Those who believe that justice wasn't quite served in the 2008 Black Panther voter intimidation case were right according to panelists sitting on the U.S. Commission for Civil Rights. A synopsis of their conclusions was released earlier this week, and the key finding was that the case was "meritorious on the law and the facts." Commission member Todd Gaziano notes, "Three eyewitnesses ... provided powerful and convincing testimony that the former defendants had engaged in intimidating conduct, and that voters had turned away from the polling place rather than walk within a billy-club swing of the entrance." Sounds pretty open-and-shut to us.
Other remarks by commissioners about the performance of the Department of Justice were nearly as damning, including the administration's reticence to enforce the purging of voter rolls as states are mandated by existing law. On the other hand, Democrat appointees to the civil rights body excused the department's actions, blind to the impact it could have on future elections. With the prospect of Republican oversight, at least in the House of Representatives, flouting the law by selective prosecution may become vastly more difficult.
Unfortunately, justice delayed is truly justice denied in this case. A voter intimidated on Election Day doesn't get a second chance to cast a ballot. Of course, holding on to power by any means possible will certainly be the objective of Obama and his allies next year.
National SecurityWarfront With Jihadistan: Egyptian Uprising
It has been an extraordinary few weeks in the Middle East, to put it mildly. First, following riots by protesters demanding "freedom," Tunisia's President Zine al-Abedine Ben Ali was forced to flee the country after 23 years in power. Two weeks later came the biggest bombshell, as hundreds of thousands of Egyptians took to the streets, demanding the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak, who has ruled Egypt under "emergency" law since 1981.
The hated Egyptian security forces showed up to quash the protesters but were themselves brushed aside by crowds that wouldn't back down. Next came the Egyptian Army, which had it in its power to gun down as many protesters as needed to restore order, but chose instead to do nothing. After arriving at key locations around Cairo, the Army made no attempt to suppress the protesters, even mingling with them for pictures and joyous conversation in some places. Finally, thousands of Yemenis openly protested their repressive government, demanding the ouster of 30-year President Ali Abdullah Saleh and his notoriously corrupt regime.
Why, after so many years suffering under the iron fist of their rulers, have these Arab populations finally had enough? Why were Iranians willing to take on the regime's security forces in 2009, following yet another rigged election, when so many previous rigged elections had gone by with hardly a notice?
There are doubtless different reasons for each nation that has recently experienced a popular uprising, but one common factor has had some influence on each of them: that of watching Iraqis slowly but resolutely building a truly democratic nation for themselves. Arabs in the region no doubt began to ask why they should live under tyranny when their neighbors in Iraq are free. Iranian Shia began to ask why they should live under a medieval clerical regime when their Iraqi Shia neighbors are free. Persians and Arabs, Sunni and Shia, all are human beings who share the same desire for liberty, and Iraq is proving that such a life is possible even where repressive tyranny has been the norm for generations. Contrary to the thinking of those on the Left, might there have been something to the Middle East "domino principle" that George W. Bush and his administration put forth in the run-up to the Iraq War?
This is not to say that the outcome in Egypt or Tunisia is sure to be a good democratic government. Palestinians were allowed free elections and chose Hamas, a Muslim mafia more devoted to destroying Israel than to building a Palestinian state. In Egypt, along with the usual entrenched interests and cronies in any dictatorship, there is the extremist Muslim Brotherhood of which Hamas is an offshoot. While Egypt's security services have succeeded in largely driving the Brotherhood underground, it is still a powerful force there, and, like Hamas, it's more interested in killing Israelis than in raising Egyptians. If allowed to hijack Egypt's transition from Mubarak to a new government, another Arab-Israeli war could follow. Celebrate the imminent ouster of a dictator in Egypt -- but be very attentive to what comes next.
Other remarks by commissioners about the performance of the Department of Justice were nearly as damning, including the administration's reticence to enforce the purging of voter rolls as states are mandated by existing law. On the other hand, Democrat appointees to the civil rights body excused the department's actions, blind to the impact it could have on future elections. With the prospect of Republican oversight, at least in the House of Representatives, flouting the law by selective prosecution may become vastly more difficult.
Unfortunately, justice delayed is truly justice denied in this case. A voter intimidated on Election Day doesn't get a second chance to cast a ballot. Of course, holding on to power by any means possible will certainly be the objective of Obama and his allies next year.
National SecurityWarfront With Jihadistan: Egyptian Uprising
It has been an extraordinary few weeks in the Middle East, to put it mildly. First, following riots by protesters demanding "freedom," Tunisia's President Zine al-Abedine Ben Ali was forced to flee the country after 23 years in power. Two weeks later came the biggest bombshell, as hundreds of thousands of Egyptians took to the streets, demanding the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak, who has ruled Egypt under "emergency" law since 1981.
The hated Egyptian security forces showed up to quash the protesters but were themselves brushed aside by crowds that wouldn't back down. Next came the Egyptian Army, which had it in its power to gun down as many protesters as needed to restore order, but chose instead to do nothing. After arriving at key locations around Cairo, the Army made no attempt to suppress the protesters, even mingling with them for pictures and joyous conversation in some places. Finally, thousands of Yemenis openly protested their repressive government, demanding the ouster of 30-year President Ali Abdullah Saleh and his notoriously corrupt regime.
Why, after so many years suffering under the iron fist of their rulers, have these Arab populations finally had enough? Why were Iranians willing to take on the regime's security forces in 2009, following yet another rigged election, when so many previous rigged elections had gone by with hardly a notice?
There are doubtless different reasons for each nation that has recently experienced a popular uprising, but one common factor has had some influence on each of them: that of watching Iraqis slowly but resolutely building a truly democratic nation for themselves. Arabs in the region no doubt began to ask why they should live under tyranny when their neighbors in Iraq are free. Iranian Shia began to ask why they should live under a medieval clerical regime when their Iraqi Shia neighbors are free. Persians and Arabs, Sunni and Shia, all are human beings who share the same desire for liberty, and Iraq is proving that such a life is possible even where repressive tyranny has been the norm for generations. Contrary to the thinking of those on the Left, might there have been something to the Middle East "domino principle" that George W. Bush and his administration put forth in the run-up to the Iraq War?
This is not to say that the outcome in Egypt or Tunisia is sure to be a good democratic government. Palestinians were allowed free elections and chose Hamas, a Muslim mafia more devoted to destroying Israel than to building a Palestinian state. In Egypt, along with the usual entrenched interests and cronies in any dictatorship, there is the extremist Muslim Brotherhood of which Hamas is an offshoot. While Egypt's security services have succeeded in largely driving the Brotherhood underground, it is still a powerful force there, and, like Hamas, it's more interested in killing Israelis than in raising Egyptians. If allowed to hijack Egypt's transition from Mubarak to a new government, another Arab-Israeli war could follow. Celebrate the imminent ouster of a dictator in Egypt -- but be very attentive to what comes next.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment