Cozying up to Libya is an immoral act
The term “state-sponsored terrorism” fits the activities of Libya more snugly than that of almost any other country. It was to Libya that the trail led from the infamous fatal bombing of a Berlin night-club that was a hang-out for U.S. service personnel. That outrage, in April 1986, led President Ronald Reagan to launch an attack by the Air Force on Gadhafi’s compound. But even before the attack on the Berlin disco, Gadhafi was believed to have bankrolled the 1972 massacre of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics.
Gadhafi’s most unspeakable act was, of course, the dispatch of his agents to place a bomb on Pan Am 103 on Dec. 21, 1988, that destroyed the aircraft over Lockerbie, Scotland, and killed 270 people on the plane and in the village. For that alone, he should be shunned for all time by civilized nations. Nonetheless, his isolation now appears to be ending.
Gadhafi has been negotiating with the United States and Britain to finally settle responsibility and compensation for the Lockerbie bombing. Matters have advanced to the point that President George W. Bush said at his Tuesday night press conference that “Libya has turned its back on terror” and “Libya was a nation … that sponsored terror … that was dangerous because of weapons [of mass destruction]” but Gadhafi “made the decison, and rightly so, to disclose and disarm for the good of the world.”
Of course WMD didn’t figure at all in Gadhafi’s ability to terrorise, they had no play in the 9/11 attacks, and their possession will not be a prerequisite for success in future attacks. That George Bush & Co. are still delivering ammo along virtually unchallenged supply routes to the dumbed-down reactionary masses should be decried until even the potato heads obsessing over Michael Jackson’s fate take note of their own chumpness.
Matt Drudge was on C-Span’s Washington Journal yesterday morning. I was so pleased that a burning question of mine was put to him by a Libertarian caller. The man noted that over the years Drudge has never missed an opportunity to call Clinton out for being a liar yet when it comes to Iraq and WMD he treats Bill’s word as gospel. Why?
Drudge evaded the question by telling the man he sounded like a perfect candidate for his own website. While observing Matt brag that he earns a seven-figure salary from his own and gushingly admit to being invited, for the first time, to the “party of the year” in D.C., I searched his rolling eyes for signs of an epiphany. All I saw were dollar signs embedded in the tricked-out shell of yet another poseur claiming to be a non-partisan journalist.
Matt doesn’t write books or speak publically, so he said. His website keeps him too busy. But I think he should consider starring in a reality series and I have a working title for it. “Muckrakers on the Dole”.