From the WSJ Opinion Archives
'Phony'
Baloney
An editorial in the New York Times praises President Bush's decision to transfer
14 top al Qaeda terrorists to Guantanamo Bay and push for legislation allowing
them to be tried for war crimes. "Those are just the right steps," the paper
declares.
But keep the presses rolling: Hell remains hot, and the porcine have attained no relief from gravity's constraints. For there is a "But . . .":
But Mr. Bush's urgency was phony, driven by the Supreme Court's ruling, not principle.
The Supreme Court's ruling that the Times now describes as "not principle" is Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the June case in which the narrowly divided justices held that military commissions could not go forward until authorized by statute. At the time, the Times exulted:
The current conservative court is not hostile to law enforcement or presidential power. But it is proving to be admirably protective of individual freedom and the rule of law. Rather than continue having his policies struck down, President Bush should find a way to prosecute the war on terror within the bounds of the law.
Now that Bush has done exactly what the Times demanded, the paper accuses him of acting with a "phony" urgency. He just can't win with these guys.
Today's editorial also perpetuates an outright falsehood about Guantanamo Bay, namely the claim the detainees are held there "without due process." In fact, they have an astonishing array of procedural protections:
- Every detainee at Guantanamo (possibly excepting the 14 new arrivals) has
gone before a Combatant Status Review Tribunal, also known as an Article V
hearing, to determine whether he actually is an enemy combatant. The Geneva
Conventions require such hearings only in cases of doubt, and the U.S. Supreme
Court has additionally mandated them (in the 2004 case of Hamdi
v. Rumsfeld) only for detainees who hold U.S. citizenship, of which
none remain.
- Each detainee annually goes before an Administrative Review Board--analogous
to a parole board--to determine whether he can be released without endangering
U.S. security. This process is described in a July 2005 Pentagon
briefing.
- Pursuant to Rasul
v. Bush (2004), all detainees have the right to retain lawyers and
petition for habeas corpus.
- War-crimes trials for the four detainees who've been charged have been delayed only because Osama bin Laden's bodyguard was able to avail himself of American appellate courts to challenge the legality of the proceedings.
This is not just procedural window dressing. As President Bush noted in his speech yesterday, some 770 detainees have spent time at Guantanamo, of whom some 315 have been released from U.S. custody. More than a dozen of those, the president added, are known to have returned to the battlefield, suggesting that, if anything, the procedures are too lenient.
Making
Them Talk
In his speech yesterday President Bush described how CIA interrogation of terrorists
held overseas has saved American lives. It's worth quoting at length:
We knew that [Abu] Zubaydah had more information that could save innocent lives, but he stopped talking. As his questioning proceeded, it became clear that he had received training on how to resist interrogation. And so the CIA used an alternative set of procedures. These procedures were designed to be safe, to comply with our laws, our Constitution, and our treaty obligations. The Department of Justice reviewed the authorized methods extensively and determined them to be lawful. I cannot describe the specific methods used--I think you understand why--if I did, it would help the terrorists learn how to resist questioning, and to keep information from us that we need to prevent new attacks on our country. But I can say the procedures were tough, and they were safe, and lawful, and necessary.
Zubaydah was questioned using these procedures, and soon he began to provide information on key al Qaeda operatives, including information that helped us find and capture more of those responsible for the attacks on September the 11th. For example, Zubaydah identified one of KSM's [Khalid Sheikh Mohammad's] accomplices in the 9/11 attacks--a terrorist named Ramzi bin al Shibh. The information Zubaydah provided helped lead to the capture of bin al Shibh. And together these two terrorists provided information that helped in the planning and execution of the operation that captured Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
Once in our custody, KSM was questioned by the CIA using these procedures, and he soon provided information that helped us stop another planned attack on the United States. During questioning, KSM told us about another al Qaeda operative he knew was in CIA custody--a terrorist named Majid Khan. KSM revealed that Khan had been told to deliver $50,000 to individuals working for a suspected terrorist leader named Hambali, the leader of al Qaeda's Southeast Asian affiliate known as "J-I." CIA officers confronted Khan with this information. Khan confirmed that the money had been delivered to an operative named Zubair, and provided both a physical description and contact number for this operative.
Based on that information, Zubair was captured in June of 2003, and he soon provided information that helped lead to the capture of Hambali. After Hambali's arrest, KSM was questioned again. He identified Hambali's brother as the leader of a "J-I" cell, and Hambali's conduit for communications with al Qaeda. Hambali's brother was soon captured in Pakistan, and, in turn, led us to a cell of 17 Southeast Asian "J-I" operatives. When confronted with the news that his terror cell had been broken up, Hambali admitted that the operatives were being groomed at KSM's request for attacks inside the United States--probably [sic] using airplanes.
