Spanning the Globe, 12/15/04

* Not to point any fingers or anything, but this is a cool article on the KGB�s historical fondness for using poison (complete with spring-loaded umbrellas!).
* The Washington Post covers Germany�s frustrating inability to prosecute anyone in connection with the 9/11 attacks. The more one reads about modern-day Germany, the more clear it is why it has been a favorite rest stop for terrorists: the legacy of the Nazis has left the country unwilling to take responsible security measures, both internally and externally.
* Like the Abu Ghraib case, this should be investigated and any wrongdoers should be severely punished.
* In criticizing Bernard Kerik, who clearly had some issues, a few of which might even be relevant, I�m pretty much in agreement with Rich Lowry�s argument that the first rationale for his withdrawal was the most important.
* Speaking of which, John Derbyshire doesn�t like the way some caricature the immigration debate.
* One of the contributors over at Slugger O�Toole provides a nice reminder as to which side in the dispute in Northern Ireland was recently praising the late, unlamented Yasser Arafat. (Hint: it�s not the one many Irish-Americans like to demonize). That said, from my limited knowledge, the anti-Catholic Rev. Paisley is someone I�m pretty loathe to defend.
* Finally, Ed Morrissey looks at the recent statement by Mahmoud Abbas calling the intifadas a �mistake as well as having some good suggestions as to how to support the troops this Christmas.
UPDATE: There is some dispute over the facts of the Kerik �nanny� situation. I have nothing to add about that, one way or another. My point was a more general one: for a potential head of DHS, or for anyone that matter, allegations of violating of U.S. immigration law should be viewed as a deadly serious matter in a post-9/11 world.

3 thoughts on “Spanning the Globe, 12/15/04”

  1. Re Kerik – there’s apparently no independent evidence that the nanny in question actually exists – see for coverage.
    Re Germany – I think it’s frustrating that the US has been unable to successfully prosecute anyone in connection with 9/11.
    Re poisining – my favorite was the venomous wet suit for Castro idea.

  2. Aside from Zacarias Moussaoui, a foreign national who should probably be facing a military tribunal rather than a standard criminal trial, how many cases are ongoing in the U.S. that are related to the 9/11 attacks? There seems to be an obvious reason why the 9/11 hijackers themselves haven�t been convicted.
    As for Kerik, I�ve updated the post above.

  3. There have been a number of cases brought against a dozen or so defendants, all of which (as far as I know) the Justice Dept. has lost due to incompetence. I believe there are other cases involving the Europeans where our death penalty statutes impede cooperation leading to justice. Anyway.
    Ditto re Abbas – lots of good news lately on the P-I conflict. Fingers crossed.

Comments are closed.