. The novelty of a woman heading up a major party’s ticket. Even the threat of violence from left wing loons following an election defeat which shows once again how the Euro-twits and socialists never tire of aping the tactics of their 1960’s ideological counterparts.

In fact, the winner of yesterday’s contest, Nicolas Sarkozy, made it a central theme of his campaign to once and for all rid French politics of the disease that infected the country in 1968. In May of that year, a series of student strikes led to a general strike that paralyzed many parts of the country. Despite the fact that the protests failed to change much of anything in French society and culture much less altering any of President DeGaulle’s policies, the battle cry “May ‘68″ lives on in leftist legend much the same way the legend of Woodstock lives on in this country; as an iconic representation of a time and place that never was. Instead, those two events are treated by the left as talismans that are trotted out at regular intervals and lovingly stroked and fondled by those who see the “revolutionary spirit” or “spirit of Woodstock” as more important than any tangible benefit to society that accrued as a result of those events.

For the French, the legacy of May ‘68 has been devastating. It has led France down the primrose path of hard left socialism much to the detriment of the economy and culture. But beyond that, the infection has created the illusion that if only France were to pile more socialist experimentation on top of what has already been tried, the “spirit” of May ‘68 would become flesh and a socialist paradise would be created.

This political mindset permeated not only the hard left but also the soft right and moderates in France. To one degree or another, every French government for more than 35 years - left, right, or in between - has tried to keep faith with that revolutionary spirit.

Until today. President-elect Sarkozy has finally said “non” and vowed to change course nearly 180 degrees:

Mr. Sarkozy acknowledges he is now part of the elites of French society, but he pledges he will govern in a way that is beyond their interests. “If I’m elected,” he told reporters before yesterday’s balloting, “it won’t be the press, the polls, the elites. It will have been the people.” His clearest break with much of French elite opinion came last week when he made a dramatic speech about a “moral crisis” the nation entered in 1968, when the “moral and intellectual relativism” embodied by the 1968 student revolt that helped topple President Charles de Gaulle from power the next year. Today, many philosophers and media commentators routinely pay homage to “the élan of 1968″ and lament that the revolutionary spirit of the time did not succeed in transforming bourgeois French society more than it did.

Mr. Sarkozy took on that ’60s nostalgia. He labelled Ms. Royal and her supporters the descendants of the nihilists of 1968, and even appealed to France’s “silent majority” to repudiate the false lessons of that period. He claimed that too many Royal backers continue to hesitate in reacting against riots by “thugs, troublemakers and fraudsters.” He declared this Sunday’s election would settle the “question of whether the heritage of May ‘68 should be perpetuated or if it should be liquidated once and for all.”

It appears that Mr. Sarkozy may have found the ultimate “wedge” issue in France, judging by the solid margin he won many traditional working-class neighborhoods that normally support Socialist candidates. Mr. Sarkozy’s triumph provides at least a chance that there will be a real debate on the role of the state in France’s economy and, yes, even some discussion of whether France should be in perpetual conflict with America.

Can it be done? Can benefits and economic policies that have given the people of France an unprecedented amount of job security and leisure time not to mention the comfy, warm blanket of cradle-to-grave nanny state guarantees that government will always take care of its citizens actually be withdrawn at the behest of the people these programs and policies help the most?

It would be unprecedented in the history of Democratic states - at least to the degree that Sarkozy is talking about altering the social compact between citizen and government. And the reason he may succeed is the almost universal agreement among the voters (except the die hard left and anarchists) that the reforms Sarkozy is talking about are absolutely necessary if France is to find its way back to economic greatness:

Mr Sarkozy delivered a lyrical victory speech, voicing his love for “this great and beautiful nation which has given me everything”. He promised to be “the president of all the French” and fulfill his promise of immediate radical reform.

“The French have chosen to break with the ideas, habits and behaviour of the past,” he said. “I will restore the value of work, authority, merit and respect for the nation.”

He would also rid France of its habit of “repenting” for its past historical sins. “This repentance is a form of self-hatred,” he said.

What Sarkozy proposes is nothing less than an “Americanization” of the French economy and a Reaganesque revival of national self-confidence. The new French President has continuously gotten into trouble at home with the Yankophobes by expressing his admiration for the American system as well as his desire to repair the almost shattered relations between the two countries - a state of affairs that hurts the national interest of both nations. The French can be extraordinarily trying as an ally. But their positions directly opposing many American initiatives in the international arena has been a disaster for our foreign policy. Like it or not, the French are still a major power with influence over most of their former colonies as well as a large segment of the Third World who view the French as something of a champion. Even a modest improvement in relations would be a boon to American interests.

