November 5, 2005

KOFI McCHIMP HITLER

Syria and the UN: Another polarizing double standard (Salim Lone, International Herald Tribune, November 4th, 2005)

The beginning of the drive to justify the use of force or other serious action against Syria for its possible involvement in Rafik Hariri's killing is reminiscent of the run-up to the 2003 U.S.-led war against Iraq. As it was then, the United Nations Security Council is the instrument for escalating the tensions, with its unanimously passed resolution demanding that Syria cooperate with the UN investigator Detlev Mehlis by arresting those he suspects of complicity in Hariri's death and that interrogations be conducted outside Syria.

If the Iraq experience is a guide, the demands will multiply regardless of the level of cooperation Syria offers, with the United States still free to resort to war if it chooses. With or without war, the resolution will intensify charges of UN double standards and further polarize Muslim-Western relations.

The arguments being advanced for intervention this time are infinitely more spurious than the claims that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. The highly speculative and overtly political Mehlis report relies on partisan witnesses, offers no concrete evidence that Syria was involved in Hariri's killing and in any event contends only that such involvement is probable.

The resolution's passage offers yet more proof that the Security Council is an instrument of Western power invoked principally for intimidating or punishing Arabs.

To dree-am...the impossible dream...

Posted by Peter Burnet at November 5, 2005 8:04 AM
Comments

"The resolution's passage offers yet more proof that the Security Council is an instrument of Western power invoked principally for intimidating or punishing Arabs."

He says that like that's a bad thing.

Posted by: Mikey at November 5, 2005 8:53 AM

The recognition that the power in not that of "the West," but that of civilized humanity under the leadership of the West is what makes this story so significant. It is a harbinger of the end of Boxer-Leninism.

Posted by: Lou Gots at November 5, 2005 9:11 AM

(Just to keep the record straight, writing-wise...if it hasn't already...I believe it was Jim Lileks, in a July column, who coined the nifty term "Bushy McChimpHitler" as a way to describe the over-the-top treatment of W by the leftwing/MSM.)

I could be wrong. But I'm pretty sure Lileks is 100 per cent, A-1 original. (Not that the poster here isn't, just keeping things straight is all. Credit-wise. You know.)

Posted by: Brian McKim at November 5, 2005 9:14 AM

you forgot halliburtonco.

Posted by: Sandy P at November 5, 2005 9:49 AM

Thanks, Brian. Grumble

Posted by: Peter B at November 5, 2005 10:11 AM

I prefere Chimpy McHallibushitler. It seems to cover everything you need to know about the head of the BushCo crime family. It's just a stylistic quibble, nothing of real importance.

Posted by: Mikey at November 5, 2005 10:36 AM

Mikey,
I like Chimpy McBushhitlerburton, but yes, it's a minor quibble.

Posted by: Patrick H at November 5, 2005 11:18 AM

I don't know ... Chimpy McHitlerbushburton rolls off the tounge better, in my opinion.

At least we're all agreed on the first name, though it does make one nostalgic for those waybegone days of yesteryear, when "Shrub" was all the left needed to use for a monicker.

Posted by: John at November 5, 2005 1:48 PM

Just for laughs go google the author of this propoganda piece.

Posted by: TedM at November 5, 2005 2:54 PM

Chimpy McBushitlergoldstein (gotta cover those neo-cons, you know). Of course, if he keeps nominating Catholics to the Court, we'll have to fit Cardinal or Pope in there somewhere.

Posted by: jim hamlen at November 5, 2005 4:32 PM

The arguments being advanced for intervention this time are infinitely more spurious than the claims that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.

That's probably true, considering that Dr. Hans Blix's UN weapons inspection teams found that Iraq possessed illegal warheads, illegal missiles, was manufacturing mustard gas, and wouldn't account for 6,500 bombs' worth of VX nerve agent, along with unknown but large quantities of anthrax.
(Unknown because we now know that Iraq lied about how much they actually produced).

Therefore, the "Iraqi WMD" claim waan't spurious at all.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen at November 6, 2005 1:06 AM
« SURE, THE PROPHET MADE ME DO IT | Main | THE WONDER OF ED (MAJOR SELF-REFERENCE ALERT): »