Read
Why It Happened!
Dime's
Worth of Difference:
Beyond the
Lesser of Two Evils
Order Here!
Today's
Stories
December
7, 2004
Dave
Lindorff
American Fantasies: Psst! Hey Buddy,
Did You Hear How Well the War's Going?
December
6, 2004
Paul
Craig Roberts
Paranoia and Pre-emption: Is the
Bush Administration Certifiable?
December
4 / 6, 2004
Alexander
Cockburn
Politicize the CIA? You've Got to
be Kidding
Joe
Bageant
Dining with the Rhinos
Alan
Maass
Reporting from the Ground in Iraq: an Interview with Patrick
Cockburn
Brian
Cloughley
Democracy, Bush-style, in the Gulf
Laura
Carlsen
Latin America Shifts Left
Lenni
Brenner
Jefferson, Madison, Bush and Religion
Anna
Ioakimedes
Brazil's Haitian Mission: Doing God's Work or Washington's?
Uri
Avnery
Widow of Opportunity?
Fred
Gardner
Supreme Court Hears Medical Pot Case
Dave
Zirin
Steroids to Heaven
Jackie
Corr
Mining Camp Blues: the Red State Variation
Don
Fitz
Will Greens Abandon IRV?
Lucy
Herschel
"Art can be a Weapon of the Oppressed": an Interview
with Artist Anthony Papa
Richard
Oxman
No Angels in America: Bashing the Gay Play
Ron
Jacobs
Holiday Greeting Card
Poets'
Basement
Collins, Albert, LaMorticella
December
3, 2004
Dave
Lindorff
Lie Then Escalate
Ben
Tripp
Fun With Boycotts: How to Shop in a
Time of Crisis
Joe
Allen
Murder in El Salvador: the Assassination of Teamster Organizer
Gilberto Soto
Matthew
B. Riley
Human Rights Court Fails Lori Berenson
Meir
Shalev
In the End, It is the Violin that Wins
Bob
Wing
The White Elephant in the Room: Race and Election 2004
Christopher
Brauchli
When McCain Bit His Tongue
Sasan
Fayazmanesh
The EU, the US, Israel and Iran
December
2, 2004
Tito
Tricot
No Justice in Chile: I'm a Torture
Survivor in a Country Where Torturers Still Run Free
Behzad
Yaghmaian
The Murder of Theo Van Gogh and Muslim Migration
Dr.
Susan Block
Lana and Me: Meetings with Remarkable Apes
Frank
/ Chowkwanyun
Liberalism and Its Bounds
Lee
Sustar
Standoff in Ukraine: the Bad v. the Corrupt
Patrick
Cockburn
Another Grim Record in Iraq
Mark
Engler
Seattle at Five
Michael
Donnelly
Something Stinks in South Bend: the Firing of Tyrone Willingham
Nate
Collins
The Bay Area Mall on an Ohlone Burial Grounds
Saul
Landau
The Assassination of Danilo Anderson
December
1, 2004
Phillip
Cryan
Associated with Whom? Rightist Bias
in Wire Coverage of Colombia
Dave
Zirin
What's the Matter with "Leon"?:
Budweiser's Racist Commercial
Ghali
Hassan
Iraq's Health Care Under the Occupation:
200 Children Die Every Day
Donna
J. Volatile
Beware Western Nations Threatening "Democracy"
Patrick
Cockburn
How Saddam Tried to Arm the Insurgency
Nick
Meo
Chemical War Over Afghanistan
Mike
Ferner
The Battle of Toledo
Mokhiber
/ Weissman
Shame and Determination on Global AIDS Day: 40 Million and Rising
Kathy
Kelly
Looking the Other Way: the Real Crimes
of the UN in Iraq
November
30, 2004
Jennifer
Van Bergen
The Veil of Secrecy
Toni
Nelson Herrera
Meeting Kurtz: When Art is a Crime
Paul
Craig Roberts
The Bush Delusions: Successful at Incompetence
Patrick
Cockburn
The Insurgency Strikes Back: There Are No Safe Havens in Iraq
Chuck
Munson
WTO Protests Five Years Later: Seattle Weekly Trashes Anti-Globalization
Movement
Adam
Williams
Citizenship Sold: Back to Business in Indiana
Gregory
Elich
A Dangerous Turn in the US Plans for
North Korea
Website
of the Day
Read Lynne Cheney's Lesbian Novel Online!
