Regarding Thursday’s Outlook column “Lobbyists torpedo national intelligence post nominee”: I was amused to read that David Broder is disappointed that “lobbyists” and Republicans sunk the nomination of Charles Freeman to head up the National Intelligence Council. Describing Freeman as “thoughtful” and “smart as hell,” Broder went on to reveal that Freeman “once referred to a clash between Tibetan demonstrators and Chinese guards as a race riot.” Setting aside for the moment the sheer lunacy of such a belief, the question is whether somebody who relishes controversial viewpoints is necessarily the person who ought to be in charge of interpreting foreign intelligence.
Broder stated that Freeman’s first order of business would have been to assign “intelligence analysts this week to figure out why the Chinese provoked a naval incident” with a U.S. warship. It is the classic example of the liberal tendency to blame America first: America brought the Chinese provocation on itself by having a military vessel in international waters, the rest of the world was dismayed at our provocation and America must mend its ways by ceasing such activities.
It’s also revelatory of Broder’s mind-set that declaring some moral equivalency between Tibetans and the Communist dictatorship bent on their destruction might not automatically qualify one for a job meant for more sober-minded people.
— Pete Smith, Cypress
No comments:
Post a Comment
Friends - Let 'er rip!