From what I’ve seen of Sarkozy, I like. He seems straightforward, down to earth, and something of an idealist. After 12 years of the cynical Chiraq, he’s like a breath of fresh air. Whether he succeeds or not depends on how he handles the coming painful transition to economic sanity that will almost surely roil the streets of France, setting off massive demonstrations against his program. And it’s almost a dead certainty that his “law and order” program will not sit well with the immigrant communities - particularly the Muslim ghettoes where unrest is almost a nightly occurrence.

In his favor, the people of France seem to have spoken fairly convincingly that they want reform. But it will take all of his skills as a politician and communicator to turn his ideas into reality without shattering French society in the process.

It should be interesting to watch.

Were you really surprised that fully 35% of Democrats believe that George Bush had foreknowledge of 9/11? Couple that with the number who “aren’t sure” (waiting for an appointment with their Tarot card reader) and you have 61% of the “Reality Based Community” who have lost touch with reality and should be declared certifiably insane.

While the 9/11 Truthers go on their merry way, ignoring the fact that their “theories” have been totally debunked by the real members of the reality based community -scientists - Democrats continue to find it useful to intimate, to hint, to give credence to, and even to come right out and say that George Bush knew about 9/11 in advance and, by inference, planned and executed the operation.

It was the hard left that first raised questions about the Kennedy Assassination and largely for the same purpose; to undermine confidence in the government. While the Warren Commission has been bruised and battered over the years, it has held up as a narrative of the assassination surprisingly well. Three separate scientific inquiries have shown that the so-called “magic bullet” could easily have made the wounds on both Kennedy and Connally, the most controversial of the Commission’s conclusions.

Other aspects of the Commission’s report have never been seriously challenged while much of the “evidence” that Oswald was involved with the FBI or CIA or the Mafia has been largely debunked. And the “hero” in Oliver Stone’s 3 hour lie of a movie JFK Jim Garrison - the rabidly ambitious, homophobic, out of control District Attorney who ruined the life of an innocent man (Clay Shaw) was exposed for the rogue prosecutor he truly was by both CBS and NBC as well as several authors, most notably Gerald Posner.

It does no good, of course, to point this out. Most young people believe Oswald was working for the American government and was either a patsy in the plot to kill Kennedy or murdered the President at the behest of the CIA or the “military industrial complex.” The damage done by this fantasizing to faith in the government (not, I hasten to add, politicians) has been irreparable. And since some of those early Kennedy truthers were actually being paid by the KGB or writing in magazines that were funded by Soviet intelligence, the disinformation campaign (which began in France with the publication in the French Communist Party newspaper L’Humanite just days after Kennedy’s funeral that Oswald was a CIA agent) succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of its perpetrators.

But this meme is different because apparently, only Democrats are stupid enough to think George Bush had anything to do with 9/11. Republicans, as to be expected, reject the idea of Bush involvement by 7-1. But it is independents who close the case for Democratic Party idiocy. Only 18% believe the fantasy.

Call it BDS. Call it laughable stupidity. But every time I read one of these mountebanks bragging about being a member of the “Reality Based Community,” I’m just going to leave a link to this Rassmussen survey as proof that most of those sites should carry the disclaimer “Caveat Emptor.”

As I watched the gaggle of Republican Presidential pretenders (for the most part - there are two who I could see with their hand on the bible taking the oath on the Capitol steps in January, 2009), I was struck by how truly bereft the GOP is of political talent at the national level.

The Governator seems hefty but, of course, can’t run because of that codicil in the Constitution that prevents Austrian-born body builders from becoming President. Still, there’s no doubting his talent for governance, having gone from novice to expert in just a matter of years while receiving high marks for many of his programs. And if a Republican is elected, they should absolutely find a place in their Administration to utilize Arnold’s considerable and varied talents.

But besides Arnold, who is there? Jeb? Puh-leese. After this election, I don’t want to see another Clinton or Bush as a candidate until Chelsea’s grandchild is eligible for office. This run of “power families” who have dominated American politics much of the last 50 years - the Kennedys, the Clintons, the Bush’s, - makes the United States look like a banana republic. Or worse, a debased aristocracy.

The whole point of inventing America was to create a place where it wasn’t supposed to matter who or what your father was, that you were judged on your own talents and merits. But given that these and other families like the Cuomo’s of New York, the Bayh’s of Indiana, the Boren’s of Oklahoma, the Ford’s of Tennessee, the Doles, the Gores, the Dodd’s, and the ever popular Rockefeller’s always seem to get one of their prodigies elected to high office, politics has become almost hereditary in some respects. At the very least, the scion of a well known political family has a huge leg up in any contest as far as money contacts and access to campaign expertise. It is unseemly in a republic for this to be so and I wish it weren’t.

Then again, I wish the talent on display last night would have approached the towering political figures who ran for President in 1980. That year, the Republican party fielded perhaps the most capable group of men ever to run for the presidency. There were two Presidents in Reagan and Bush. There was the 1996 Republican nominee Bob Dole. There was the larger than life, charismatic presence of former Democrat, former Texas Governor John Connally. There was the smooth inside the beltway Minority Leader of the Senate Howard Baker. There were two brilliant Congressmen in Phil Crane and John Anderson - either one would have made the pitiful group of small minded men who trudged on stage last night look like idiots.

Actually, a couple of them didn’t need any help in looking foolish. Tommy Thompson’s candidacy is over after answering a question about whether he would fire a gay person just for being gay in the affirmative. The crestfallen look on Thompson’s face after he was cornered into saying “yes” he would fire someone based on their sexual orientation showed he knew full well he had jumped the shark, screwed the pooch, and fallen off a cliff with that stupid, thoughtless answer.

Then there was Tom Tancredo and his problems with communication. He seemed to be speaking a foreign language at times so incoherent he sounded - an irony of great proportions given his opposition to foreigners entering America even legally.

Duncan Hunter will make a fine Secretary of Defense. President? Not so much.

Ron Paul took a wrong turn in 1952 and ended up transported to modern times. How many Republicans today know who Robert Taft was? How many Republicans care?

Mark my words: We will never, ever elect a President named “Huckabee.”

Sam Brownback is at least Vice Presidential material. His appeal to that part of the base who believe social issues are most important is undeniable and he would make a fine addition to a Romney or Guiliani ticket.

Jim Gilmore intrigues me. He comes off as something of a cold fish - a competent, passionless technocrat. But he is smooth, smart, and quick on his feet. I have a feeling that the GOP is going to look very closely at adding a southern face to the ticket if current adverse trends continue in that part of the country.

The so-called “Big Three” of McCain, Romney, and Guiliani pretty much played it safe. McCain started out poorly but came on strong in the second half of the debate. And I think the format harmed Guiliani who never seemed to get enough time to answer the questions directed at him fully.

Romney was probably the “winner” for the night. His response to questions about religion showed he had put a lot of thought (and practice) into how to answer critics who say a Mormon can’t be President. I have no doubt that he will be able to put that issue behind him eventually. He was less competent in answering questions about his flip flop on abortion. This problem will be more difficult to put behind him and will be exploited by his primary opponents as well as the Democratic nominee. It just doesn’t ring true because it isn’t. Romney has not had a consistent position on abortion and every one knows it. It might be nice if he acknowledged that fact and moved on.

Not an entirely depressing night but it’s no secret that the addition of Fred Thompson would have livened up the festivities. Most of my Heading Right colleagues believe that Fred ended up the big winner last night by not showing up. It’s hard to argue with that logic.

(To listen to the Heading Right Debate Roundtable wrap up from last night, go here.)

My overall impression was is this the best the Republicans can offer the country? Not only was the stage bereft of personality and warmth but there was a noticeable dearth of ideas. Part of the problem there was the format and those who hosted the debate; MSNBC and Politico. Compared to the Democratic debates, I thought the questions were hostile and inane (”Would Bill Clinton being back in the White House be a good thing?”). Interesting that we didn’t get a question at the Democratic debates like “Would it be a good thing to have a Mormon in the White House?” or some other equally stupid question. Chris Matthews gave us his best impression of a Democratic party hack while the post debate coverage featured that well known, fair minded, unbiased, journalist/speaker of truth to power/Diogenes wannabe, the Murrowesque Keith Olbermann.

And they say Fox News is too biased?

