The Cincinnati Enquirer from Cincinnati, Ohio on September 22, 1991 · Page 46
Get access to this page with a Free Trial
Click to view larger version

A Publisher Extra Newspaper

The Cincinnati Enquirer from Cincinnati, Ohio · Page 46

Cincinnati, Ohio
Issue Date:
Sunday, September 22, 1991
Page 46
Start Free Trial

Page 46 article text (OCR)

Sunday, September 22, 1 99 1 THE CINCINNATI ENQUIRER ColumnistsD-3 r Senator, there are a Changes on the way to meet the future Jm mmm m variety o? ice cream flavors. To pd a specific one would leave the impression that ive favorite RET 1 George W Blake W prejudged... Your ice cream iEllXfcWri ' w lAnJUu Confirrn; Jt Heanrc Bush right to pressure Israel "The future ain't what it used to be," Yogi Berra said (or at least was quoted as having said). If you had asked me a year ago for my expectations for The Cincinnati Enquirer as we moved into the 1990s, my answer would have been different than it would be today. I would have projected changes, but not as many as I now see ahead. For 11 months now, our news staff has taken part in an assessment and planning project that will help us find new ways of presenting the news to our readers. Through staff and reader surveys, community meetings and research analysis, we have derived a list of top community interest areas for our area. We hope to create a news plan that will address these areas every day. Our list: 1. The economy and money. 2. Family and home, habitat, nesting, entertaining. 3. Public safety. 4. Education and schools. 5. Health. 6. The way we live, work and play. 7. Sports. 8. The environment. 9. Social concerns: drugs, hunger, homelessness, poverty, diversity, etc. 10. Government and politics. 11. Generations: children, young adults, baby boomers, seniors. 12. Food. That's a fairly all-encompassing list and we are grateful to the more than 1,000 readers who wrote us andor filled out published questionnaires. We began our year of assessment with a look at how newspapers are doing overall. The answers weren't too kind. With our own staffers and readers, we were told we were boring, that we don't write enough stories that people talk about, that we were negative. Some people said they didn't have time to read us. As our assessment progressed, a similar project started at our parent company's headquarters. When Gannett editors were asked about newspapers, more tough replies were received. I especially liked a comment from Mike Connell, editor in Port Huron, Mich.: "What are we doing for the reader who goes to work Monday through Friday after getting the kids ready to go to school, goes bowling Tuesday night, goes shopping Thursday night, plays bingo on Friday, goes fishing Saturday, goes to church every other Sunday and watches lots of TV, but not much PBS? What we're doing is fumbling religion pages and outdoors coverage and most participant sports, and personal finance and consumer issues, and classroom and child-rearing issues and then we get elitist on television pages. And what are people talking about in the bingo halls, anyway?" Patrick J. i Buchanan : h f The other day, the president of the United States was called a liar, a demagogue and an anti-Semite by a member of the Israeli cabinet. Morris Amitay, a leader of the Israeli lobby in Washington, hinted the Mr. Bush may be summoning forth the demons of "anti-Semitism." The president's offense: He asked Congress, in the interest of peace, to delay, for four months, $10 billion in ban guarantees for Israel. When feelings run so deep as to call forth such vituperation of a president who rushed Patriot missiles to Tel Aviv, sent $4 billion in aid this year, and destroyed Israel's mortal enemy, it is time for an airing of grievances. Hardly 'humanitarian' First, it is propaganda to call that $10 billion "humanitarian aid," which summons up a vision of food, blankets and medicine. The money is for roads, houses, utilities, i.e., infrastructure halfway around the world when our own infrastructure is crumbling. Second, these guarantees make no economic sense for the United States, which is to start running a $400 billion deficit in October, or for Israel, one of the most heavily indebted nations per capita on Earth. Standard and, Poor's rating of Israel's unsecured debt is Triple B Minus, the market's way of saying the Israelis are over their head, and U.S. guarantors are moving into junk-bond territory. That $10 billion for 1 million Jewish immigrants factors out to $40,000 for every family of four arriving in Israel, more than we provide our own immigrants. How can Israel ever repay? Indeed, the probability is high that we Americans will have to make good that enormous sum, plus fees and compound interest over 30 years. Nevertheless, says Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, you Americans "are obliged, from a moral point of view, to give Israel this aid." That's a mouthful, but he scores his point. Newspapers have been missing important interest areas. Gannett developed a plan called News 2000, a look at what newspaper should become if they seek to grow in importance to readers. We want newspapers to be so compelling that people make time for us every day. The key to the News 2000 plan is a pyramid. At its base is a building block labeled "Centers on Community Interest." A newspaper must, first of all, do this. As the pyramid rises, blocks are added other goals for newspaper success, showing that we must uphold First Amendment responsibilities, require diversity, utilize compelling presentation, provide information people need, evoke emotions, maintain consistency, emphasize immediacy, foster interaction with readers and anticipate change. As we start our push toward a better newspaper, we are beginning a series of internal changes. Our Metro section is in process of a reorganization by topic areas. Three major teams of editors and reporters will focus on the following: Law and order: police, courts, politics, government. Social services, health, education and religion. Growth, development (including commuting and transportation), the economy and the environment. The three teams will be headed by three news department heads: Ron Lei-bau, formerly deputy Metro editor, Ronnie Agnew, formerly EXTRA