HERD ON THE STREET (via Budd White)

Debunking the myth of the 'Arab street' (Ari Melber, August 26, 2003, Baltimore Sun)

Politicians in the Middle East and the United States agree on one thing: The occupation of Iraq will shape how America is viewed in the infamous "Arab street." But any examination of public opinion in the region should begin by discarding this misleading cliche.

The Arab street is inaccurate, disrespectful and obstructive to U.S. efforts to engage the Middle East. There is no monolithic Arab street stewing with a singular hatred of the United States; the populations of 18 different countries and the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories do not think as one group.

It suggests a mob mentality; even when France is frustrating we don't decry the "French street." It is simply hypocritical to talk of public opinion at home and ethnic streets overseas.

Defenders say the term emphasizes the gap between Arab dictators and their citizens. But it is precisely those rulers who advance the impression that the "street" may erupt at any moment (even as they control information and limit expression). This is the most dangerous part of perpetuating the "street" fiction: It feeds the scare tactics of dictators in the Middle East.

Liberties -- for lefties only (Debra J. Saunders, August 26, 2003, San Francisco Chronicle)

Some of the very people who are attacking the Patriot Act on civil libertarian grounds are raising questions as to whether Attorney General John Ashcroft has the right to lobby in its favor.

Here's an idea for a new slogan: Free speech -- Ashcroft need not apply.

Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, wrote to Ashcroft that speeches he delivered in U.S. cites to boost the besieged Patriot Act appeared to conflict with congressional rules regarding "publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized by Congress." Conyers objected to Ashcroft's goal of setting the record straight on the USA Patriot Act -- that is, correcting the anti-Patriot Act propaganda -- and suggested that Ashcroft "desist from further speaking engagements" until he could establish that what he was doing was legit. (DOJ attorneys disagree with Conyers' interpretation.)

In a press release, the American Civil Liberties Union "questioned" the Department of Justice's "use of public money to counter broad public concern about the expansive surveillance powers of the law."

Note that both Conyers and the ACLU object to Ashcroft speaking out. If he had agreed with them, if he were not a dissident on their issue, apparently there would be no problem.

Somehow it's easier to believe that the experts are channeling the Arab street than it is to believe that the ACLU speaks for broad public concerns in America. Posted by Orrin Judd at August 26, 2003 7:48 PM