Said's Wrath

Academia's leading apologist for terror, Edward Said, says that the Bush administration violated the Constitution by going to war, but Said never says which part of the Constitution he's talking about. Said, of course, is simply against the policy of liberating Iraq that was arrived at constitutionally -- that is, with the approval of Congress. He appears to be a sore loser, since he was obviously on the wrong side of that policy decision, at least with regard to military matters. The political result is still in the balance, of course, though there is every reason to be hopeful.

The fact is that Iraq may now be on its way to liberal democracy; and Said is furious at that prospect, for it is giving America more status in the region and putting pressure on the Palestinians (among others) who finally may be ready to jettison Arafat.

After his non-arguments regarding the Constitution, all Said can do is decry "the reactionary Washington institutions that spawned Wolfowitz, Perle, Abrams and Feith [providing] an unhealthy intellectual and moral atmosphere." Give the literature prof. credit for hyperbole; unfortunately, he knows nothing about constitutionalism. With any luck, the Iraqis will be able to teach him soon, if he's willing to learn.