The country is changing before our eyes. As American is wont to do from time to time, we are re-inventing ourselves to answer the challenges of a new age. And while those men from 1980 who made this bunch look like little old ladies at a coffee klatch advanced a solid agenda of strength at home and abroad and freedom for all, this grouping of average Republicans seemed unable to string more than two coherent thoughts together in succession. And if history has taught us one thing, America waits for no man, no party in its rush to change. Those who don’t adapt are simply left behind while the country goes about the business of re-alignment.

At a time when the nation needs his clarity of purpose, Ronald Reagan was reduced to a ghost on that stage last night; his name invoked constantly, homage paid to his ideas, but the essence of the man and his sense of mission sorely lacking among the pretenders who would inherit his mantle. And with Bush a non-factor, the party at the moment is leaderless, rudderless, and without purpose - except to win elections. And as the Democrats proved in the 25 years prior to 2006, this is a recipe for disaster.

UPDATE

Some quickie reactions:

Michelle has a gigantic round up. Something for everyone.

Ed Morrissey (who did a fantastic job moderating our roundtable last night on BTR) says “It’s Romney.”

Erik at RedState says “It’s McCain…and Fred Thompson.”

Dean Barnett: Romney (natch!)

Powerline: McCain!

Sully: McCain.

Sister Toldjah: No winners. Format sucked. Ditto moderators. Re-ditto questions. She’s got the best liveblogging of the debate I’ve seen.

More later…

This article originally appears in The American Thinker

Secretary of State Condi Rice’s meeting with Syrian Foreign Minister Waleed Moallem - the first high level contact between Syria and the US in more than 2 years - may be a significant step on the road to better relations between the two countries. At the very least, it signals a willingness on the part of the Bush Administration to explore ways to get the Syrians to stop assisting the Iraqi insurgents by funneling fresh Arab fighters on to the battlefields of Iraq.

Just prior to the meeting in Egypt, a US military spokesman reported that Syria had moved to reduce “the flow of foreign fighters” across its borders into Iraq. This was a prerequisite for any contact to take place between Syria and the US. But one wonders what has changed? Syria has been saying that they have taken steps to close their borders before. The fact that we now “accept” Syria’s contention at this time could mean that our State Department has employed a diplomatic device to justify the meeting.

Cynics would argue that this is the way of the world and that artificial roadblocks to talking with the enemy need to be taken down sometimes with artificial pretensions. But the fact is, this meeting between Syria and the US is not taking place in a vacuum. It comes at a crucial time for Lebanon, now entering the 5th month of political gridlock as a result of the Hezb’allah led opposition’s attempt to bring down the elected government of Prime Minister Siniora.

The fallout from that effort has now reached all the way to the United Nations where the Security Council will take up Lebanon perhaps as early as next week. At issue: Invoking Chapter 7 of the UN Charter that would allow the world body to enforce its will and convene the International Tribunal to try the murderers of former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri. The Syrian backed opposition in Lebanon has blocked the sitting of the Tribunal at every turn, most recently in the Parliament as Speaker Nabih Berri, a Hezb’allah ally, refused to even convene the legislature in order to consider the measure that would have authorized the sitting of the judges.

The reason is simple. High level members of Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government as well as members of his family have been directly implicated in Hariri’s murder as well as more than a dozen other politically motivated killings. Some observers believe the reason Assad is fighting tooth and nail to prevent the Tribunal from sitting is because of the nature of his dictatorship. The Syrian President is part of a small clique of Alawite Muslims who, with a few Sunni allies, have governed Syria for 40 years. If several of his closest advisors and family members were to be tried and convicted, it could knock the legs out from underneath this clique and lead to the President’s downfall. At the very least, it would make Syria a pariah state with tough international sanctions a real possibility. Given the precariousness of the Syrian economy, that too could lead to personal disaster for Assad.

So Assad’s friends in Lebanon have obliged him by paralyzing the government, setting up a protest camp in front of the government building that serves the dual purpose of putting pressure on Siniora while bringing most of the economic activity in downtown Beirut to a virtual standstill. It has also raised the spectre of civil war - something none of the sides claim they want but that appears almost inevitable at times.

Every effort at reconciliation by the majority has been rebuffed by Hezb’allah leader Hassan Nasrallah. It would appear only complete capitulation by Siniora to the opposition demands regarding cabinet representation (which would effectively kill the Tribunal) would satisfy Nasrallah. And this, Siniora cannot do without his coalition collapsing.

