[lit-ideas] Andy McCarthy on the Obama gaff (if it happened)
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lawrencehelm1.post@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 10:48:12 -0700
Here is another interesting article sent me by a lurker:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWZlZjBhNDA0ODEzNWE2ZDMwMDk1MjZkMWE
3NjUxZDM=
It is by Andy McCarthy who was the Federal Prosecutor of the Blind Shiek.
McCarthy wrote a book about the trial:
http://www.amazon.com/Willful-Blindness-Andrew-C-McCarthy/dp/1594032130/ref=
pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8
<http://www.amazon.com/Willful-Blindness-Andrew-C-McCarthy/dp/1594032130/ref
=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221586345&sr=1-1>
&s=books&qid=1221586345&sr=1-1
Publishers Weekly wrote about it, ". . . the prosecutor responsible for
leading the investigation of Blind Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and others
involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing dissects the miscues between
federal agencies that led to that event . . . The pre-1993 comedy of errors
begins with the CIA's decision to funnel arms and money to Afghanistan
during the Soviet-Afghan war and continues with inexplicable lapses of
communication between the State Department and immigration officials
(despite having been placed on a State Department terror watchlist, the
sheikh travels freely to the United States). The most enduring oversight,
however, at least from McCarthy's perspective, is the refusal among
academics and political leaders to confront fundamentalist Islamic tenets,
the 800-pound gorilla that is somehow always in the middle of the room when
terror strikes. The jihadist philosophy that guided the Blind Sheikh is
traced through generations of Islamic thinkers to the Prophet Mohammed
himself. . . his firsthand account of jihad's rise and the sheikh's trial
of the century is an important contribution . . . to existing literature on
the attack that foreshadowed disaster to come."
Someone on National Review asked him to respond to the Amy Holmes article:
He writes, "If Obama did what he's been accused of, it was an outrageous
bit of treachery and in my mind shows he is unfit to be president. (Of
course, you might point out that I'd already made up my mind about that, but
I would counter that this episode, if it happened, was singularly
egregious.)
"That said, I'd make two points. First, I don't like the idea of Logan Act
prosecutions. I addressed
<http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTJlODU3MDc3ZjEzZjEzYzVkNGRmNzhiYmZiNj
kwNTI=> this back in 2007 when Speaker Pelosi tried to conduct foreign
policy in the Middle East, and I haven't changed my mind. Like the Pelosi
gambit, this Obama misstep would be a golden political opportunity for the
McCain campaign and the GOP. It ought to be handled just that way - argue
how despicable and hypocritical the conduct is, but refrain from calls for
prosecution.
"Second, at this point we also have to be concerned about the overlay of
this whole issue of criminalizing politics - which is banana-republic stuff
and which Obama and Biden have threatened to do to their political opponents
if they get their hands on the Justice Department. The editors addressed
this in an editorial
<http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Y2M5ZjMyMzYyOTNlMTc4OGQyNjJhYzRhYWY2OT
FhZmY=> last week, and I think, for the reasons argued there, that the
criminalization of our policy debates is to be avoided. That doesn't mean
Obama would not have violated the law if he did this, or that such a
violation would not merit our condemnation. But letting prosecutors decide
our politics is a prescription for a very bad brand of politics."
Lawrence Helm
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Andy McCarthy on the Obama gaff (if it happened)
