Matching Grant Challenge
alexPureWhen I met Alexander Cockburn, one of his first questions to me was: “Is your hate pure?” It was the question he asked most of the young writers he mentored. These were Cockburn’s rules for how to write political polemics: write about what you care about, write with passion, go for the throat of your enemies and never back down. His admonitions remain the guiding stylesheet for our writers at CounterPunch. Please help keep the spirit of this kind of fierce journalism alive by taking advantage of  our matching grant challenge which will DOUBLE every donation of $100 or more. Any of you out there thinking of donating $50 should know that if you donate a further $50, CounterPunch will receive an additional $100. And if you plan to send us $200 or $500 or more, CounterPunch will get a matching $200 or $500 or more. Don’t miss the chance. Double your clout right now. Please donate. –JSC (This photo of Alexander Cockburn and Jasper, on the couch that launched 1000 columns, was taken in Petrolia by Tao Ruspoli)
 Day 19

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)

pp1

or
cp-store

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

One of my earliest recollections of Ronald Reagan’s “freedom fighters,” much admired by many in the U.S. press in the early years of Jihad against the secular government of the time, was the hell Alexander Cockburn caught from libs and rads alike for a few critical (now arguably prophetic) sentences he wrote in his old […]

The Fate of Reagan’s Freedom Fighters

by Jack McCarthy

One of my earliest recollections of Ronald Reagan’s “freedom fighters,” much admired by many in the U.S. press in the early years of Jihad against the secular government of the time, was the hell Alexander Cockburn caught from libs and rads alike for a few critical (now arguably prophetic) sentences he wrote in his old Village Voice Press Clips column.

Cockburn wrote that Reagan’s freedom fighters were in fact a barbarous, atavistic crew who wanted to return Afghanistan back to medieval days.

Talk about the chickens coming home to roost! Coming home to bomb would be more accurate.

The dirty little secret of Day of Infamy 2–and all but taboo as far as discussion goes in the media– is that the U.S. was viciously attacked by Ronald Reagan’s freedom fighters with our own airplanes!

This helps explain why the U.S. Government has personalized the issue in the form of the Taliban’s “guest” Osama bin Laden: “Master terror mind of the world” indeed.

The fact is the U.S. has been attacked by the Government of Afghanistan and not for the first time. The bombing of the Cole, the embassy bombing in Kenya and the Khobar towers bombing all took U.S. lives.

But only now after Reagan’s freedom fighters attacked the U.S. mainland has the U.S. all but conceded that its the Government of Afghanistan behind Bin laden and the infamous “network” that is trained and armed in that country. Only is the U.S. government committed to removing that government, most likely by any means necessary.

According to a little reported article in the British “Guardian” for Sept 21, that paper has seen “Diplomatic cables” outlining the plan for the removal of the Taliban government, replacing it with an “interim administration under United Nations auspices.”

Even more shocking, according to the “Guardian” the U.S. plan is to pressure the so-called “Northern Alliance” opposition to get behind a U.S. plan to reinstall 86-yr-old monarch King Zahir Shah.

There’s been lots of blather(see Roger Rosenblatt in the current issue of “Newsweek”) by U.S. big thinkers that the shocking events of Sept 11 have brought about the “end of irony.”

Au contraire.

If one can’t find irony in the fact that the U.S. suffered its first domestic military attack at the hands of Ronald Reagan’s “freedom fighters” one just isn’t trying.

And speaking of irony, writing in the current issue of the magazine, “Washington Report on Middle East Affairs,” former U.S congress from Illinois Paul Findley (writing before the attack of September 11 took place) points out that George W Bush may owe his victory against Al Gore not to Ralph Nader or butterfly ballots, but the U.S. Muslim vote.

For the first time the U.S. Muslim lobby endorsed a Republican, George W Bush. Bush won 78 percent of the U.S. Muslim nationwide–and by a similar margin in Florida.

Now George W Bush recklessly and foolishly talks of a “crusade” (bin Laden’s “Fatwah” declaration on the U.S. by the way specifically mentions “crusaders”).

The only thing certain at this point is that the attack of September 11th proved beyond a reasonable doubt that both “irony” and “history” were still with us. CP

One of my earliest recollections of Ronald Reagan’s “freedom fighters,” much admired by many in the U.S. press in the early years of Jihad against the secular government of the time, was the hell Alexander Cockburn caught from libs and rads alike for a few critical (now arguably prophetic) sentences he wrote in his old […]

The Fate of Reagan’s Freedom Fighters

by Jack McCarthy

One of my earliest recollections of Ronald Reagan’s “freedom fighters,” much admired by many in the U.S. press in the early years of Jihad against the secular government of the time, was the hell Alexander Cockburn caught from libs and rads alike for a few critical (now arguably prophetic) sentences he wrote in his old Village Voice Press Clips column.

Cockburn wrote that Reagan’s freedom fighters were in fact a barbarous, atavistic crew who wanted to return Afghanistan back to medieval days.

Talk about the chickens coming home to roost! Coming home to bomb would be more accurate.

The dirty little secret of Day of Infamy 2–and all but taboo as far as discussion goes in the media– is that the U.S. was viciously attacked by Ronald Reagan’s freedom fighters with our own airplanes!

This helps explain why the U.S. Government has personalized the issue in the form of the Taliban’s “guest” Osama bin Laden: “Master terror mind of the world” indeed.

The fact is the U.S. has been attacked by the Government of Afghanistan and not for the first time. The bombing of the Cole, the embassy bombing in Kenya and the Khobar towers bombing all took U.S. lives.

But only now after Reagan’s freedom fighters attacked the U.S. mainland has the U.S. all but conceded that its the Government of Afghanistan behind Bin laden and the infamous “network” that is trained and armed in that country. Only is the U.S. government committed to removing that government, most likely by any means necessary.

According to a little reported article in the British “Guardian” for Sept 21, that paper has seen “Diplomatic cables” outlining the plan for the removal of the Taliban government, replacing it with an “interim administration under United Nations auspices.”

Even more shocking, according to the “Guardian” the U.S. plan is to pressure the so-called “Northern Alliance” opposition to get behind a U.S. plan to reinstall 86-yr-old monarch King Zahir Shah.

There’s been lots of blather(see Roger Rosenblatt in the current issue of “Newsweek”) by U.S. big thinkers that the shocking events of Sept 11 have brought about the “end of irony.”

Au contraire.

If one can’t find irony in the fact that the U.S. suffered its first domestic military attack at the hands of Ronald Reagan’s “freedom fighters” one just isn’t trying.

And speaking of irony, writing in the current issue of the magazine, “Washington Report on Middle East Affairs,” former U.S congress from Illinois Paul Findley (writing before the attack of September 11 took place) points out that George W Bush may owe his victory against Al Gore not to Ralph Nader or butterfly ballots, but the U.S. Muslim vote.

For the first time the U.S. Muslim lobby endorsed a Republican, George W Bush. Bush won 78 percent of the U.S. Muslim nationwide–and by a similar margin in Florida.

Now George W Bush recklessly and foolishly talks of a “crusade” (bin Laden’s “Fatwah” declaration on the U.S. by the way specifically mentions “crusaders”).

The only thing certain at this point is that the attack of September 11th proved beyond a reasonable doubt that both “irony” and “history” were still with us. CP