editor, and Bill Cieslewicz, formerly deputy features editor. Leisa Richardson, formerly national editor, becomes editor of EXTRA, Karen Schrock, formerly assistant Metro editor, becomes suburban editor. Kerry Klumpe, Metro editor, becomes News 2000 director. Jim Smith, assistant managing editornews, becomes assistant managing editornews and sports. Neena Pellegrini, executive news editor, becomes assistant managing editornights. There's a lot of work to be done as we move to the next generation of news coverage. But it's clear that the future is changing. George Blake is editor of The Enquir er. Walter E. I Williams mm are working on it "Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture." To me that sounds awfully close to congressional calls for national service, a program requiring all young people to work for free doing something in the national interest. The Communist Manifesto also called for "free education for all children in public schools" and "abolition of child labor in its present form." We've achieved this in spades free corrupt education for our kids and, through minimum wage laws, labor regulations and union collective-bargaining agreements, reduction of work opportunities for children. Laws that used to protect kids from working in dangerous mines and factories now "protect" them from working in air-conditioned buildings with plush carpets. The U.S.S.R. has spent 70 years trying to make communism work. It can't be faulted for effort. After all, it slaughtered 30 million or more of its own people and kept the rest captive or enslaved. Communism is not a failure because a lack of effort. Successful communism, like constructing a building from the roof down, is inherently impossible. Change directions While we've adopted many Marxist principles, we are not yet a Communist nation. But with increasing government controls over our lives, we're headed, tiny steps at a time, toward communism. And remember that even if you take tiny steps toward a goal, sooner or later you're going to be there. For the sake of our children, let's change directions. Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University, Fairfax, Va., and a nationally syndicated columnist. U.S. steadily edging into Communist mold 600,000 terrified Arabs fled the Jewish sector, never to return. With the Six-Day War in 1967, another 200,000 fled into Jordan, only 14,000 to return. Some 1.7 million Palestinians now live on 22 of Palestine. Now, half of the West Bank and a third of its water has been confiscated by Housing Minister Ariel Sharon, and Israel has made it a crime to sell or lease land to a Palestinian. Is this what we had in mind? Why is it anti-Israel for President Bush to reach the same conclusion as nearly half the Israeli people: Any peace that leaves millions of Palestinians locked up in a Bantustan on the West Bank means eternal enmity and endless war. As for the "transfer" option militant allies of Sharon and Shamir speak of pushing the Arabs off the West Bank into Jordan that would constitute the same kind of crime as has been done to Jews down through the centuries. Three choices Having chosen not to make Arabs full citizens, Israel is left three choices: expulsion, which is unjust and immoral; absorption, which is impossible given the bloody 44-month uprising; and letting the Palestinians have their own tiny and demilitarized state. In going public, rather than engaging the Israeli lobby on its preferred turf, the back rooms and corridors of Congress, Mr. Bush did the right thing. Even if Bush's veto of the guarantees is overridden, he will have won high marks for courage, and exposed Congress for what it has become, a Parliament of Whores incapable of standing up for U.S. national interests, if the American Israel Public Affairs Committee is on the other end of the line. Patrick J. Buchanan is a Washington-based, nationally syndicated columnist. Bank and permit far-reaching Israeli compromise. That is the only road to peace. It will not be traveled, however, so long as the Arabs think they can get the West Bank back for free. The Arabs know that there are only two ways to get what they want from Israel. One is to deal with Israel directly and offer peace. The other is to let Uncle Sam do it. It is natural for the Arabs to prefer route No. 2. But it is route No. 1 that serves American interests. Why? Because it is the only one that leads to peace. Sinai returned How do we know? The historical evidence is unmistakable. Israel has twice given Sinai back to Egypt. One return led to war, the other to peace. The first time was 1957 when Eisenhower pressured Israel into withdrawing from Sinai in return for vague guarantees from the United States. Egypt offered nothing. Israel complied, and 10 years later, Egypt, having made no concession toward accepting Israel's existence, used Sinai to blockade Israel and started the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. In 1979, the United States did it differently. This time Egypt made a genuine offer of peace to Israel. Israel reciprocated by returning all of Sinai. The United States acted as broker, not as an agent for Arab demands. It is 12 years later, and Egypt and Israel are at peace. The rules of peacemaking in the Middle East are very clear. If the Arabs want to wring from Israel concessions on the territories, they must offer an end to their 45-year-old war on the Jewish state. So long as Bush does the wringing, why should they? Charles Krauthammer is a Washington-based, nationally syndicated Bush wrong to pressure Israel Whence comes this moral obligation? We acquired it, we are told, when we pressed Leonid Brezhnev to permit higher emigration of Soviet Jews. But Jackson-Vanik of a generation ago was passed at the behest of Israel herself. Is it not ludicrous to argue that those who pressed for release of Soviet Jews from the Evil Empire of 1973 thereby incurred a moral obligation to build condos for any who wish to depart Russia in 1991? Poor Jewish refugees are being held hostage to George Bush's pique over settlements! is how the case is being framed. But compare the working- and middle-class Jews flying in to Tel Aviv with the pathetic people of the West Bank and Gaza whose dreams are