THE DAILY STANDARD welcomes letters to the editor. Letters will be edited for length and clarity and must include the writer’s name, city, and state.
*1*
Here he goes again–a second, more desperate Hugh Hewitt column referring to me, the supposed antiwar, leftist professor who bullied two freshmen (Blacklist Envy). And the second he has written without calling me first to ask whether anything he was writing was true. The only “call” I EVER got before all this was an e-mail from a producer inviting me to a radio show hosted by one Hugh Hewitt, who was unknown to me; I declined. No one said anything about a column. Now Hewitt writes that Joe Scarborough’s producer Greg Cockrell called me before the Scarborough MSNBC show. That is a lie. The first call I ever got from MSNBC came days after the show, from a very apologetic Cockrell. He never claimed he’d left any messages on my machine or otherwise. Neither he nor Hewitt are good at telling the truth about contacts. I do have to give Hewitt credit for linking my second column, but I’m beginning to wonder who among the free and the brave is strong enough to read it and tell Hewitt and his radio show and The Daily Standard and Cockrell and Scarborough and MSNBC that, this time, they simply messed up and can’t admit it.
–Jim Sleeper
Hugh Hewitt responds: I am tempted to send Professor Sleeper a T-shirt with the words “Anguished Conscience of a Conflicted Generation” printed on the back so he wouldn’t have to work so hard at attempting to telegraph his great sensitivities and his commitment to truth-telling. Alas, I can’t send him the shirt because he’s built his pose on either self-delusion or simple lies.
Both Cockrell and the Yale freshmen confirmed to me that MSNBC repeatedly tried to contact Sleeper.
His writings have been reviewed by a long list of serious people and they all agree that he slandered the freshmen with the terms “neo-Stalinist” and “Fedayeen Uncle Sams.”
I plead guilty to inviting him on my radio show only once. I regret he refused the invitation because the tape no doubt would have been a classic. Sleeper seems most upset that no one takes him seriously, and has apparently persuaded himself that this is because his message has been distorted or muffled. In fact, the chuckling that follows his every column or letter is because instead of a simple apology–one manifestly owed to the freshmen–Sleeper keeps reaching for martyrdom.
*2*
As a diehard Bosox fan, I welcome the stir caused by Boston Herald reporter Howard Bryant. (Christopher Caldwell, A Clubhouse Divided) It takes my mind off the fact that despite a decent April, we are already three games behind the Yankees. News about a sportswriter driven to activism will keep memories of the Curse off my mind–and off the pages of the Boston dailies.
–Christian Farley
*3*
Terry Eastland should realize that there is another alternative in Iraq: A Shiite state theocracy which tolerates other religions (The Separation of Mosque and State).
I am an American living in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. There is a large Shiite population here. They believe (at least my small sampling–mostly graduate-degreed engineering professionals–believe) that a theocracy would be the utopian form of government. Their belief is that the Shiite sect of Islam is the only pure and righteous one. It relies on religious leaders for guidance in all matters of religion and politics. They feel an Islamic state which provides freedom for infidels to practice other religions is superior to a secular one which treats all religions equally.
–Ron Monsen
*4*
Claudia Winkler, while she rightly praises President Bush for saying nice things about Iraqi Americans, should realize that it doesn’t matter too much what Iraqi Americans think about Iraq–what matters is what native Iraqis think (Bush’s Ideology of Freedom) And what native Iraqis think should give both Bush and Winkler pause.
For one thing, the natives seem to believe they can run Iraq better than the Americans or the British. For another, native Iraqis do not seem much enamored of democracy–they prefer theocracy. Or at least they seem to, based on the demonstrations I’ve seen on CNN.
Since it is unlikely that native Iraqis will be changing their opinions about self-government or theocracy any time soon, it would seem that the Americans and British will be occupying Iraq for a long, long time.
–Carl W. Goss
*5*
I am very disappointed by Justin Polin’s It’s All About Kashmir. The Weekly Standard has consistently and heroically defended Israel against its critics who use moral equivalence to gauge the Arab-Israeli conflict. Why doesn’t the same defense applied to India?
While the India-Pakistan situation has many differences, it also has many similarities. India and Israel are both solid democracies emerging from bloody partitions in the late 1940s. Both were later threatened by largely undemocratic neighbors who have consistently fomented war and terrorism over disputed territories. Both are diverse (Israel’s diversity is especially underappreciated), and encompass deep religious and secular dimensions.
