The good Glenn (yesterday):

"you can criticize someone's political activism and the effects of that activism without suggesting that the activism itself is illegitimate."

The bad Glenn (today):

"the *lynch mob* leaders, like The New Republic's Jonathan Chait..."

Unless you hold that lynch mobs are a legitimate form of political activism, there is a contradiction here.

I think you were right the first time, and I would encourage you to retract the "lynch mob" line.

Glenn:

...no House member other than a handful dare utter anything other than unquestioning support for Israeli actions...

Here are some slightly more nuanced remarks from one member of Congress.

[Congressional Record: January 9, 2009 (House)][Page H142]

COMMENTS ON THE SITUATION IN THE GAZA

(Ms. KAPTUR asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, today I wish to comment on the bloodbath occurring in the Gaza. No human being can watch this carnage and not be reminded of the festering hatred that grows with each successive unleashing of violence in Israel, the Gaza, in the Palestinian territories that sadly rescars that tragic region.

In voting for the resolution today, I want to be clear I did not do so because I believe more war or violence is the solution to stability. In fact, more war will breed more retribution, as history surely demonstrates. I voted for the resolution because its preamble clearly states our goal is supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

The proportionality of Israel's response to Hamas' incessant terrorist rocket launches is lamentable. Over 750 Palestinians have now died, one-third of them women and children; there have been four Israeli soldiers killed; and in the last 7 years three Israeli casualties from the rocket launches from the Gaza into Israel. Immediately, there is a lack of adequate humanitarian relief from the world community, and for the victims, that is appalling. Two wrongs do not make a right.

My view is, the current administration has left Israel more vulnerable and less stable as hatreds grow toward it regionally. Our Nation's reputation, too, has been badly damaged globally.

I would like to enter into the Record today an editorial written by President Jimmy Carter called ``The Unnecessary War,'' the only President in the last 3 decades to achieve real, lasting peace in the Middle East. There is a road forward. His life is proof the future of that region can be better than the past as development replaces war as the common denominator. But that will take courage. It will take perseverance. It will take more than congressional resolutions. It is why our hopes ride high at this moment with the incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama.

Glenn:

For supporters of the Israeli war in Gaza: is there some number of Palestinian civilian deaths that, once exceeded, renders this war unjustifiable? 1,000? 10,000? 25,000?

If the number of Palestinian civilian deaths exceeded the number of Israeli civilians whose lives are potentially threatened by Hamas missiles fired into Israeli territory, then it would clearly be unjustifiable.

This is an unseemly and unworthy piece by Glenn that substitutes innuendo for serious inquiry.

The personal animosity behind the piece reaches a climax in the gratuitous mention of Halperin’s son, even though he had nothing to do with the debate over amending FISA. The allegation of nepotism is also hard to comprehend. Being related to or affiliated with Morton Halperin is not a path to power. His own nomination to be an assistant secretary of defense was derailed in 1993 by conservative activists.

But as long as you are meanly counting his children against him, you might consider his "political children" as well. Halperin personally mentored, influenced and encouraged an entire generation of civil liberties activists, including the current directors of organizations such as the Center for National Security Studies, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and others who helped lead the campaign against the FISA Amendments Act.

The fact that Halperin broke ranks with his own colleagues, friends and students to stake out a position of qualified support for the FISA bill is astonishing, but it is unlikely to result in the kind of crude payoff that the article suggests. Is that all it would take for you to sell out? If not, why do you assume less of him?

from Secrecy News:

http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/11/revisiting_the_state_secrets_p.html

A new assessment of the "state secrets privilege" disputes the claim presented in several other recent critiques that government reliance on the privilege to curtail or terminate sensitive litigation has increased in recent years.

"I find that the Bush Administration does not differ qualitatively or quantitatively from its predecessors in its use of the privilege," concludes Robert M. Chesney in a forthcoming paper in the George Washington Law Review.

http://ssrn.com/abstract=946676