Michael Scheuer Watch #5: The Danish Affair, Cont.
10.31.2007 - 11:33 AMA couple of days ago, I started this new department devoted to monitoring Michael Scheuer. I don’t think it will be a long-term proposition. The television shows that regularly bring on this former CIA official as an expert in counterterrorism, I believe, will soon be getting wise, if they haven’t gotten wise already, that they’ve been dealing with a loose potato. Scheuer will soon fade even further to the margins, appearing not in the mainstream media but in far-out places that he has already begun to write for, like antiwar.com, where one of his recent pieces appears under the headline: Why Does Norman Podhoretz Hate America?
Scheuer has previously responded to some of my comments about him, which have appeared under the titles:
Michael Scheuer Watch, Vol 1, #1
Michael Scheuer: Innocent Until Proven Guilty
And his responses have consistently dodged the issues being raised. In my last post about him, with this record in mind, I posed some questions about his role in disclosing classified information that has ignited an anti-American firestorm in Denmark. I predicted that he would answer these questions “with either a telling silence or with even more telling and more irrelevant evasions.”
Scheuer has now answered:
Again, I thank Mr. Schoenfeld and COMMENTARY for drawing attention to my work. And here is what I have to say, as requested by Mr. Schoenfeld.
Regarding the subject at hand—rendition and my public comments thereon—I encourage Mr. Schoenfeld and his anti-American colleagues—that is the neoconservatives/Israel-firsters—to push every button and every friend they have to get me investigated so that I can testify under oath about the rendition program. Before either or both of the congressional intelligence committees would be ideal, as long as the session is under oath and public. The American public needs the truth about the effectiveness of the program, the debt they owe to the men and women of CIA, and the efforts of Mr. Schoenfeld and others to damage the CIA because its officers do not share their love for foreign powers. Press on, Mr. Schoenfeld, press on. Rather then rattling me, you are merely doing my bidding.
This is clearly not a telling silence. But is it a telling evasion? I would love to hear the telling opinions of readers. My own view is that it is sometimes tellingly easy to connect the dots.
A complete guide to other items in this Michael Scheuer Watch series can be found here.
| »Back to Connecting the Dots | »Back to Commentary |
October 31st, 2007 at 12:31 PM
Oh yes, the AIPAC spy ring ought not to be investigated, but Michael Scheuer should be jailed — that’s the Lobby’s view. Foreign spies — no problem, as long as they’re spying for A Certain Country. But Scheuer must be punished. Aren’t you guys taking an enormous risk by being so brazen about your real loyalties?
October 31st, 2007 at 1:23 PM
At some point baiting Michael Scheuer is bound to get PETA on your tail. The twinge of actual sympathy I feel for him is, however, offset by my incredulity at the size of that giant asteroid weighing down his shoulder. It sounds as if Scheuer’s addictive craving for fame, and outrage at anyone who would deny him celebrity, led him to leak details (true or false, I obviously have no idea) of an alleged CIA rendition to a foreign publication, then to attempt to “out” the foreign government engaged in damage control, and finally to repeat his oft-rehearsed demand for star billing at a Congressional circus where, John Kerry-like, he could hang out the rest of our soiled laundry and testify to his own career excellence. Conceivably he even timed it all to coincide with the release of that Hollywood movie. (So talented and underappreciated and his own Swifty Lazar to boot.) So much for the self-effacing patriot, counter-spy and servant of the people. Actually, I’m reminded of the sardonic suggestion attributed to Ernest Hemingway, that he and his friends ought to chip in and send a notoriously socially insecure fellow writer (I think it was John O’Hara) to Yale to cure the latter of his obsessions. I mean, better Scheuer than that Taliban guy, right? (I admit it’s a little like lamenting that you-know-who didn’t make it as an architect.) Oh, and you’re correct Scheuer never responds directly to allegations that might get him into trouble. Incidentally, and for whatever it’s worth, I personally dislike the whole idea of “renditions”. A government and people ought to have the guts to do their own torturing or to eschew it and take the national-security consequences. Outsourcing our dirty work is scarcely a way to improve either our standing or our self-respect.. If that’s naivete, I plead guilty to it. But it’s definitely not something I would accuse Scheuer of.
October 31st, 2007 at 2:49 PM
If “The Lobby” was so all-fired powerful, it would instantly be able to activate filters to block all “incomings” from the likes of Mr. Raimondo.
“Israel-firsters”? “Love for foreign powers”? This is madness.
October 31st, 2007 at 11:42 PM
I see your Scheuer (or is it Sewer) Watch has inspired Justin Raimondo to crawl out from under his rock just long enough to lob a few Jew-baiting jabs in support of his fellow traveller. You don’t really expect Scheuer to defend himself in response to your challeges, do you? His pat answer will always be the same: What he has to say is so important that he can only state it before congressional grandees and, oh yeah, it would be better if it were televised in primetime, so that “the Joos” couldn’t use their influence to flush it down the memory hole. Sorry, Mikey, but you had your day in the sun. Now be a good boy, will you, and vanish into a well-deserved obscurity. And take Raimondo with you.
November 1st, 2007 at 10:40 AM
Yeah, yeah, yeah: Hemingway, John O’Hara, John Kerry, blah blah blah — oh, I can hardly wait for the AIPAC spy trial to begin: what a way to begin the New Year. And I’m so glad that Commentary has appointed itself an unofficial adjunct of the Justice Department: but if Scheuer is really “guilty” of a “crime,” then why haven’t they moved to indict him? Oh, I forgot, this is the same Justice Department that is a veritable den of anti-Semites because they’re prosecuting Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman. Yes, it’s all a conspiracy …