There are differences, to be sure. Israel is a tiny state (but a critical outpost of Western civilization) while India is an aspiring global power and a distinct civilization in its own right. The West Bank and Gaza have much greater security implications for Israel than Kashmir does for India (although it could be convincingly argued that Kasmiri secession would embolden other regional separtists in India). Israel is much closer to being a developed nation, and while India has developed rapidly in the past 12 years, it has a long way to go (internal violence like last year’s bloody riots in western Gujarat state would not have happened in Israel).
I speak as American of Indian descent, and a staunch defender of Israel. Polin’s article basically parrots the same Kashmir view as David Bonior, who would also want nothing less than meddling American “mediation” between Israel and the Palestinians.
–Mihir Shah
*6*
Thinking Australians have never forgotten that the USA saved Australia from Invasion by the Japanese in World War11. (David Hackett, “Howard”–Australian for Loyalty) General McArthur started his long march to Tokyo from these shores. Out of that conflict came the Anzac alliance and Australia has contributed as well as she could in Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf War, and now in Iraq. We have a good thing going in this country and are grateful for the help the United States has provided in making us a safe and prosperous member of the world community.
We will be always there when tyrants attempt to change the world order. We don’t like war or fighting (except on the sporting field). But when a young reporter recently sarcastically suggested to the prime minister that our troops appeared to be punching above their weight level in Iraq, he curtly replied: “They always do.”
–Peter R Lyon
*7*
Thank you for David Hackett’s acknowledgement of Australia’s role in Iraq. Aside from the basic common sense expressed by Howard–that one can’t leave an armed and dangerous maniac on the loose–Australia’s defense policy is to develop niche abilities (such as our SAS units) and to use these to support our major ally, the United States. Quite a sensible approach for a country of 19 million.
As an aside it might be noted that prior to the war the country with the largest support for armed intervention in Iraq was Australia at 68 percent–in the United States it was 66 percent.
–Gilbert Mane
*8*
Yesterday I spoke by crackling telephone to my daughter, a Lance Corporal in the Marine Corps, for the first time in 50 days. David Brooks is right (Cynics and the USS Abraham Lincoln). The pundits, because they do not have the talent to capture the scope of the real situation, are cynical. The concept of the leader of the free world being in charge of the most powerful military force in history and using it for good is just too much for them. What is really frustrating is that these highly paid pundits can’t seem to grasp something that this 19-year-old girl from the hills of Kentucky understands implicitly: Our nation is built on honor, courage, and commitment, and what we have here is worthy of sacrifice.
–Mike Crockett
*9*
Some qualification’s about Australia’s role in Iraq:
Australia’s armed forces are extremely small, so those contingents noted were difficult to field. Australia presently has only six infantry battalions (including one parachute and one commando) on active service, but manning constraints (leave, sickness, school, etc.) cut the actual force to somewhere near four battalions. That’s a reinforced U.S. Brigade! With Australia’s peacekeeping commitments abroad, this places a heavy responsibility on their equally small reserves.
I should like to point out that in this war, at least, those Australians who have served with U.S. contingents are being recognized by our own Army. It was not always so. Australians serving with U.S. Special Forces in Vietnam, cut off from Australian Army administration and command channels often found their courage and sacrifice unnoted in official records. In that regard, the U.S. Army Awards Board recently awarded the Bronze Star with V Device (for valor) to WO2 (Ret.) Barry Tolley, of Townsville, for his actions over a three day period during the battle of Duc Lap in August 1968. Warrant Officer Tolley was leading a platoon of Montagnards under U.S. Special Forces command. Later, at Ben Het, he commanded a company.
Nations must, of course, follow their own interests, and thus Australia may not always be with the United States. But for my part, I certainly hope they are. Their army may be small, but they are among the finest soldiers in the world.
–Shaun Darragh
*10*
I’m an Ivy League grad who’s been friendly with a few pro athletes over the years and Christopher Caldwell’s comments about the jealousies that obsess some members of the media are right on. I’ve often thought if these journalists could at least accurately perceive their own overwhelming mediocrity, they’d be far less envious of the jocks’ success.
The fact that some fourth-rate mind who’s the third reporter covering a sports team for a city’s second paper has the chutzpah to lord his intellectual capacities over anybody, pro athlete or not, is astonishing.
–Dean Barnett