During questioning, KSM also provided many details of other plots to kill innocent Americans. For example, he described the design of planned attacks on buildings inside the United States, and how operatives were directed to carry them out. He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a point that was high enough to prevent the people trapped above from escaping out the windows.
KSM also provided vital information on al Qaeda's efforts to obtain biological weapons. During questioning, KSM admitted that he had met three individuals involved in al Qaeda's efforts to produce anthrax, a deadly biological agent--and he identified one of the individuals as a terrorist named Yazid. KSM apparently believed we already had this information, because Yazid had been captured and taken into foreign custody before KSM's arrest. In fact, we did not know about Yazid's role in al Qaeda's anthrax program. Information from Yazid then helped lead to the capture of his two principal assistants in the anthrax program. Without the information provided by KSM and Yazid, we might not have uncovered this al Qaeda biological weapons program, or stopped this al Qaeda cell from developing anthrax for attacks against the United States.
Bush added: "I want to be absolutely clear with our people, and the world: The United States does not torture. It's against our laws, and it's against our values. I have not authorized it--and I will not authorize it."
Some administration critics have argued (a) that any harsh interrogation amounts to torture, and (b) that torture cannot yield useful intelligence. These claims cannot both be true. This column accepts the president's assurances that the techniques the CIA used did not amount to torture--but if you disagree, then you have to admit "torture" works.
Opponents of aggressive questioning, then, are willing to sacrifice the lives of American civilians, including women and children, for the sake of their own moral vanity. As a practical matter, they are also willing to sacrifice the civil liberties they claim to cherish. For as we have argued many times, it is highly unlikely that our current regime of civil liberties can survive another attack on the scale of 9/11.
Democrats
Embrace Pre-Emption
"Top officials of the Clinton administration have launched a preemptive strike
against an ABC-TV 'docudrama,' slated to air Sunday and Monday, that they say
includes made-up scenes depicting them as undermining attempts to kill Osama
bin Laden," reports the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz:
Former secretary of state Madeleine K. Albright called one scene involving her "false and defamatory." Former national security adviser Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger said the film "flagrantly misrepresents my personal actions." And former White House aide Bruce R. Lindsey, who now heads the William J. Clinton Foundation, said: "It is unconscionable to mislead the American public about one of the most horrendous tragedies our country has ever known."
ABC's entertainment division said the six-hour movie, "The Path to 9/11," will say in a disclaimer that it is a "dramatization . . . not a documentary" and contains "fictionalized scenes." But the disclaimer also says the movie is based on the Sept. 11 commission's report, although that report contradicts several key scenes.
The Clintonites may have a point here. A few years ago, when the shoe was on the other foot, we were happy to see CBS scotch "The Reagans." (See Bob Bartley's final column.)
On the other hand, one wishes the Clinton people had been as aggressive in defending the nation from bin Laden as they now are in defending their own reputations.
Miss Short
Attention Span
Reader Stephen Lockhart calls our attention to a comment House Minority Leader
Nancy Pelosi made last week, after a speech by Donald
Rumsfeld that likened those who wish to appease terrorists today to those
who took the same approach to the Nazis.
Sneered Pelosi: "If Mr. Rumsfeld is so concerned with comparisons to World War II, he should explain why our troops have now been fighting in Iraq longer than it took our forces to defeat the Nazis in Europe."
To which Lockhart responds:
This is very offensive to some people, like me, who lost non-American relatives in World War II (in my case, Canadian). I've seen my uncle's grave site in northern Denmark, and the Australian graveyard in Singapore, and countless military grave sites in England. While I have not yet seen similar sites in Africa or Russia (among other venues), I hope to before I die.
The U.S. provided an invaluable service in World War II, clearly tipping the balance of the war. But Nancy Pelosi's we-beat-the-Germans-in-a-relatively-short-war perspective is extraordinarily myopic. Rumsfeld's comments about not learning the lessons of history were intended for people exactly like Nancy Pelosi.
A check of the Information Please Almanac shows that victory in World War II was anything but easy. More than 16 million American servicemen took part in the war, of whom 291,557 were killed in battle and 113,842 others died in service. That's a total of 405,399, well over 100 times as many U.S. servicemen as have lost their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. This casts Pelosi's glibness about World War II in an even more withering light.