November
29, 2004
Dave
Lindorff
Blowback in Ukraine: The Hand of
the CIA?
Omar
Barghouti
"The Pianist" of Palestine:
Roadblock Concerto at Gunpoint
Mike
Whitney
The US Media and Fallujah: How to
Market a Siege
Uri
Avnery
The Abu Mazen Style: "Give Me
Some Credit!"
Matt
Vidal
Globalization and Economic Inequality: a Look at the Numbers
Patrick
Cockburn
An Interview with Iraq's Foreign
Minister
Alan
Farago
Sex Change and Salvation: God, Girly Men and Endocrine Disrupters
Justin
Huggler
Bhopal 20 Years Later
Antony
Loewenstein
How Australia Reported Arafat's Death and Legacy
Gary
Leupp
Ukraine: Poll Results Aren't the Real
Issue
Website
of the Day
Mosul: Images from a Kill Zone
November
27 / 28, 2004
Peter
Linebaugh
Torture & Neo-Liberalism with
Sycorax in Iraq
Alexander
Cockburn
What Happened to O'Reilly's Loofa?
Fred
Gardner
Ashcroft v. Raich: Medical Marijuana and the Supreme Court
Kathy
Kelly
What We Can Control
Diane
Christian
The Other Cheek: "Empire Doesn't Analyze, It Acts"
Gary
Leupp
One More Neocon Target: South (Yes, South) Korea
Lenni
Brenner
Equality and Rights of Return: Jefferson Instructs the New York
Times
Ron
Jacobs
Death Squads and Iraq's Elections: the Mysterious Murders of
the AMS Clerics
Joshua
Frank
An Interview with Kevin Zeese on Nader, Kerry and the ABB Crowd
Toni
Solo
The Murder of Danilo Anderson
Saul
Landau
Fallujah, the 21st Century Guernica
JoAnn
Wypijewski
Matthew Shepard Case 6 Years Later: Why Hate Crimes Laws are
No Cure for Homophobia
Justin
Taylor
Empire's Lawless Opportunities
Amos
Harel
The Case of Captain R.
Walter
A. Davis
Tabloid Justice
Stephen
Hendricks
God's Kind of Men
Poets'
Basement
Albert, LaMorticella and Ford
November
26, 2004
Peter
Feng
Gavin Newsom: Man or Machine?
Greg
Moses
It's the White Vote, Stupid
Liaquat
Ali Khan
The Devil's Work: Bush's Minority Appointments
Michael
Mandel / Gail Davidson
Why Bush Should Be Banned from Canada: a Memo to the Ministry
of Immigration
Dave
Lindorff
Nation of Sheep, Turkey of an Election: Urkrainians Show the
Way
Gary
Corseri
When Black Friday Comes...
Paul
Craig Roberts
Whatever Happened to Conservatives?
Website
of the Day
Iraq Pipeline Watch
November
25, 2004
Willliam
Loren Katz
Giving Thanks to Whom?: "Thanks
to God We Sent 600 Heathen Souls to Hell Today"
Mitchel
Cohen
Why I Hate Thanksgiving
Mike
Ferner
An Uncommon Mom
November
24, 2004
Gila
Svirsky
License to Kill: the Example of Violence
is Set by the State
Winslow
T. Wheeler
The
Other Mess in Congress
Christopher
Brauchli
The Company He Keeps: the Syndicate of Tom Delay
Dave
Lindorff
Double Standards on Exit Polls: Hypocrisy Sans Irony
Ron
Jacobs
The Occupation of Iraq is the Root of t he Problem
Ken
Sengupta
Witnesses: War Crimes in Fallujah
Diana
Barahona
The Final Holocaust or Why I Voted for Ralph Nader
John
L. Hess
Safire the Shameless
Jason
Leopold
Did Harvard Hire (Another) War Criminal?