And now 6 months into this stalemate, Syria and the US appear ready to hold serious talks about stabilizing Iraq. The problem for the US is relatively straightforward; there is precious little we can offer Syria in the way of compensation for their assistance in tamping down the violence. Syria would dearly love the US to put pressure on Israel to make a deal on the Golan Heights, Syrian territory occupied by Israel since the 1967 War. This will never happen - at least as long as George Bush is President. Too many Israelis are still alive who remember Syrian gun emplacements on those heights firing indiscriminately and without warning into the valleys below, killing civilians and terrorizing the population. And Bush would never ask any Israeli leader to risk going back to those days by handing the Heights back to Syria.

We could facilitate peace talks between Israel and Syria. But Assad has made it clear that issues involving the Palestinians must be settled first before there could be formal peace negotiations. And given the confused, violent, and contradictory situation in the territories, it doesn’t seem likely that there will be movement on that score any time soon.

Trade and commercial concessions would be welcome but would hardly amount to much. Syria doesn’t produce much of anything the west wants while the country is too poor to afford much of anything the west produces.

Realistically, about the only other enticement we could offer Syria that would possibly interest them would involve Lebanon. US support for the Siniora government has been unwavering. Our commitment to seeing the Tribunal sit and mete out justice has been total. We have urged our allies in the area - especially the Saudis - to play an active and positive role in trying to resolve the political stalemate in Lebanon, something that King Abdullah has done with great skill and unflagging energy.

So what could we possibly offer Syria on Lebanon without selling them down the river?

This question has been on the minds of many Lebanese as several factors loom as possible goads to push US policy toward making some kind of deal on Lebanon with the Syrians.

First and foremost is time. The US military commitment to pacifying Iraq is now hostage to the 2008 Presidential election. The closer the election gets, the more likely that the Democrat’s plan for a withdrawal of combat troops will attract more and more support from Republicans, peeling away enough skittish Bush supporters concerned about their own re-election chances so that any veto by the President can be overridden. To forestall that possibility, some kind of bargain on Lebanon with Syria could be in the offing.

Then there is the practical reality that involves some of the insurgents being directed and funded by Saddam loyalists safely operating in Syria. Over the last few years, Syria has handed over several high ranking former members of Saddam’s security services. But it is believed that many more are still in hiding, funnelling money and arms to some of the insurgents. Assad could be convinced to give the rest up for a price.

Finally, there is the Iraqi government’s need for a secure border with Syria. As mentioned above, the Syrians may be doing more than they were previously to close off the border to foreign fighters. But given the weakness and inexperience of the Iraqi military, Assad’s efforts on the border will probably spell the difference as the current surge strategy unfolds in Baghdad and the western province of Anbar.

Given these and other factors, what could we possibly offer President Assad on Lebanon that would be the basis for some kind of deal?

The answer is not much. At the United Nations, the Russians - Syria’s ally - have been grumbling that Lebanon should be able to deal with its own problems and not always look to the UN to bail them out. And in order to bring the Russians on board, it may be necessary to compromise on the Tribunal in some small way. But any major changes in the makeup of the Tribunal, its mandate, rules of evidence, or even who it may indict will be vigorously opposed by both the French and the United States. It seems improbable that we would make a deal with Assad on the Tribunal even if it would help bring the violence down in Iraq.

The same goes for any other issue that Assad would be willing to deal on with regards to Lebanon, including the future influence of Syria in that country as well as territorial and economic issues. There may be some small, ancillary matters that we would agree on - perhaps a recognition of Syrian “interest” in Lebanon. But anything that would smack of reestablishing Syrian hegemony over the tiny country would be a non starter.

This is what we all hope anyway. And it is what the Lebanese expect. But many Lebanese remember what they consider the abandonment of their country by the United States at the time the Taif Accords ending the civil war that were signed in 1989. At that time, Secretary of State James Baker fully backed the agreement even though it legitimized Syrian occupation and dominance in Lebanon. Many considered our support at that time as a sell out.

But this is a different world, a different Lebanon. Despite our need for Syria to play a constructive role in Iraq, it won’t come at the expense of Lebanese democracy or the Lebanese people who are struggling to throw off the yoke of decades of bloody civil war and humiliating occupation. We must make this absolutely clear to Assad’s Syria and disabuse him of any notion that we would sell out our friends in order to reach some kind of agreement that would nominally affect the battlefield in Iraq.

Anything less would betray our values as well as the Lebanese people.