Al-Qaeda's choice
- 18 Feb 08, 04:21 PM GMT
Bedd Gelert and Vagueofgodalming may well be right about Rees Mogg.
My own concern about his piece is this. He writes: "There are, of course, hypothetical events that could change everything. There could be an attack on Mr Obama himself, but he is protected by the Secret Service.
"There could be an action by al-Qaeda, which would refocus American anxiety on the threat of terror. But al-Qaeda is itself highly political. It would probably not be in its interest to secure the election of Senator John McCain. Al-Qaeda may be unpredictable, but it would be a mistake for it to interfere in American politics, even if it had the capacity to do so."
But that is manifestly untrue, is it not?
Islamic terrorists want war. They want suffering - among others and their own people alike.
They would surely surmise that McCain will give them what they want. Bin Laden himself intervened with what many thought was the effect of keeping President Bush in power in 2004 with that weird tape just before the poll.
I think al-Qaeda would back McCain - that is not an argument for or against America backing him, but it seems to me that the vague assumption that the terrorists would back a lefty is lazy thinking...
Apparatchiks rule
- 18 Feb 08, 09:11 AM GMT
One of the grand old men of British journalism has been bitten, I see, by the Obamabug.
And this view in the other major British paper is probably the view of most American Democrats (and democrats) as well: (*)
"Since the beginning of January, the Democratic party in the US has held elections that have provided great excitement and held the attention of much of the world. We are about to see if its commitment to democracy is equally impressive. Having started this election season with scenes of rural folk gathering in frontrooms and schoolhalls to stand up and be counted, the final decision is now likely to be made by party apparatchiks accountable only to themselves. Or worse still, the courts."
So what to do?
I see Barack Obama thought it worthwhile taking a long detour away from the current campaign battlegrounds to see John Edwards: might an Edwards endorsement help in Ohio perhaps?
Meanwhile as journalists trail around hoping to be shouted at (and thus made famous at least in their own newsrooms) by President Clinton, it seems ordinary members of the bolshy public are also getting in on the act...
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites








