A Day to Remember
Late summer's here and the time is right for The Scrapbook to start getting excited and impatient about September 6--the day after Labor Day. Not because Scrapbook Jr. heads back to school after the long break. Not because John Roberts heads over to the Senate for his confirmation hearings. Not even because the people of Egypt head to the polls for what could be their country's first-ever not-entirely-rigged presidential election. Nope. None of that trivial stuff.
The Scrapbook can hardly wait for September 6 because two objects of significant cultural interest will formally debut on that date.
The first comes from HarperCollins, runs 538 attractively hardcovered pages, and costs $27.95 (but can be had at a discount from most major booksellers, so there's really no excuse not to run right out and buy a copy). We're referring, of course, to The Weekly Standard: A Reader, 1995-2005, editor William Kristol's hand-picked selection of some of the best essays and articles--more than 70 of them--to have graced this magazine's pages during its inaugural decade. Having looked the volume over, The Scrapbook can personally attest to its impressive range and quality: from P.J. O'Rourke on Hillary Clinton to Larry Miller on Johnny Carson; from Fred Barnes on Karl Rove to John Podhoretz on Rudy Giuliani; from Matt Labash on Canada to Harvey Mansfield on Harvard; from Christopher Caldwell on Europe to Reuel Marc Gerecht on the Middle East; from David Frum on World War I to David Tell on World War II--and much, much more.
Also due out September 6, from Virgin Records: The Rolling Stones' A Bigger Bang, their first studio album since 1997. Which is a landmark The Scrapbook wouldn't care squat about, quite frankly, except for the part about us. And what part might that be, you ask? According to the publicity buzz surrounding the new CD, the Rolling Stones--lead singer and principal lyricist Sir Mick Jagger in particular--think The Scrapbook and all those who share our political sensibilities are "sweet." And they've gone ahead and recorded an anthem to that effect, and timed its release to exactly coincide with The Weekly Standard's tenth anniversary.
Isn't that nice?
Excerpted lyrics to "Sweet Neo Con" have been circulating around the Internet for several weeks now. Some may choose to accept the authenticity of these excerpts on faith. And some will no doubt ignore the "sweet" part and pay exaggerated attention to certain of the less attractive characteristics Sir Mick purportedly attributes to the subject of this song. The otherwise unnamed "Neo Con" of the title, for example, is said to be a liar, a warmonger, and a tyrant. We're even led to believe that one of the song's key couplets goes like this: "You call yourself a Christian, I call you a hypocrite / You call yourself a patriot, well I think you're full of sh-- . . . "
Nah. Mick Jagger would never talk like that.
The Best of Times, the Worst of Times
Let it be recordeth that when, in January 2004, "we the people of Afghanistan" didst promulgate a brand-new constitution--"in the Name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate" and "Believing in the Sacred religion of Islam"--rich men and shepherds alike rejoiced, and even the New York Times editorial page found something nice to say. Something very, very nice, in fact. The Afghan blueprint was an "excellent foundation" for that nation's future, the Times announced, and the Bush administration was right to be "thrilled" by its "enlightened" compromise between "the goal of an Islamic state" and the need to abide by international human rights norms.
Let it further be recordeth, that the Times found reason to issue such a ringing endorsement of the Afghan constitution despite the fact that said constitution (1) established "an Islamic Republic" in which "no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam"; (2) adopted a national flag and insignia each of which prominently incorporates a "sacred phrase" about there being "no God but Allah"; (3) imposed explicitly sectarian religious tests and oath requirements on candidates for highest national office; and (4) formally ensured that these and other "provisions of adherence" to an "Islamic Republic" and its faith "cannot be amended," ever.
Maybe the Times was just in a really, really good mood that day? Who knows?
And who cares? That was then, and this is now, when it's the people of Iraq who've just made public a draft constitution. Rich men and shepherds alike have again rejoiced. But this time the Times finds the whole business "unsettling." And then some. Iraq's "badly flawed," "reckless," even "indefensible" constitutional proposal raises legitimate fears of an "Iranian-style Shiite theocracy" and altogether fails to promote national unity and peace, the Times complains. "Nor does it reflect well on the Bush administration," which has abandoned its responsibility to promote Iraqi respect for "women's rights and the rule of law."
The Times, let it finally be recordeth, is particularly exercised over provisions in the new constitution "declaring Iraq an Islamic state and prohibiting any legislation that conflicts with the fixed principles of Islam." Why this might be a problem in Iraq but not Afghanistan the Times does not explain.
Uighurs Without a Country
Efforts on behalf of two Uighur men detained at Guantanamo, whose plight Ellen Bork recounted in these pages two issues ago, continued last week in federal district court in Washington. Lawyers for Abu Bakker Qassim and A'del Abdu Al-Hakim continued to try to get the men released into this country. The men have been granted better conditions on the base, but despite a determination that they pose no threat to U.S. or coalition forces, are still being held. The Bush administration refuses to allow the men to settle here but rightly will not return them to China, where they would be persecuted or killed. And no other countries where they would be safe have come forward to accept them.
As if on cue, also last week, Wang Lequan, the Communist party chief of Xinjiang, the Chinese region Uighurs know as East Turkestan, accused Rebiya Kadeer of engineering a terrorist plot. Mrs. Kadeer is a leading Uighur dissident and former political prisoner, released through the efforts of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Chinese authorities have recently raided Kadeer's business and harassed her family and associates.
Fighting the war on terrorism depends on drawing distinctions. The Bush administration has repeatedly admonished China not to use the war on terrorism as a pretext for cracking down even harder on its estimated nine million Uighurs. The president might want to reiterate that position to Hu Jintao when he visits September 7. But the best way to send a message would be to settle Qassim, Al-Hakim, and the other Uighurs at Guantanamo here among the Uighur-American community, which has expressed a willingness to take care of them.