Frequent readers of this blog may know I have nothing but the greatest respect for Tom Lantos. The only Holocaust survivor in Congress, the representative from San Mateo has shown true courage in many instances, including when he recently took on Google and Yahoo for their overly-cozy relationship with the Chinese government.
So I was deeply disappointed when I read of the Congressman’s willingness, indeed desire, to talk with Ahmadinejad:
“Speaking just for myself, I would be ready to get on a plane tomorrow morning, because however objectionable, unfair and inaccurate many of (Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s) statements are, it is important that we have a dialogue with him,” Lantos said. “Speaking for myself, I’m ready to go — and knowing the speaker, I think that she might be.”
Objectionable, unfair and inaccurate???? It’s hard to believe a Holocaust victim of Lantos’ stature is applying those banal euphemisms to a man who is not only a Holocaust denier but most probably the most powerful Holocaust denier since the event itself? How about “Homicidal lunatic liar”? Ahmadinejad, as I assume Lantos must know, is the man who ordered the state-sponsored Holocaust denial cartoon contest in Tehran last year, the one with the seemingly-endless collection of vicious anti-Semitic cartoons out of the pages of Der Sturmer.
What does the Congressman hope to accomplish by “having a dialogue” with such a person? What does Lantos expect Mad Ahmadinejad to say? “I see your point, Tom. Maybe all those Jews were incinerated in those ovens, after all.” Not bloody likely. In fact, it is Ahmadinejad who has everything to gain by such a meeting and Lantos nothing.
Back in the interview I did with the Congressman (link above at “overly-cozy”), Lantos said an interesting thing vis-a-vis Google, Yahoo and the Chinese: “I would hope than they would change China, but China changed them.” He should think about that when he next considers venturing forth to “dialogue” with the mullah’s lap dog.
I believe if he is able to speak to Ahmadinejad there will be peace in our time.
Richard, I like your sarcasm.
What was the name of the English politician, who said that if he only had a chance to talk to Hitler, WWII would never have happened? Fantasy Island!
Lantos, Kerry, and others (maybe even Pelosi) think they can persuade Ahmadinejad. They make the mistake of projecting their view of reason onto Ahmadinejad and the Islamists and also assuming that they have the same values. It is nothing but wishful thinking.
If they keep it up, they will end up being unwitting accomplices in getting a lot of people killed.
I have known Professor Lantos since 1965, when he was director of the California State Colleges International Programs and I was a young grad student heading for the Free University of Berlin. He was one of the most impressive people I had ever met–tall, distinguished, multilingual, highly educated in the central European manner. Many years later his striking persona remained memorable.
Unfortunately he has in the past few years done a number of things that have caused me to rethink my respect for him. This most recent statement is only the latest. He has become increasingly partisan in his outlook and statements. Now that he is chairman of the House International Relations Committee he is in a position to help unite the country around a rational policy toward the war on terror. It is very sad that he is becoming a serious part of the problem.
Rep Lantos is a leading Congressional enabler of the food aid policies that that are nothing more than big arga subsidies. It is said better than I here by Thomas Barnett
http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/weblog/2007/04/beyond_lies_in_american_food_a.html
I’ve written before about this Congress-protected iron triangle of food producers, food transporters and aid groups.
This story just makes you want to scream at the greed of it all.
For two years Bush and Co. try to change this insane law that says only food grown by Americans and shipped by American vessels with American crews and distributed by American charities can be used for foreign food aid.
So despite the people going hungry right now in Zambia and USAID being more than happy to buy food aid locally–as in, right in Zambia when the harvest was bountiful this year–USAID cannot do so because of this law.
Also because of this law, our food aid will likely be held up in terms of delivery for as long as six months. So people will die needlessly, according to Oxfam. Maybe 50,000 in the next half year alone.
The Bush administration says American taxpayers could feed an additional million more Africans if Congress just changes this idiotic law.
But Bush’s efforts to change the law the last two years were thwarted quietly by Congress and the iron triangle’s lobbyists.
Tom Lantos is a key villian, calling any attempt to change the law “beyond insane,” because it will kill domestic support for food aid by harming our farmers.
Move beyond your lies, Mr. Lantos.
James Kunder, acting USAID deputy is quoted in the piece as saying less than one-half of one percent of US ag exports would be affected by the law being changed.
Sound like it might be worth it to feed one milliion and prevent 50k deaths in Africa in the next six months?
And don’t even get me started on how this insane law retards agricultural markets in Africa and ensures steady death tolls over the years.
Guess who gets to die first, Mr. Lantos? The orphans of AIDS victims.
Please, somebody get Willie Nelson to wail on that one.
This is Lantos and others caving in to lobbying from Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, Bunge and Cal Western, which sell “more than half the $2.2 billion in food for Food for Peace, the largest food aid program, and two smaller programs,” according to USDA.
Bush should go on national TV to shame Lantos and his fat-cat ag biz allies and the greedy American shipping companies and the scummy nonprofit aid groups who are all in cahoots on this moneymaker.
This is all so amazingly dishonest and immoral, it just makes me sick.
And the bit about support for food aid withering from lack of support if this iron triangle isn’t served is really indefensible.
Lantos should be ashamed of himself. He needs to go on this basis alone. He’s been in for so long he can peddle crap like this and still get touted by DC types as some great man on foreign policy.
Because if Lantos was half the leader he imagines himself to be, he’d both change the law and boost Congressional support for such rapid-fire response aid.
But Lantos doesn’t because he’s more interested in credit than actually saving lives.
And I find that shameful indeed.
Partisan politics makes people stupid sometimes.
Now, someone correct me if I am wrong…but our relationship as a nation and all has been rocky sense the fanatics took our embassy back in 1979. Why is it that Lantos wants to go visit now? Did he have this great burning desire to sit down with that Iranian loon a decade ago?
One would think that after Pelosi got such God awful press after her sojourn to Syria it might not be a good idea to go pander to Ahmedenijad. In fact there are some people who might even call it treason. Maybe Pelosi is so full of herself and her new position that she does not see the impropriety, but one really would expect more from Lantos.
What’s gone wrong with Tom Lantos? I thought he was the voice of some intelligence in the House, but apparently I was mistaken. And for one who has extolled the virtues of democracy and democratic process, he has bought into an almost Orwellian junket to truly frightening anti-democratic Middle-Eastern states in a contradiction of the U.S. Constitution. Puzzling, Tom. Truly puzzling.
“What was the name of the English politician, who said that if he only had a chance to talk to Hitler, WWII would never have happened? Fantasy Island!”
U.S. Senator William Borah responded to the German invasion of Poland and the consequent British/French declaration of war as follows:
“Lord, if I could only have talked with Hitler, all this might have been avoided.”
Wouldn’t be surpised if some British politician said the same thing.
http://photoncourier.blogspot.com/2006_08_01_photoncourier_archive.html#115539058376899016
They’re just all whores, aren’t they?
I, too, have admired Lantos.
However, the only description for his current (messianic?)attitude and behavior, for whatever reason, is:
He’s jumped the shark.
Photoncourier,
Thank you. I thought it was an English politician. My guess that someone here would correct my failing memory was correct. It’s nice to be around so many informed and articulate folks.
Nevertheless, I tried to make my point as best I could. These folks never learn.
Thanks again.
Patrick,
But Bush’s efforts to change the law the last two years were thwarted quietly by Congress
So it wasn’t just Democrats but Republicans too?
Lantos has always seemed somewhat sane to me. I have noticed however, that pretty much every individual, no matter how thoughtful, logical and useful, will occasionally hold positions that make no sense when compared to the rest of their life. But,then maybe he’s a raving madman. I don’t know.