Comments on: pipes - just the man for the job

pipes - just the man for the job

specialk420 — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 18:17:05 -0800

, in a recess move (dodging senate confirmation).
among his post sept 11 quotes are: ``What we need to do is inspire fear, not affection.''
Pipe's ideas for peace in the middle east are worth a look. Does this appointment say anything about the kind of peace bush is pursuing in the middle east?

By: ednopantz

ednopantz — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 18:25:15 -0800

From the post: bush appoints pipes to head US Institute for Peace From the article: Bush appointed Daniel Pipes, director of the Philadelphia-based Middle East Forum, to the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace. Step 1: Finish reading. Step 2: Begin righteous indignation.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 18:30:00 -0800

There's something about the expression "peace in the Middle East" that doesn't sound like something one will ever hear.

By: Postroad

Postroad — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 18:34:10 -0800

Though the post suggests Pipes does not fit in with the Bush notion/plan for the ME, the events of the past few weeks suggest that it is Bush who may have to rethink things. I note just a few minutes ago that the Bush administration is freezing Hamas assets and asking other countries to do this too. My point: if the US has for some time listed Hamas as terror group, why has it not frozen their assets earlier? Now I know this issue (ME) a tinderbox, so instead of making fun of those who post and do not believe as you do, why not instead offer your plan from bringing about peace in the region? and try to be constructive rather than amusing and clever...there are, afte all, people of all kinds dying in the region.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 19:02:39 -0800

try to be constructive rather than amusing and clever... there are, [after] all, people of all kinds dying in the region. Deep within every cynic is an erstwhile optimist crushed by the weight of reality, you know. Fact is, ME is an instance in politics where everything has been tried and nothing has worked. Peace, war, occupying, giving back... we're witnessing a clash between two forces -- one which does not want peace, and one in such a precarious position, not to mentioned so attuned to self-protection, that it is starting to see peace as an obstacle to its survival against the former. And lots and lots of people caught in the middle who subscribe to neither point of view. It gets harder and harder to imagine good coming out of that combination of factors.

By: ilsa

ilsa — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 19:10:28 -0800

First, let me pick my jaw up off the floor. Now then, let me make sure I understand this correctly. It sounds suspiciously like Mr. Pipes has taken his plan for Middle East Peace straight out of the Old Testament, say about Exodus through Joshua. To whit: kill everyone that is not one of you and there will be peace. Sadly, that is also what some of the Palestinians are thinking. Step one to peace in the region is admitting that there has never been peace there in all of recorded history. Beyond that, you've got me. I once heard someone wiser than myself say on NPR that the Israelis want a a Jewish state, they want it right there, and they want peace, but realistically they can only have 2 out of 3.

By: homunculus

homunculus — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 19:17:38 -0800

Christopher Hitchens: Bush's nominee doesn't belong at the U.S. Institute for Peace.

By: riviera

riviera — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 20:12:55 -0800

I think this is what the term 'bigot eruption' was invented for: Pipes has every entry in the Bible that contains the word 'smite' marked in yellow highlighter. And you have to give Hitch his dues for this one. My point: if the US has for some time listed Hamas as terror group, why has it not frozen their assets earlier? Mainly because Hamas has long had wings that aren't ostensibly military, running hospitals, schools and orphanages in the occupied territories, as well as providing ad hoc policing against 'anti-social behaviour'; rather like the IRA, in fact, which got away with gathering money from the US in the 80s on similar grounds. The problem is that when Hamas is your source of charity and support and religious instruction, as it has been for thousands of Palestinian kids, it's too easy for them to feel that joining the military wing and killing Israelis is necessary payback: it might be perverse to say this, but think of the young people in the US who get military scholarships to put them through college and are now patrolling Iraq, most of whom had little thought of pointing a gun when the tuition cheques were rolling in. The circumstances (and morals) are very different, but the equation is similar. Now, were the Palestinians in a position to look after their own without relying on Janus-faced organisations such as Hamas -- which, like the IRA, run their deprived turfs like mobsters -- they'd be less likely to be both indoctrinated by and indebted to the people who've educated and treated them. There's also the problem that Hamas's ideological purity is considered a better source of trust than Arafat. But it's a sad truth that if you introduce charity in places of poverty, but with bundles of strings attached, people are more than likely to tie themselves up in them. It's well documented, for example, that many of the boy soldiers of West Africa are eager recruits because of the social structures and ego-boosting effects of going to war; and you could say the same of the gangs of LA.

By: samuelad

samuelad — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 20:24:28 -0800

Daniel Pipes in his own words.

By: shoos

shoos — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 20:45:44 -0800

Pipes will make up about 10% of the board. He will undoubtedly have powers of a magnitude as yet unseen on this earth.

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 21:22:07 -0800

Pipes will not allow unedited comments on his own blog.

By: billsaysthis

billsaysthis — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 21:27:17 -0800

Hey, at least Pipes has a blog that on quick examination he actually appears to write himself. Not that I care much for what he's written but...

By: specialk420

specialk420 — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 22:53:09 -0800

at least in pipes' case hes got some company: norton
poindexter
rumsfeld
perle
to name a few of the worst possible appointees for a given post....

By: bokononito

bokononito — Fri, 22 Aug 2003 23:23:52 -0800

ouch. invoking Hitchins to discredit someone. it's like invoking Ann Coulter only not as good looking. i went and listened to Pipes once, he gave a talk on campus.. He is quite naive, has good historical knowledge but no interesting solutions.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Sat, 23 Aug 2003 01:32:19 -0800

god, makes me sick.

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Sat, 23 Aug 2003 05:54:33 -0800

It's worth calling Pipes on this prediction of his, made in April of 2003: "The war in Iraq will lead to a reduction in terrorism. … I expect that Muslim anger will likewise diminish after an allied victory in Iraq. … A U.S. victory in Iraq, this means, will protect more than it harms. Today's furies can be ignored. I then drew out the policy implications: Now is a time not for fretting over future bin Ladens, but for finishing the job against Saddam Hussein." Right-o, Daniel. If current trends continue, Pipes is 180 degrees off the mark.

By: ed

ed — Sat, 23 Aug 2003 08:21:37 -0800

This is frightening. Because this guy is bad news. For people who failed to remember Pipes' Campus Watch activities, let it be known that Pipes went out of his way to harass professors who were critical of Israeli policy. The professors' names and contact info were listed publicly and they were harassed with thousands of emails. What a way to encourage an open dialogue! And Pipes isn't just a spammer. He's a conspiracy theorist as well. He actually believes that the Council on American-Islamic Relations "without a doubt" wants to create an Islamic state in America.

By: kablam

kablam — Sat, 23 Aug 2003 08:24:40 -0800

In the AP version of the story: "...was one of nine recess appointments he made Friday..." Does anybody know who the other eight were? I mean, if they weren't going to be approved by the Senate, for some reason, what are their stories? Were they 'slipped under the radar'?

By: specialk420

specialk420 — Sat, 23 Aug 2003 08:35:13 -0800

"They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution."

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Sat, 23 Aug 2003 08:36:54 -0800

kablam: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/08/20030822-7.html

By: 2sheets

2sheets — Sat, 23 Aug 2003 10:38:34 -0800

Pipes would seem to be a perfect appointment to represent this administration. Let's hope he continues to spout his hateful spew. Give 'em enough rope.

By: dhoyt

dhoyt — Sat, 23 Aug 2003 14:57:25 -0800

god, makes me sick.-- delmoi God makes me sick, too :(