Has Bush Gone Wobbly?

It ain't over 'til it's over. The base in Gitmo remains open for now, of course. But I'd expected Bush to hold out for -- oh, I don't know -- at least a couple more days before mumbling something about closing Gitmo.

At least that's what two press accounts make it seem like he has done. So far, though, it looks more to me like the leftist news media overall have merely joined the prison camp closure drumbeat as if they agree with Amnesty International that Newsweek gave up too soon. Read on.

First, failed president Jimmah Carter jumps on the prison closure bandwagon. No surprise there. The Gaijin Biker notes an interesting historical parallel where the man from Plains is concerned.

It would be ironic indeed if Carter, who spectacularly failed to free Americans being held by Islamic militants, managed to free Islamic militants being held by Americans.

The irony, I submit, would not be that Carter worked towards that end, but that he actually succeeded. Carter merely serves to illustrate what I said about pacifists just a few days ago.

The missing part of the equation -- missing because a philosophical grasp of the underlying issues is crucial to see it -- is that the pacifist left is even more of a danger to us than the terrorists. For if we begin to tread lightly lest we upset them, we will begin doing their bidding. And their bidding, clearly in the case of their drive to close Gitmo, will make us unable to continue defending ourselves from terrorists much longer.

The pacifist left, like their Platonic ideal, Carter, is unable to do anything without our help. They are parasites, depending upon others to do their bidding for their goals to be achieved. They get others to act by claiming the moral high ground and shaming these others into playing by their rules.

Amnesty International's ability to level such charges and still be taken seriously is merely a symptom of appeasement from the outset by the Bushies. Namely: Handling the terrorists at Gitmo with kid-gloves. Giving them Korans in the first place, let alone handling them reverentially, has told our terrorist and pacifist opponents that we subscribe to their moral code. All they need to do is take the moral high ground and we'll capitulate.

Amnesty's game, of course, is to lead Bush by the nose so that he'll close the prison camp himself or, even better, step into a quagmire of endless inspections by the likes of Amnesty. To hear our news media, you'd think he's within a hair's breadth of releasing the prisoners.

First, via the Army Times, the Associate Press says the following.

The White House on Wednesday left open the possibility that the U.S. prison camp at Guantanamo Bay Naval Station, Cuba, could be shuttered after criticism of the facility that has led former President Jimmy Carter and others to call for its closure.

When asked if President Bush would shut down the detention center, White House press secretary Scott McClellan responded that "we’re always looking at all alternatives when it comes to dealing with these detainees."

The entire rest of the article is nothing more than a precis of the accusations of Amnesty International and what Senator Biden and the Georgia peanut farmer have had to say on the matter which is: "What Amnesty said." All we get from "The White House" in this story is an evasive response by McClellan to some reporter's question about whether the camp should be closed.

Reuters joins the act, this time using an evasive answer by Bush himself to the same question as the basis for its prophesy of prison camp closure.

President Bush left the door open to an eventual closing of the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay on Wednesday amid mounting complaints and calls for it to be shut down, including a broadside from former president and human rights champion Jimmy Carter.

"We're exploring all alternatives as to how best to do the main objective, which is to protect America. What we don't want to do is let somebody out that comes back and harms us," Bush said in an interview with Fox News Channel when asked whether it should be shut down.

As with the AP article, the vast majority of the article is a rehash of the leftist take on this manufactured controversy.

As I have often found, one has to go overseas (not counting Reuters) before one gets something closer to the truth. Hell, even the China Daily is more honest in its reporting despite its attempt to spin a Bush concession out of FoxFoix News Channel interview. Note the third paragraph.

US President Bush on Wednesday left open the possibility that the U.S. prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, could be shut down.

"We're exploring all alternatives as to how best to do the main objective, which is to protect America," Bush told Fox News Channel's Neil Cavuto in an interview.

US Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said he did not know of anyone in the administration who was considering closing Guantanamo.

Thanks, Rummy. At least I "know of someone in the administration" who can give a straight answer. Hope you're right.

The Guardian Unlimited is the only one of these four whose headline does not imply that Bush is considering closure. Its reporting still focuses almost entirely on Jimmy Carter, though.

Certainly, the press owns much of the blame here, be it for aiding a blatant effort to pressure our government or for mindlessly parroting the baseless accusations of Amnesty International. But recall Bush's role here, first in making the controversy possible, and second, in failing to stand up to the pressure once it started. (Chalk up the evasiveness to this, at a minimum. It could still be a symptom of moral uncertainty, though.)

Bush's greatest failing as a leader is that he is bad at communicating his agenda to the people, or of reminding them why it is important to pursue his agenda, specifically with terrorism.

Dick Morris, it seems, agrees with me on this, though he looks at this solely as a political tactician.

Nearly 1,600 Americans have given their lives fighting terrorism. We owe it to their efforts to win on the battlefield not to lose public opinion at home. Bush needs to act before his presidency falls apart before his eyes.

Unfortunately, although Morris is often right on the money, and much of this article is, he offers Bush some advice that is completely wrong: aggressively investigate the allegations of prison abuse!

If his administration takes the lead — publicly, openly and enthusiastically — in investigating prison abuses at Gitmo, he will survive whatever emerges. If not, he will be on the griddle, answering each accusation of abuse and support for the war will go down the drain along with his credibility.

Pardon me, but didn't the Pentagon just release a report on this? And wouldn't Amnesty International cry "government cover-up" if not made part of the investigation, and, even then, cry foul at even the slightest impediment faced on account of national security needs? Wasn't Amnesty disingenuous enough to call Gitmo a gulag? Why would they stop there? Why not "substantiate" the charges with further claims of a compromised investigation?

Morris is right, except that his abilities as a political tactician are limited by his moral myopia. Bush does need to fight back by investigating Gitmo as his opponents wish -- but by claiming the moral high ground. He rightly has stated that America has brought freedom to the world. And Bush has correctly called Amnesty's charges "absurd." It's fine to dismiss the charges out of hand, but only if he goes further -- by reversing his over-generous policy of handing out Korans to enemy combatants. In other words, Bush needs to discover the real moral high ground and get there, pronto.

While he's taking off the gloves, he could take advantage of their superstitious beliefs by warning the Islamofascists that, as prisoners, they will lack Korans and prayer rugs. And that if they are to be executed after their trial by tribunal (What's going on with that, anyway?), a bullet dipped in pig fat will be used. That tactic did wonders for General Pershing when he was confronted with Islamic terrorists in the Philippines. [Update: I have subsequently learned that this story may not be true.] In short, Bush needs to act like we're fighting a war: Our only consideration in this war should be making our enemy unable to harm us by the quickest, most effective means available.

My take so far: Bush hasn't caved, but the liberal echo chamber grows louder by the minute.

Something's gonna give.

-- CAV

Updates

6-9-05: Corrected typo, HT The General.
2-20-06: Added update on Pershing.