Jeffrey
St. Clair
The Mark of McCain: the Senator Most Likely to Start a Nuclear
War
Map
of the Day
Now and Then: 2004 v. 1860
November
23, 2004
Forrest
Hylton
Bush and Uribe at the Beach
November
22, 2004
Dave
Zirin
Fight Night in the NBA: Selective Outrage
in Detroit
Paul
Craig Roberts
On to Iran: We Won't Get Fooled Again?
Michael
Mandel / Gail Davidson
Why Bush Should be Banned from Canada
Kathie
Helmkamp
Our Son: a Marine Who Won't Kill
Ken
Sengupta
The Triangle of Death: "This is Now the Most Dangerous Place
in Iraq"
Mike
Whitney
Greenspan's Hammer
Roger
Burbach
Why They Hate Bush in Chile
Website
of the Day
Fed Up with Government Lies and Corporate Spin?
November
20 / 21, 2004
Alexander
Cockburn
The Poisoned Chalice
Todd
May
Religion, the Election and the Politics of Fear
Abbas
Ahmed Ibrahim
The Horrors of Fallujah: a First-Hand Account
Kevin
Zeese
Mishandling Nader
Landau
/ Hassen
After Arafat
Tom
Barry
The Vulcans Consolidate Power: The Rise of Stephen Hadley
Fred
Gardner
Pot Shots: Ask Dr. Todd
Justin
E.H. Smith
Triumph of the Will: the Sequel
Carl
Estabrook
Where We Are Now
Gary
Leupp
Imperial History-Making vs. Reality-Based Thought: a Dialogue
Dave
Lindorff
Apocalypse Soon
Jenna
Michelle Liut
Plans Colombia and Patriota: Wanton Wastes of Money, Manpower
and Lives
Mickey
Z.
The Granma Moses of Radical Writing: an Interview with William
Blum
Greg
Moses
The Same Old Struggle Against Imperial America
Sharon
Smith
Abortion Rights and the Election: What Now?
Ron
Jacobs
Sandwiches and Car Bombs
Ben
Tripp
Raising d'Etre: Finding Money in Hollywood These Days
Richard
Oxman
Basketbrawl Two Pointer: Iraq Rules!
Gilad
Atzmon
Politics and Jazz
Poets'
Basement
LaMorticella, Albert, Ford, & Anon.
Website
of the Day
Voice of the Forest
Hot Stories
Alexander Cockburn
Behold,
the Head of a Neo-Con!
Subcomandante
Marcos
The
Death Train of the WTO
Norman Finkelstein
Hitchens
as Model Apostate
Steve Niva
Israel's
Assassination Policy: the Trigger for Suicide Bombings?
Dardagan,
Slobodo and Williams
CounterPunch Exclusive:
20,000 Wounded Iraqi Civilians
Steve
J.B.
Prison Bitch
Sheldon
Rampton and John Stauber
True Lies: the Use of Propaganda
in the Iraq War
Wendell
Berry
Small Destructions Add Up
CounterPunch
Wire
WMD: Who Said What When
Cindy
Corrie
A Mother's Day Talk: the Daughter
I Can't Hear From
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream
Francis Boyle
Impeach
Bush: A Draft Resolution
Click
Here for More Stories.
|
December 7, 2004
Rude Questions and the Immutable Object
All
Mosquitoes, No Swamp...No Elephants Either
By
RAY McGOVERN
Last Thursday's conference on "Al
Qaeda 2.0: Transnational Terrorism After 9/11," sponsored
by the New America Foundation and the New York University Center
on Law & Security, was a valuable gift to those wanting an
update on informed opinion on the subject. The event proved
to be as highly instructive for what was not addressed,
though, as for the issues that were. The elephants known to
be present remained largely unacknowledged.
The cavernous Caucus Room of
the Russell Senate Office Building was full to the gunnels.
Panel after panel of distinguished presenters from near and far,
from right and left-including authors Peter Bergen, Michael Scheuer,
Jessica Stern and Col. Pat Lang- exuded and freely shared their
expertise. But there was myopia as well.
The mosquitos of terrorism
were dissected and examined as carefully as biology students
once did drosophila, but typing the generic DNA of terrorism
proved more elusive. Worse, no attention was given to the swamp
in which terrorists breed. Were it not for a few impertinent
questions from the audience evoking a pungent smell, the swamps
might have eluded attention altogether.
The first panel featured two
experts from RAND, both of whom touched only in passing-and quite
gingerly-on the need to drain the swamp. The first closed his
remarks with a 30-second peroration in which he observed that
less attention might be given to kill/capture metrics in favor
of addressing the causes of terrorism and breaking the cycle
of terrorist recruitment.
The second speaker from RAND,
referring to that organization's numerous studies on influencing
public opinion, closed his remarks with this: "When the
message coheres with the context in which the message is transmitted,
it works." Sending out the right message during the Cold
War was easier, he said, because the context (the United States
being the only alternative to the USSR) was very clear. On terrorism,
he added, we need to ponder "the mismatch between context
and message."
What About
The Elephants?
Then came a rude question from
the audience: Is it not striking that even in an academic-type
setting like this, elephants must remain invisible? Is it not
ironic, that a panel of the U.S. Defense Science Board, in an
unclassified study on "Strategic Communication," completed
on September 23 but kept under wraps until after the November
2 election, let the pachyderms out of the bag? Directly contradicting
the president, the DSB panel gave voice to what virtually all
who were sitting in that ornate Senate Caucus Room knew, but
were afraid to say. It named the elephants.
"Muslims do not 'hate
our freedom,' but rather, they hate our policies. The overwhelming
majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided
support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and
the longstanding, even increasing support for what Muslims collectively
see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan,
and the Gulf States. Thus, when American public diplomacy talks
about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as
no more than self-serving hypocrisy."
"...Nor can the most carefully
crafted messages, themes, and words persuade when the messenger
lacks credibility."
U.S. Support
For Israel "Immutable"
Another questioner pressed
RAND's expert on mismatch-context-message, asking, "What
can we do to change the context?" In answer the expert
acknowledged that the United States has a "bad reputation"
but insisted that this is "unavoidable" because, for
example, U.S. support for Israel is "immutable." The
United States is also connected to what many Muslims consider
"apostate" regimes, but it is difficult to escape what
binds us, because the U.S. needs their "tactical support."
(Read: oil; military bases; intelligence.)
There was some wincing and
squirming in the audience, but in the end it was left to aptly
named Marc Sageman, a forensic psychiatrist, former CIA case
officer, and author of the book Understanding Terror Networks
(published earlier this year), to state the obvious on Israel
and Iraq. Putting it even more bluntly that the Defense Science
Board panel, he asserted:
"We are seen as a hypocritical
bully in the Middle East and we have to stop!"
Now why should that be so hard
to say, I asked myself. And I was reminded of a frequent, unnerving
experience I had while on the lecture circuit in recent months.
Almost invariably, someone in the audience would approach me
after the talk and ensuing discussion, and congratulate me on
my "courage" in naming Israel as a factor in discussing
the war in Iraq and the struggle against terrorism.
I don't get it. Since when
did it take uncommon courage to state simply, without fear or
favor, the conclusions that fall out of one's analysis? Since
when did it become an exceptional thing to tell it like it is?
Taking
The Heat On Israel
I thought of the debate I had
on Iraq with arch-neoconservative and former CIA Director James
Woolsey on PBS' Charlie Rose Show on August 20, when I
broke the taboo on mentioning Israel and was immediately branded
"anti-Semitic" by Woolsey. Reflecting later on his
accusation, it seemed almost OK since it was so blatantly
ad hominem. And his attack was all the more transparent,
coming from the self-described "anchor of the Presbyterian
wing of JINSA"-the Jewish Institute of National Security
Affairs, a strong advocate of war to eliminate all perceived
enemies of Israel-like Iraq. In the ensuing days, a flood of
e-mail reached me from all over the country-some of it repeating
Woolsey's charge, but most of it warmly congratulating me on
my "courage."
I still don't fully understand.
