The Los Angeles Times this morning disgraces itself beyond the levels reached in its recall election coverage. After failing to overshadow Gray Davis's maladministration with rumors of sexual harassment, the LAT turns its attention to a Baathist Palestinian, whom it finds a surprisingly sympathetic character.

The entire piece accepts a twisted perspective, in which 'occupation' is a commonality between the fate of Palestinians and Iraqis, and in which violence is the only reasonable approach for Palestinians in their dealings with Israel and Israel's allies. Victimization, the most—favored—status of the LAT, trumps all other considerations.

Ahmed Rahal, a Palestinian general formerly in the service of Saddam Hussein, is the subject of Alissa J. Rubin's profile. He is presented as a sad figure, 'bitter and without remorse,' a man 'who cast his lot with a ruthless dictator,'  but a man worthy of sympathetic understanding. True, he made mistakes, but they were well—intentioned. After all, '[Saddam] Hussein...was the only leader who fostered the hope that a pan—Arab movement would create a Palestinian state and welcomed Palestinians to Iraq while they awaited his grand plan's fulfillment.'

But now, he has become a victim. In Rubin's sympathetic view, like other Palestinians, Ahmed just cannot catch a break. 'For decades, many Palestinians who held fast to their hopes for an independent state relied on Iraq's staunch support. But Hussein's pan—Arab campaign proved a dead end for their aspirations' So now, 'The bitter irony for Rahal is that he staked everything on reversing the effects of one occupation, only to find himself trapped in another.' Poor Ahmed! Poor Palestinians!

Rubin gives not one indication that Ahmed and his Palestinian terror cohorts, have alternatives to the fascist, racist, genocidal, terrorist tactics they have embraced. For her, these are the natural choices of the victimized. Catch her portrayal of Ahmed's older brother's affiliation with the Baathists, which led Ahmed down his path: 'The Baath Party philosophy dominant in the 1950s and 1960s emphasized a secular Arab nationalism and opposition to colonial rule.'

Wow! Secular nationalism and opposition to colonial rule sounds pretty reasonable, doesn't it? No hint that Baathism developed out of Nazism, as Yasser Arafat's late uncle, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem sat out the war years in Berlin, and brought back home a political model for the Baath party. No exploration of the aim of driving the Jews into the ocean. Nope, only just a bunch of harmless secular nationalists.

Ahmed's own terror activities are of no interest at all to Rubin. She reports that he joined the PLO, and went to Lebanon with them. She reports in deadpan fashion that when the PLO were expelled from Lebanon (for unnamed reasons!), Ahmed went immediately to Baghdad. Readers with no memory of what the PLO did to Lebanon are left clueless as to the brutalities of the PLO.

Rubin presents raw data which could readily be presented in a much more meaningful context. Ahmed's brother Khadar gave up his Baathist revenge fantasies, and emigrated to the United States, where he became a medical doctor, with a prosperous practice as an oncologist in Oklahoma City. By abandoning the poisonous doctrines of Palestinian irredentism and fascist Baathism, Rahal ceased to be a victim. In fact, he prospered in peace.

But Rubin apparently could not be bothered to make a phone call to Oklahoma, so we hear nothing from Dr. Hussein of OKC. We don't know how or why he abandoned his former political miasma, or what he thinks of his brother's deicison to embrace that which he rejected.

That would have been a really interesting story. But the Los Angeles Times is apparently uninterested in helping to illuminate a path out of the tar baby politics of Palestinian anti—Zionism.

Posted by Thomas 12 22 03