Or, Why do we have more Iran-Contra flunkies running things that we don't know about?
I just finished reading an article in Newsweek Online Elliot Abrams: The Last Neocon Standing that annoyed and astounded me. Here we are, two decades after the Iran-Contra debacle and these accused and subsequently pardoned ass-clowns are still here:
But Abrams has one powerful advantage. "Bush has enormous regard for him," says a senior administration official who would not speak about their relationship on the record. "One, because he knows Elliott is keeper of the flame. And also, he's the only one who doesn't draw any attention to himself." (Abrams has been somewhat press-shy ever since he admitted to withholding information from Congress about the Iran-contra affair two decades ago; he was later pardoned.)
Abrams is the number two official in the National Security Council and is relatively low-profile. This annoys and scares me. He needs to be drummed out of the State Dept. and federal service, regardless of the fact that he was pardoned. He effectively lied to Congress by withholding information and yet here he is. Dammit, it makes me angry that we keep getting the neocon and Reagan Retreads running things when all they should be doing is running out of town!
Geeze.
The neocons are reeling, but they're not dead yet. A few stalwarts are digging in their wing-tips. And there's already a small backlash against the backlash. At the State Department, supposedly the bastion of realism, some officials are sounding defiant. "There are a lot of people throughout the ranks who believe in the democracy agenda," says one senior official who would only discuss policy issues anonymously. "If the result of the Baker report is that we have to make any deal necessary ... to get out of Iraq, I don't think that's going to fly." Their hopes, and the hopes of neocons everywhere, may rest on the shoulders of Elliott Abrams, the number-two official at the National Security Council—who remains in charge of promoting democracy in the Middle East, a linchpin of the neocon agenda.
The State Dept. should be on the side of promoting democracy in the world. No one can deny that that is not a good stance. However, does the State Dept. really want to promote it at the end of the barrel of a gun?
Is Abrams really that last neocon standing? If he is removed from his position, will there be another neocon "whack-a-mole" ready to pop up somewhere else?
I am all for the figurative "stake through the heart" here to see if this would finally put these neocon/PNAC clowns out of our misery.