And that was my candid answer to the question I dreaded-the
one that so often came up during the Q and A sessions following
my presentations: Why is it that the state of Israel has
such pervasive influence over our body politic? No one denied
that it does; most seemed genuinely puzzled as to why. My embarrassment
at my inability to answer the question is attenuated by the solace
I take in the thought that I am in good company.
Gen. Brent Scowcroft, National
Security Adviser to President George H. W. Bush and now chair
of his son's President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board,
has been known to speak out on key issues when his patience is
exhausted. Remember how, for example, before the attack on Iraq,
he described the evidence of ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda as
"scant" when Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was
calling it "bulletproof?" Well, it sounds like he has
again run out of patience. Scowcroft recently told the Financial
Times that George W. Bush is "mesmerized" by Israeli
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. "Sharon just has him wrapped
around his little finger," Scowcroft is quoted as saying.
Scowcroft and I apparently
have less at risk than those working for RAND...or for the
New York Times, which gives off the aroma of being similarly
mesmerized and intimidated. This shows through with amazing
regularity; I'll adduce but two recent examples:
Times Timing...
To its credit, the New York
Times on November 24 published a story by Times reporter
Thom Shanker on the findings of the Defense Science Board panel
report given to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld on September 23.
But why was the story two months late? And the urban legend
that it was the Times that broke the story is not true,
even though the Washington Post's somnolent ombudsman,
Michael Getler "confirms that legend in his column this
morning. (Noting that the story "didn't appear in the
Post," Getler implies that it should have, because "it
goes to the heart of both the war on terrorism and the war in
Iraq and it raises many crucial issues that don't get probed
deeply enough by news organizations, in my opinion.")
It was not the Times
on November 24, but rather Reasononline's Matt Welch,
who broke the story. On November 15 Welch wrote an account of
the panel's report in which he referred to its recommendations
as having already been "made public." Were reporters
from the mainstream press again asleep? Do they feed only on
the thin gruel of approved Pentagon handouts? It is easy to
understand that the Defense Department had no incentive to advertise
the DSB panel's embarrassing and potentially explosive findings.
(How often have we seen a Pentagon-sponsored report contradicting
a sitting president on a matter of such significance-and before
a crucial election?) It is not so easy to grasp why the media
missed or ignored the story. Or perhaps it is.
Maybe the clue is in the timing.
I gave a long interview on US intelligence matters to another
Times reporter a few weeks before the election and at the
conclusion of the interview I commented that I certainly hoped
his story would appear before November 2. This reporter turned
out to be as candid as he was embarrassed. No, he confessed,
his superiors at the Times had made it clear that there
was an embargo on criticism of the administration of the kind
I had offered until after the election. I expressed amazement
that the New York Times-once courageous publisher of the
Pentagon Papers that helped bring an end to our last ill-conceived
war-would allow itself to be so intimidated. He replied, with
undisguised embarrassment, that this is simply the way it is
today.
Again, I find myself wondering
how long the Times sat on the material reported by Shanker.
Did it have the story before November 2? What does it mean
that the Times published Shanker's report only after a
decent post-election interval? Also interesting is the date
ultimately chosen to run it-the day before Thanksgiving, a very
poor time to attract the attention such a story might otherwise
evoke. Yet another sign of wimpish desire to pander to administration
preferences?
...and Times Surgery
Of equal interest is how the
Times abridged the story itself. Shanker did quote from the
key paragraph beginning with "Muslims do not 'hate our freedom'"
(quoted in full above). But he or his editors deliberately cut
out the next sentence about what Muslims do object to;
i.e., U.S. "one-sided support in favor of Israel and against
Palestinian rights," and support for tyrannical regimes.
The Times did include the sentence that immediately followed
the omitted one. In other words, the offending middle sentence
was surgically removed from the paragraph like a malignant tumor.
Editing Bin
Laden, As Well
Similarly creative editing
showed through the Times' reporting on Osama Bin Laden's
videotaped speech in late October. Several paragraphs of the
story made it onto page one, but the Times saw to it that
the key point Bin Laden made toward the beginning of his remarks
was relegated to paragraphs 23 to 25 at the very bottom of page
nine. Buried there, dwarfed by a large ad for Bloomingdales,
was Bin Laden's revealing claim that the idea for 9/11 first
germinated after "we witnessed the oppression and tyranny
of the American-Israeli coalition against our people in Palestine
and Lebanon."
