Posted on 12/29/2002 12:17:06 AM PST by DocFarmer
Sen. Patty Murray had the guts to raise an important question about the popularity of Osama bin Laden in some parts of the world.
At a time when America still hasn't started a review of the Sept. 11 attack, Washington state's senior senator showed more willingness to tackle needed inquiries than the federal government as a whole. If we want to assure a triumph over bin Laden and those who have twisted a religion to their own hateful purposes, we better be able to act like Americans of previous generations and work diligently to know our enemies.
Murray's remarks last week to an honors class at a Vancouver high school deserve good marks for tackling that tough assignment, and the ensuing debate across the state and even the nation fits American tradition.
Generally, Murray was right about bin Laden's activities in poverty-stricken Muslim regions. He has built roads in Afghanistan and schools in Pakistan, for instance. One news report refers to a Pentagon fact sheet that mentioned bin Laden importing heavy equipment used in hospital construction, which seems to back up Murray's reference to health care facilities. While her statement about bin Laden providing day care facilities makes little sense, there is apparently a long-standing rumor that he built an orphanage.
Murray spoke in broad, even overstated, terms about the lack of U.S. foreign aid in the region. But she nailed the underlying reality: We could do a lot better helping the poor in central Asia and Africa.
On balance, Murray did OK on the basic facts. But she deserves to be challenged on her apparent belief that bin Laden's popularity derives from treating poor people well.
Most of his support, we believe, stems not from any good works but from al Qaida's murderous attacks on Americans and others, including Muslims from many countries. Her discussion with the honors class would have been more enlightening if she had at least raised that possibility as she concluded her talk.
But her remarks and school visit certainly raised the level of thinking among the students. And the discussion that has developed on talk radio and in letters columns is, in most respects, worth having.
Even in a war, a democracy should be strong enough to allow healthy debates about the nature of its foes. During World War II, America launched massive efforts to understand Japan's political psychology -- and used the results in crafting propaganda and diplomatic strategies. Books about Japan and Germany were widely published.
This state, with its sharp east-west political differences, is particularly fertile ground for healthy argument about any aspect of the war on terrorism. As a poll conducted recently for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer showed, the Seattle area is considerably more skeptical about military action against Iraq than the rest of the state.
Is the debate producing some political discomfort for Murray? Yes, and that's fine, although some of the criticism has been hot air. Washington state GOP Chairman Chris Vance and conservative talk show commentator Rush Limbaugh called on her to apologize. For speaking frankly about how America is perceived by enemies? That's not a matter for apology. Not in America.
Beyond the spin and the blatant attempts to manufacture a political issue, there's still value in the debate. It's important -- vitally so -- to talk about the nature of our enemies and how we most effectively respond to their murderous assaults.
That's exactly the discussion she deliberately stirred in a Vancouver class. And now the debate has spread much more widely. Good for Murray.
(Excerpt) Read more at seattlepi.nwsource.com ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.