Ted Rall is at it again with KARL ROVE: WORSE THAN OSAMA BIN LADEN.
His name alone makes my jaw drop to the floor in sheer astonishment and disbelief.
In war collaborators are more dangerous than enemy forces, for they betray with intimate knowledge in painful detail and demoralize by their cynical example. This explains why, at the end of occupations, the newly liberated exact vengeance upon their treasonous countrymen even they allow foreign troops to conduct an orderly withdrawal.
Apparently, in Ted's world, the bullets and bombs don't matter, it's the war planners that do all of the real damage. At least that's what I think
he is saying. I will admit I had a hard time figuring out the point he is trying to make. I suppose he also has forgotten about all of the ink stains on those newly liberated fingers, but I guess I'm just nitpicking. It has been my impression that our military is taking care of the "treasonous countrymen" even as we speak.
If, as state-controlled media insists, there is such a creature as a Global War on Terrorism, our enemies are underground Islamist organizations allied with or ideologically similar to those that attacked us on 9/11. But who are the collaborators? The right points to critics like Michael Moore, yours truly, and Ward Churchill, the Colorado professor who points out the gaping chasm between America's high-falooting rhetoric and its historical record. But these bête noires are guilty only of the all-American actions of criticism and dissent, not to mention speaking uncomfortable truths to liars and deniers.
Here are a few examples
of "All-American actions of criticism and dissent" as Ted Rall would define it:
The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not 'insurgents' or 'terrorists' or 'The Enemy.' They are the revolution, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow - and they will win.
The motivation for war is simple. The U.S. government started the war with Iraq in order to make it easy for U.S. corporations to do business in other countries. They intend to use cheap labor in those countries, which will make Americans rich.
If U.S. foreign policy results in massive death and destruction abroad, we cannot feign innocence when some of that destruction is returned.
They were targeting those people I referred to as 'little Eichmanns.' These were legitimate targets.
When you kill 500,000 children in order to impose your will on other countries, then you shouldn't be surprised when somebody responds in kind.
I believe this goes just a bit past "criticism and dissent", but then again my idea of All-American is still Mom, Apple Pie, and Baseball. I am also naive enough to think that just maybe 9/11 and Terrorism has a little something to do with the reason we are over there.
Rall basically uses this opening to get to the main point: Karl Rove is worse than Osama Bin Laden. Why? Did he kill over 3,000 Americans on 9/11? No, he released the name of CIA Agent Valerie Plame! In my world view, the two aren't comparable by any stretch of the imagination.
Last week Time magazine turned over its reporter's notes to a special prosecutor assigned to learn who told Republican columnist Bob Novak that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent...Time's cowardly decision to break its promise to a confidential source has had one beneficial side effect: according to Newsweek, it indicates that Karl Rove himself made the call to Novak.
Basically, Karl Rove committed the unpardonable sin according to Rall, but it's okay because Karl Rove is the guilty party. Nice logic there.
In my opinion, the reason Valerie Plame's days were numbered with the CIA had as much to do with her recommending the unqualified Joe Wilson go to Niger as anything Karl Rove has supposedly done. There is also plenty of speculation as to whether Ms. Plame was even undercover when she was "outed" which means, according to Clifford D. May, no law was broken by columnist Bob Novak in naming her, or by whoever told Novak that she worked for the CIA
Here's the money quote:
If Newsweek's report is accurate, Karl Rove is more morally repugnant and more anti-American than Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden, after all, has no affiliation with, and therefore no presumed loyalty to, the United States. Rove, on the other hand, is a U.S. citizen and, as deputy White House chief of staff, a high-ranking official of the U.S. government sworn to uphold and defend our nation, its laws and its interests. Yet he sold out America just to get even with Joe Wilson.
Osama bin Laden, conversely, is loyal to his cause. He has never exposed an Al Qaeda agent's identity to the media.
First of all, we all know the inherent danger in relying on Newsweek
for accuracy. Second, if Rall thinks that any decent American citizen will establish some sort of moral equivalence between Karl Rove and Osama bin Laden, he is sadly mistaken. He's comparing apples to terrorists. Logical people simply don't make such connections. Neither do they look to Osama bin Laden when defining loyalty!
The grand finale:
Rove and his collaborators should quickly resign and face prosecution for betraying their country, but given their sense of personal entitlement impeachment is probably the best we can hope for. Congress, and all Americans, should place patriotism ahead of party loyalty.
I believe Ted Rall is right about resignations, but 180 degrees out of phase. If there is anyone who is betraying their country, it is Ted Rall and the tripe he continues to put out there. How dare
he question anyone's patriotism. To do so would require him having some of his own.
If Mr. Rall wants evidence of betrayal, he need look no further than his own mirror. As far as resignations go, I'm sure there is a long line of true
patriots ready and willing to accept his.