Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
At the end of the article, we have this:
"Where is the justice? I am still being threatened because of this," Wakil said, his arms flailing. "But I do not want to retaliate. People respect me now more than before because they know I am innocent. It is my job as a tribal elder to suffer on behalf of my people."
What a succinct summary of the depths to which we have sunk. First, of course, Wakil understands that the concept of "justice" no longer exists for the United States when it come to the Great War on Terror.
Further, though, I dare anyone to give me a single example of a political figure in Washington who sees their job as entailing the obligation "to suffer on behalf of my people". Inside the Beltway, the only objective is to enrich oneself as much as possible in both cash and power while ensuring re-election. The concept of doing anything, let alone suffering, on behalf of the people is completely foreign to our government. [False suffering, such as that professed by the far right fundamentalists, can be dismissed out of hand as mere grandstanding.]
David Davies, a Conservative Party MP and who I think you have previously acknowledged as a committed civil libertarian, has adopted a new tack in exposing torture and abuse committed against terrorist suspects.
He's using Westminster parliamentary privilege - a privilege that basically safeguards unfettered free speech - to put evidence of these abuses onto the official parliamentary record.
Here's the article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/08/mi5-torture-evidence-david-davis/print
Real journalists, and real democratic politicians, we've never more urgently needed them.
1) Can you give us an estimate of when Nancy Yousseff will be fired from her job for actually exposing this gov't malfeasance? It is clear she has violated several terms of the Sacred Sycophancy Kode of Konduct that nearly all establishment journalists rigidly adhere to, especially Alicia Shepard.
2) When will she be on Salon radio?
3) Can you give us some insight into why it is usually only McClatchy Newspapers who allow such honest and critical discussion of the government's actions to be printed on at least a semi-frequent basis? Are their owners/executives not an inside-enough part of the DC establishment organ complex, so they aren't getting the "spin this story THIS way" memos??
4) It would be interesting to hear from Youssef in an interview what she does to promote and expand this kind of "real" journalism, and how she sees other MSM journalists in terms of how they "report" the news.
Just posted this a while ago on the previous comment thread. Amazing how so many people repeat this "too dangerous to let go" bullshit as if it's self-evident when in fact, it's just baseless.
Sheep.
I maintain that these detainees are being kept caged to protect the political career of Barack Obama. If any U.S. detainee is released, then subsequently commits an act of terrorism on American soil, Barack Obama becomes a one-term President. He won't tolerate that. In Obama's eyes the rights of these detainees are an insignificant consideration. His glorious career in politics is what matters.
As the McClatchy article reflects, what is and is not real "journalism" is not that complicated. The government makes a claim. The role of the "journalist" is not to repeat it or merely report that the government claims it, but instead, to investigate it with skepticism to determine whether it is true, and then report if it isn't.
As we've heard and read, what passes for real "journalism" is even worse than that. "Journalists" even "journalists" with "30 years experience" will not only repeat what they are told but even assume and then "report" the reasons why what they were told happened or happens.
NPR will use the word "torture" to describe what other governments do because they do it merely to sadistically inflict pain on people while the U.S. did it for a noble reason: to obtain information about Terrorist attacks.
"... although he worked against our Enemies -- some alleged "associations" he had reflect an agenda that conflicts with ours."
If this is going to be the law of the land, we should put Ollie North in jail. Donald Rumsfeld, too (we have him on video canoodling with Saddam Hussein).
Just murder the poor bastards and be done with it. It's not like anyone would be held accountable for the murders. We've already murdered 100 or so of these guys by torturing them to death. What's a few more rotting corpses added to the piles of dead Muslims we've created? Put them out of their misery and be done with it. Americans are a barbaric people. Everyone else should just get used to that fact.
We keep hearing from some powerful journalists that their role is just to repeat the conflicting claims, of course giving precedence to those of the government.
If that were the case they would not need any "reporters" at all - they would just print the press releases or give air time to government spokesmen. Maybe newspapers could keep afloat by just becoming printing shops.
But any real authority that the MSM have comes from reporters who actually try to get to the facts. Obviously this means being deeply skeptical about government claims. The existence of such reporting, as opposed to just opinion, is what actually distinguishes newspapers and other media from bloggers. If newspapers can't penetrate government propaganda there is little reason for their existence.
Note the central role The New York Times played -- yet again -- in spreading and given credence to pure government propaganda. And the method used to accomplish that is exactly what led them to help disseminate lies about the "Iraq threat" in the run-up to the war: anonymous government sources leak something, they mindlessly print it without identifying who gave it to them, Dick Cheney cites the NYT article to bolster the lie, and then -- even once the NYT is forced to admit they were used -- they not only protect the identity of the anonymous sources who manipulated them, but they'll use the same exact method tomorrow -- and the day after and the day after that -- to report the "news." What Judy Miller and Michael Gordon did in late 2002 and early 2003 -- that the NYT supposedly regrets so much -- is exactly what Elizabeth Bumiller and her editors did here. As a result, a blatant lie -- that 1 in 7 released Guantanamo detainees "returned to jihad -- became, as intended, embedded fact in our political debates.
That's an excellent definition of myth-jacking.. How quaint that Cheney and the NYT don't think we can see them moving behind the veil of anonymous sourcing.
Jacking an entire nation is surprisingly easy. This is how we do it: grab them by their most intimate myths.
The terrorists are coming! Quick, do as you're told or you'll get us all killed. The Big Man Upstairs has authorized us to do whatever it takes to keep us safe in a world and time of war. God bless the Big Man Upstairs! Since we're doing the work of the Big Man, we can do no wrong; and anyone opposing us also opposes the Big Man. That makes them suspected evil-doers. Why should we give evil-doers a fair trial? Don't you know they hate us? Let the Big Man put them in a hidden hell forever. Gathering up and containerizing evil is the only way to keep us safe.
I think we should call it Goering's Method, or the Goering Treatment, or maybe's Cheney's Variations on Goering's Method.
SEN. ROBERT BYRD: My hands tremble, but my heart still throbs. I read this quote: “Naturally, the common people don’t want war. But after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country.” Hermann Goering, president of Reichstag, Nazi Parliament, 1934.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
