Quotes for the record:

All too much rhetorical nonsense relating to the Lebanon crisis is afoot. Where to start? Many of the themes I raised here weeks ago are finally being taken up meekly by reporters and commentators. No comfort in that.
I do not think I have ever been more embarrassed and worried for my country – and I say that as one whom my former colleagues at Houghton would have accused of being quite the conservative, patriotic type. Maybe I got converted somewhere. Or maybe I’ve been quite free of ideological straight-jackets all along. Ah never mind, let the facts – and the quotes below – speak.
So as I craft essays on, among other things, Iran and Hizbullah, here’s a selection of particularly memorable quotes re. Lebanon related matters from the past week or so, with my own brief comments inserted:
Retired Israeli army Col. Gal Luft, first quoted in Washington Post essay by Wright & Ricks on 19 July:

“Israel is attempting to create a rift between the Lebanese population and Hezbollah supporters by exacting a heavy price from the elite in Beirut. The message is: If you want your air conditioning to work and if you want to be able to fly to Paris for shopping, you must pull your head out of the sand and take action toward shutting down Hezbollah-land.”

Or in the “open ended” words of Israeli chief of Staff, Brigadier General Dan Halutz, “Nothing is safe (in Lebanon), as simple as that.”
Dr. Martin Accad, academic dean of the Arab Baptist Theological Seminary of Lebanon, writing on 25 July in Christianity Today (an influential “evangelical” weekly)

“Seven hundred thousand out of a total Lebanese population of 3.5 million, 20 percent of the population, mostly Shiites, are now being cared for and given refuge by mostly Christian schools, churches, and
other humanitarian organizations. This is the story of the Good Samaritan at a mega scale! And to think that this is the outcome of a strategy that meant to rouse anti-Hezbollah feelings among the Lebanese population and government. Talk about a failed strategy! Of course, this has happened so many times before that any thoughtful
tactician would have learned the lesson by now, but military muscle is always too hedonistic and narcissistic to listen to the voice of reason and history.”

Fascinating – considering the source that published this quote. Lately, it seems that one wi’ll find more “balance” in some “evangelical” Christian sources – home of “dispensationalism” – than you will on CNN domestic, especially “Blitzer-world”…. (CNN International is more like BBC – but very few Americans can get it.)
Zbigniew Brzezinski, from a speech on 20 July 2006

“I hate to say this but I will say it. I think what the Israelis are doing today for example in Lebanon is in effect, in effect–maybe not in intent–the killing of hostages. The killing of hostages. Because when you kill 300 people, 400 people, who have nothing to do with the provocations Hezbollah staged, but you do it in effect deliberately by being indifferent to the scale of collateral damage, youÕre killing hostages in the hope of intimidating those that you want to intimidate. And more likely than not you will not intimidate them. You are simply outrage them and make them into permanent enemies with the number of such enemies increasing.”

And from the same session’s Q&A:

Secretary of State Rice’s trip to the Middle East will be like “sitting in front of a mirror, talking to herself” if she does not deal diplomatically with the major players.

Unfortunately, it was worse. And to think Brzezinski was considered among the most “hawkish” of advisors to President Jimmy Carter. Well, some of us learn.
“Birth Pangs & Children”
Thus far, we have Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice sticking to the same un-diplomatic script 21 July 2006 :

“I have no interest in diplomacy for the sake of returning Lebanon and Israel to the status quo ante. I think it would be a mistake. What we’re seeing here, in a sense, is the growing — the birth pangs of a new Middle East and whatever we do we have to be certain that we’re pushing forward to the new Middle East not going back to the old one.”

In other words, we have neoconservative “creative destruction” in vogue, and full speed ahead. Rice’s conception of American “leadership” for Middle East diplomacy has thus far been one of delay, stall, and fiercely change the subject, until the Israeli midwifed baby is sufficiently ready for delivery. The Israelis rightly call it an (American) “green light.”
Speaking of babies, here’s President George Bush, when he signed bills on 27 July for “protecting children“:

“[H]aving someone harm your child is one of the worst nightmares a parent could face… Protecting our children is our solemn responsibility. It’s what we must do. When a child’s life or innocence is taken it is a terrible loss — it’s an act of unforgivable cruelty.”

and on 19 July, when he when he vetoed a “Stem Cell Enhancement” bill:

“These boys and girls are not spare parts. (Applause.) They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells.”

SURREAL…. Too bad Lebanese children aren’t still embryonic. But even then, they likely wouldn’t be the baby Secretary Rice has in mind. Where’s the humanity of a Ronald Reagan when needed? At least Reagan had a picture of a wounded Beirut child on his desk, as he struggled (badly) to find a way to end the Israeli seige of Beirut in 1983.
One wonders if the current President even has been permitted to learn if any Lebanese children have died? If so, are Lebanese children mere “spare parts?” Are their deaths also the fruit of an “unforgivable cruelty?”
Watching the Watchers
Speaking of American self-censorship, Lawrence Pintak, amid an extraordinary News Hour discussion about the differences between American and Arab media world reporting of the Lebanon conflict:

American television is sanitized…. Americans in many ways still live in an information ghetto, because we are not seeing the images coming out of the Arab world…. [A]t home in Cairo, I have 300-odd stations. I can watch Al-Jazeera. I can watch Al-Arabiya. I can watch Al-Manar. I can watch CNN, and the BBC, and FOX News, and MSNBC. So an Arab can surf across the spectrum. Americans can’t.

Alas, there’s been little difference between major American TV networks in their reporting on Lebanon. CNN domestic, with the exception perhaps of Larry King, has been little different than Fox News. In short, there may be a greater variety of opinion and content in the Arab media presently than in the presumed “land of the free,” of the late and intrepid William R. Murrow. So much for “speaking truth to power.”
One slight exception can be found on the CNN web site here (which only today has been mentioned on CNN daytime – sans pictures).
As Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell lamented in a recent column, “Reporting on Israel is the third rail of American journalism. Touch it critically and you excite strong emotions.” No kidding.
Israeli (reserve) Major Michael Oren, interview on CNN American Morning, 28 July 2006:

“Israel is proceeding at Israel’s pace and not Hezbollah’s pace. Israeli is proceeding cautiously…. It’s rugged terrain, as you see. Israel’s tank power here is of limited usage in this type of terrain. Even its air power — the enemy is deeply built in. They’ve had six years to dig in trenches, in caves and in underground chambers. And Israel’s proceeding cautiously to reduce casualties on its side, but also to reduce casualties on the Lebanese side. We’ve had reports now that Hezbollah has prevented Lebanese civilians from leaving the town of Bint Jbeil, often by force.”

M. O’BRIEN: Boy, if I’m a civilian, I’m going to be afraid to leave my home, much less Bint Jbeil, because of the bombardment that is coming from the sky from artillery and from Israeli bombs.

OREN: “Well, we had leafleted this area days in advance, informing the local population that there would a battle here, that we would take on Hezbollah here. They gave them fair time to leave, but Hezbollah apparently has prevented them from leaving.”

O’Brien let that whopper stand without comment or follow-up.
Eveybody clear now? So its open season on Lebanese civilians – the cockroaches of the day. They were warned to leave, but it was their fault for staying. That argument works on Faux News, but likely would not get far in a war crimes court. As such, go to defense B; any civilian deaths will somehow all be Hizbullah’s fault for somehow preventing the civilians from leaving. (and don’t mention just which side has been bombing roads, bridges, and any other infrastructure that might facilitate evacuation of civilians)
And from a pending essay here,

“When all else fails, blame Iran.”

Stay tuned.