THE DODD-FATHER

THE SCRAPBOOK enjoys a good cry as much as anyone, and we suspect there wasn't a dry eye in the New York Times newsroom last week when they published "Dodd's Other Campaign: Restoring Dad's Reputation" by Elisabeth Bumiller.

There was a front-page snapshot of toddler Christopher Dodd (now senator from Connecticut and Democratic candidate for president) sitting in the lap of his father, who is reading him a story in front of a fireplace. His father, of course, was the late Senator Thomas J. Dodd. Inside there's an artsy photo of today's Senator Dodd standing among some trees on the Capitol grounds (you can see the dome in the background).

The story is full of touching details. How, for example, the senator's sister stumbled on a sheaf of letters the elder Dodd, then a prosecutor at the Nuremberg war crimes trials, had written to his wife, now collected in a new book ( Letters from Nuremberg: My Father's Narrative of a Quest for Justice) edited by Christopher Dodd. How the elder Dodd's censure by the Senate in 1967 devastated young Christopher, then a Peace Corps volunteer in the Dominican Republic, whose "[presidential] campaign is the most public chapter in his career-long quest for his father's redemption." How, according to Senator Dodd's brother Thomas Jr., Christopher "said to me once, 'Every time I walk on the Senate floor, I feel that he's vindicated.'"

At which point, THE SCRAPBOOK is not ashamed to say, we reached for our handkerchief. The only problem with the story, of course, is that Times readers are somehow left with the impression that the noble Roman Thomas Dodd was censured by his Senate colleagues (92-5) four decades ago not for "diverting $116,000 in campaign funds for his personal use" but because he was so gosh-darned decent and law-abiding, especially when prosecuting Nazis.

"Mr. Dodd," writes Elisabeth Bumiller, ".  .  . insisted that [ Letters from Nuremberg] was not meant as a vindication, but as a reminder about the commitment to due process at the admired Nuremberg trials when civil liberties are under assault at Guantanamo--a formulation that earns him big applause on the campaign trail. .  .  . Friends say that Mr. Dodd has been personally overwhelmed by what he learned of his father through the letters and by his passion to redefine his legacy."

To which THE SCRAPBOOK feels constrained to add two dry-eyed comments. First, only someone like Christopher Dodd, a reliable apologist for left-wing tyrants in Latin America since arriving in the Senate, would see the lawful detention of the world's most dangerous terrorists in a compound open to public inspection as "civil liberties .  .  . under assault."

And second, tender letters to his wife notwithstanding, the late Tom Dodd was a crook. The "diverting [of] $116,000 in campaign funds for his personal use" was the standard sort of tip-of-the-iceberg charge meant to symbolize his long and squalid career of shaking down people for cash, in exchange for political influence, and pocketing the proceeds. If Christopher Dodd wants to learn more about his father, may we recommend Above the Law: The Rise and Fall of Senator Thomas J. Dodd by James Boyd (New American Library, 1968), an account of criminality written by the old senator's onetime administrative assistant which, 39 years later, still makes chilling reading.

MORE IRAQ VIGNETTES

We published a few observations on Iraq last week from Willy Stern, an old SCRAPBOOK friend, who had just returned from a stint in Iraq embedded with the First Cavalry Division out of Fort Hood, Texas. Here are a couple more:

What's a Rhodes Scholar like you doing in a place like this? I went for a run the other day with the commanding general of the U.S. Army in Iraq, David H. Petraeus, and some of his senior staff. Gen. Petraeus has a Ph.D. from Prince-ton. His legal adviser, Col. Mark Martins also was along on the run. Col. Martins is a Rhodes Scholar with a Harvard Law degree. Petraeus's aide-de-camp ran too. He has a Duke MBA. They are all very fast. More to the point, these are also impressive human beings of superior intellect who share an unfaltering commitment to serve their country. What was John Kerry thinking?

Those naughty, rule-breaking Jews: In an effort to be sensitive to the local Muslims--only some of whom are trying to kill us--all U.S. military bases here forbid porn and alcohol. They take the ban seriously. Not so the Jews. I showed up at 1830 last night for Shabbat services in a mini-chapel over at Camp Victory. The Army had flown in a baby-faced reservist rabbi--the ever-smiling Rabbi Mark Sachs--from Pittsburgh. The nine of us in Rabbi Sachs's Baghdad "congregation" that night sat in desk chairs that we had arranged in a semi-circle around our preacher. M-16s and M-4s lined the back wall. Those in attendance included a top executive with Kellogg, Brown & Root (the contractor that performs many non-military services here), three enlisted guys, and one female (a commander in the U.S. Navy). Afterwards, someone went into the backroom and came out with a case of kosher red wine. I guess Jewish customs trump Muslim ones. Our final prayer was in celebration of the United States of America. I couldn't take notes (the rabbi was orthodox and they have some sort of prohibition about using writing instruments on the Sabbath). But there was a line in there where we all prayed for the president of the U.S. It's the first time I've ever heard a rabbi say a single nice word about President Bush.

HUNDREDS KILLE D IN PEARL HARBOR FIGHTING

Our morning got off to a dismal start. We scanned the news wires and saw this Associated Press headline: "81 Killed in Afghan Fighting, Airstrikes." Sure sounded bad. Was the long-awaited "spring offensive" by the Taliban finally underway, six months later than predicted? Not exactly.

Here's how the story continued: "KABUL, Afghanistan--Heavy battles punctuated by airstrikes killed 75 suspected Taliban and at least six civilians in Afghanistan's south." Oh. So this was in fact, a military success story--for NATO and Afghan forces. They seem to have scored lopsided victories in battles against Taliban militants allied with Osama bin Laden. Too bad the headline didn't convey that.

THE SCRAPBOOK is not unreasonable. It realizes the AP is not about to allow any pro-American rooting to creep into its headlines. It's not 1944 anymore, so we're not expecting to see "Hajji Hightails It to Helmand Hills: Yanks in Hot Pursuit."

But how about "NATO Airstrikes Kill 75 Taliban"? This would seem to be a bit more informative. That it would ruin the breakfasts of those rooting for the Taliban is lagniappe.