Yes,
This Does Raise Questions
"Scientists say abnormal 'intersex' fish, with both male and female characteristics,
have been discovered in the Potomac River and its tributaries across the Capitol
Region, raising questions about how contaminants are affecting millions of people
who drink tap water there."--Associated Press, Sept. 6
Don't
Hold Your Breath, Karl
The Washington Post's David Broder, dean of Washington columnists, weighs in
on the Valerie Plame kerfuffle, faulting partisan media outlets--Salon, Newsweek,
The American Prospect--for smearing Karl Rove:
These and other publications owe Karl Rove an apology. And all of journalism needs to relearn the lesson: Can the conspiracy theories and stick to the facts.
It would be more accurate to say they need to unlearn the mistaken lesson of Watergate. In that scandal the facts actually did bear out a conspiracy theory, but too many journalists now assume that Watergate-like conspiracies are everywhere.
As for anyone apologizing to Rove, that would certainly be nice, but something tells us we'll sooner see $1-a-gallon gas or the Red Sox win a World Series.
Rough
Justice
Remember George Ryan? He's the Republican former Illinois governor who, just
before leaving office, commuted the sentences of all 165 prisoners on death
row. As we argued
at the time, "Ryan's decision harms the innocent, helps the guilty and is
a slap in the face of the victims of violent crime and the jurors who made the
difficult decision to sentence defendants to death."
Now the Associated Press reports that "Ryan, who was acclaimed by capital punishment foes for emptying out death row, was sentenced Wednesday to 6-1/2 years in prison for the corruption scandal that ruined his political career."
The AP notes that "defense attorneys argued that even 2-1/2 years would deprive Ryan of the last healthy years of his life." We realize that, strictly speaking, Ryan's incarceration has nothing to do with the outrage he perpetrated back in January 2003. But maybe there is such a thing as karma.
What
Would Many Do Without Studies?
"Study: Medical Instructions Stump Many"--headline, Associated Press, Sept. 6
Assault
With a Dead Weapon
"Woman Found Guilty of Hitting Another Woman With Dead Puppy"--headline, Houston
Chronicle (story from St. Louis Post-Dispatch), Sept. 7
Who
Knew He Even Spoke Beinish?
"Katsav Won't Swear in Beinish"--headline, Jerusalem Post, Sept. 6
Now
That They're Famous, They Just Eat Junk
"Stars Used to Rate Foods for Nutrition"--headline, Associated Press, Sept. 7
News
You Can Use
"Parents Should Stay Involved in Kids' Education"--headline, Arizona Republic,
Sept. 6
Bottom Stories of the Day
- "NASA to Decide When to Launch Shuttle"--headline, Associated
Press, Sept. 7
- "Arkansas Cow Has Fourth Set of Triplets"--headline, Associated
Press, Sept. 7
- "Bank of Canada Leaves Interest Rate Unchanged"--headline, CBC
News, Sept. 6
- "Karl Rove Won't Be Frog-Marched Across White House Lawn"--headline, FoxNews.com, Sept. 5
The
World Is Round
"The global obesity pandemic combined with society's anti-fat bias is more damaging
to women than to men, an expert has warned at an international conference,"
Agence France-Presse reports from Sydney:
"Being obese and female is as bad as it gets," Berit Heitmann, a nutritional and medical research advisor to the Danish government, told a meeting of world obesity experts gathered in Sydney Wednesday.
Not only were obese women socially stigmatised more than their male counterparts, but their health suffered to a greater degree, delegates at the 10th International Congress on Obesity heard.
Heitmann said that although gender differences in the obesity epidemic were narrowing, the vicious circle of obesity and poverty still had a greater impact on women.
The vicious "circle"--that's an amusing choice of metaphor. Heitmann also said, in AFP's words, that "paradoxically, while obesity appeared to cause more disease in women, death rates were similar among the sexes." About 100%, we'd wager.
But the Associated Press, reporting from the same conference, quotes its chairman, Paul Zimmet, who says obesity is "as big a threat as global warming and bird flu." So apparently it isn't very serious after all.
(Carol Muller helps compile Best of the Web Today. Thanks to Michael Segal, Stuart Creque, Ethel Fenig, Ed Lasky, Mark Van Der Molen, Chris Scibelli, John Farrar, Matthew Noonan, Lewis Scknolnick, Jim Moran, Randall McElwain, Monty Krieger, Julie Beck, Edward Schulze, Shabtai Atlow, Peter Shalen, Mike Granoff, Jeff Dobbs, Dave Huber, Michael Kingsley, William Katz, Daniel Foty, Dave Tinkle, Thomas Shea, Bill Vis and Bob Dowding. If you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com, and please include the URL.)
Today on OpinionJournal:
- Newt Gingrich: Echoes of the past in today's strategic mistakes.
- Clint Bolick: In Los Angeles, four million children left behind.
- Richard Woodward: What is the proper response to the glut of photographic information about 9/11?