dying. In 44 months of the intifada, 10,000 Palestinian teen-agers and children have been shot and wounded, hundreds killed. Scores of homes have been dynamited and thousands imprisoned without trial. In last year's massacre on the Temple Mount, 19 unarmed Palestinians were slaughtered, 140 wounded. Had the men firing the guns been Arabs, and the victims Jews, would we all have stayed so silent? Does no one recall the clause in the Balfour Declaration where Britain promised a homeland for Jews in Palestine, "it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine." Does anyone recall that the 1947 U.N. Partition Plan allowed for a Palestinian and a Jewish state? After the Irgun massacre at Deir Yassin in April, 1948, Charles Krauthammer direct talks without preconditions, picked up the hint and warned that the loan guarantee would doom the chances for peace. Far from saving the peace process, Bush's linkage between American loan guarantees and Arab-Israeli negotiations could wreck it. Bush's real reason for withholding the loan guarantees is to use them as a club to force Israel to stop West Bank settlements. Settlements have become a presidential obsession. At a time when the Soviet Union is collapsing, Saddam is recovering, and the American economy is sputtering, the one thing that seems to stir the passions of this president is the number of Jews living on the godforsaken hills of the Judean desert. Bush's obsession is not just irrational. It leads him to policies that are deeply contrary to the American national interest. America's interest and Bush's goal for the area is Arab-Israeli peace. How does one get to it? We already know. The only way to get peace is the way Egypt and Israel did in 1979: Egypt made a genuine, indeed radical, offer of peace; Israel reciprocated with a radical offer on territory. True, a majority of Israelis are today not prepared to cede territory on the West Bank. But for years a majority of Israelis opposed giving back Sinai to Egypt. But when Anwar Sadat came forward and offered real peace, it caused a revolution in Israeli public opinion on the issue. Similarly, if the Arabs came forward with a genuine, Sadat-like offer of peace, it would cause a revolution in Israeli public opinion about the West fc" v Communism is crumbling. Let's look into the horse's mouth to see what communism is all about. In 1848, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels collaborated to write the Manifesto of the Communist Party. They condemned capitalism and gave 10 objectives for the proletariat struggle. Just for fun, let's see how close our country has come to achieving Marx's objectives. U.S. version The first was, "Abolition of property in land and the application of all rents of land to public purposes." In many cities, we have rent-control laws banning condominium conversion and building demolition. With the Environmental Protection Agency's wetlands policy, increasing amounts of private land are being controlled in the name of protecting the environment. Widespread land regulation is just a tiny step away from confiscation. Marx called for "a heavy progressive or graduated income tax." That's the same thing congressional Democrats call for, and if it weren't for the efforts of the Reagan administration, which saw a 70 marginal tax rate in 1980, we might be looking at a 90 rate now instead of 33. Marx wanted "centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly." He couldn't have done much better than our Federal Reserve Bank and its monopoly on money and credit. "Williams," you say, "we need the Federal Reserve to prevent bank failures and to maintain price stability!" Check it out. The Federal Reserve system was started in 1913. There were far fewer bank failures and greater price stability before 1913 than afterward. What about Marx's call for "centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the state." We have two large bureaucracies to implement this Marxist dream: the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Interstate Commerce Commission. Only lately have controls over transportation been relaxed, but the FCC maintains its tight-fisted, cartelizing control over the radio, television and telephone industries. One Marxist dream has yet to be realized, but a number of congressmen WASHINGTON: In March, 1990, after months of delicate negotiations, the State Department had established the basis for direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians in Cairo. At which point, out of the blue, President Bush raised the issue of Jewish "settlement" of Jerusalem. This gratuitous undermining of Israel's claim to Jerusalem helped precipitate a crisis in Israel. (Not even the most moderate Israeli is prepared to make any part of Jerusalem off-limits to Jews.) The Israeli government collapsed and the Cairo talks never took place. Eighteen months later, Bush has done it again. After months of delicate negotiations, the State Department had established the basis for direct talks between Israel and the Arab states. Out of the blue, President Bush announced that he would veto any congressional attempt to guarantee loans to Israel for the absorption of Soviet immigrants. Arabs don't object The president demanded a 120-day delay for consideration of the loans out of concern for the peace process. Granting the guarantees now, he said, would jeopardize the upcoming peace conference. This is nonsense. Not a single Arab state not Syria, not Egypt, not Jordanhas made withholding the loan guarantee a condition for participation in the conference. Nor has a single Arab state made an Israeli settlement freeze a condition for attending the peace conference. On the contrary: Secretary of State Baker's major breakthrough was obtaining Arab agreement to enter talks with Israel unconditionally. What possible reason can an American president have to create new conditions no Arab insists on? Of course, now it will be difficult for any Arab not to be as tough on Israel as the president of the United States. Predictably, two days after the president's press room outburst against Israel, Syria, which two months ago had agreed to 1

Get full access with a Free Trial

Start Free Trial

What members have found on this page