If, as suggested earlier, one
were to look for "context," precious little is provided
by the Times. A "newspaper of record" might
have noted that even the risk-averse 9/11 commissioners pointed
out on page 147 of the Commission Report that Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed, mastermind and executioner of the 9/11 attacks, was
motivated by "his violent disagreement with U.S. foreign
policy favoring Israel." Was that not news fit to print?
Four More Years
With the mainstream media co-opted
and four-year-older-but-no-wiser national security faces in place
for the president's second term, it is a safe bet we are in for
the same inept, misguided policies-only more so. Sadly, Secretary
of State Colin Powell's relatively moderate views had little
visible impact on policy decisions. Still, when he is gone the
president's circle of advisers will have an even shorter diameter.
And it is highly unlikely that Powell's designated successor,
Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will be any more astute than in the past
in seeking counsel from experienced statesmen like her former
patron, Gen. Scowcroft.
Foreign leaders are aghast...and
have been for years. In August 2002, British senior Labor backbencher
Gerald Kaufman, a former shadow foreign secretary, warned that
the "hawks" in the U.S. administration were giving
the president poor advice:
"Bush, himself the most
intellectually backward American president in my lifetime, is
surrounded by advisers whose bellicosity is exceeded only by
their political, military and diplomatic illiteracy. Pity the
man who relies on Rumsfeld, Cheney and Rice for counsel."
Shrinking Circle
On the afternoon of February
5, 2003, after Secretary of State Colin Powell made his embarrassingly
memorable speech at the UN, my colleagues and I of Veteran Intelligence
Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) drafted and sent a short memorandum
to the president, which concluded with this observation:
"After watching Secretary
Powell today, we are convinced that you would be well served
if you widened the discussion beyond...the circle of those advisers
clearly bent on a war for which we see no compelling reason and
from which we believe the unintended consequences are likely
to be catastrophic."
Instead, the circle has been
squeezed still tighter--as with wagons. And those widely known
in Washington as "the crazies" when they were middle-level
officials and the president's father was in the White House are
now even more firmly ensconced. They remain in charge of things
like war-the very same folks who brought us the "cakewalk"
that became war in Iraq.
Hold onto your hats!
Ray McGovern, a CIA analyst for 27 years from the
administration of John F. Kennedy to that of George H. W. Bush-has
written "A Compromised C.I.A.: What Can Be Done?"
in Patriotism, Democracy and Common Sense published this month
by the Milton S. Eisenhower Foundation. McGovern's chapter includes
a detailed discussion of the qualities needed in a CIA director.
He is also a contributor to Imperial
Crusades: Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia.
An earlier version of this
article appeared on Tompaine.com
Weekend Edition
Features for November
27 / 28, 2004
Peter
Linebaugh
Torture & Neo-Liberalism with
Sycorax in Iraq
Alexander
Cockburn
What Happened to O'Reilly's Loofa?
Fred
Gardner
Ashcroft v. Raich: Medical Marijuana and the Supreme Court
Kathy
Kelly
What We Can Control
Diane
Christian
The Other Cheek: "Empire Doesn't Analyze, It Acts"
Gary
Leupp
One More Neocon Target: South (Yes, South) Korea
Lenni
Brenner
Equality and Rights of Return: Jefferson Instructs the New York
Times
Ron
Jacobs
Death Squads and Iraq's Elections: the Mysterious Murders of
the AMS Clerics
Joshua
Frank
An Interview with Kevin Zeese on Nader, Kerry and the ABB Crowd
Toni
Solo
The Murder of Danilo Anderson
Saul
Landau
Fallujah, the 21st Century Guernica
JoAnn
Wypijewski
Matthew Shepard Case 6 Years Later: Why Hate Crimes Laws are
No Cure for Homophobia
Justin
Taylor
Empire's Lawless Opportunities
Amos
Harel
The Case of Captain R.
Walter
A. Davis
Tabloid Justice
Stephen
Hendricks
God's Kind of Men
Poets'
Basement
Albert, LaMorticella and Ford
|