General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJeremy Scahill and Noam Chomsky: The Truth About America's Secret, Dirty Wars
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/jeremy-scahill-and-noam-chomsky-truth-about-americas-secret-dirty-wars?page=0%2C0Jeremy Scahill: Im really honored to be here with both Amy Goodman and Noam Chomsky. On my own Facebook page, I list Democracy Now! as my university, because I learned journalism not from the classroom. I wouldnt have been able to beyou know, I was saying to Professor Chomsky, when we were walking, Ive never been on Harvard and didnt actually spend much time in an actual classroom when I was technically enrolled in college anyway. So its a little bit odd to be here [at the Harvard Kennedy School]. But I bring that up because I think that journalism is a trade and should be accessible to people. And I learned journalism as an apprentice under the person that I think is a great journalist of our time, and that is Amy. And I had to stalk Amy before she would agree to let me come in and volunteer at Democracy Now! I think she hadI was calling her and writing her letters, and I was sayingthis was in the mid-'90s"If you have a cat, I'll feed your cat. Ill wash your windows." And she had to decide whether, I think, to get a restraining order against me or to let me come in and volunteer for her. And, you know, she has just been such a dear friend and teacher for so long.
And I like to think of the footnotes in my book as a tribute to Professor Chomsky, because one of the first things I do when I look at a book is to check out the notes in the index to see how serious the book is, how serious the author was about citing every fact that he states in the book. And it was something that I very much learned reading Professor Chomskys books. And its a real honor to be here with you, Noam.
Were here at a time when a popular Democratic president, who is a constitutional lawyer by trade, has expanded, intensified, continued and, most importantly, legitimized, in the eyes of many liberals, some of the most egregious aspects of what the Bush administration called its counterterrorism policy and the Obama administration continues to call its counterterrorism and national security policy. And despite the fact that this very popular Democratic president campaigned on a pledge to radically change the way that the U.S. conducted its business around the world and, upon taking power, issued a number of executive orders that were purportedly aimed at shutting down secret prisons, ending torture and closing Guantánamo, what has actually happened is that the Obama administration has made cosmetic changes, tweaked the language, made a few adjustments to the detention program, to thewhats called the targeted killing program, but its anything but targeted, as weve seen so oftenits an assassination program. And this administration has sold the idea to many liberals in this country that this is a clean war, that its a smarter war than the ones that were being waged by his predecessor.
If you look at the administrations claims of bringing the Iraq War to an end, you have to examine what was on President Bushs desk the day he left office. It was the very plan that President Obama implemented. It was already in motion. So this administration did not bring an end to the Iraq War; the Bush administrations plan was implemented. But also weve seen an expansion of CIA paramilitary activity in Iraq over the past several months. The largest embassy in the world is the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, and strike teams continue to operate out of it alongside thousands of mercenary forces.
KG
(28,751 posts)word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty, word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty, word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty, word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty,
word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty, word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty, word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty, word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty,
word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty, word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty, word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty, word salad, goobledy-gook, nader, eighty-twenty,
truth2power
(8,219 posts)Chomsky and Scahill are heros. They speak the truth.
redgreenandblue
(2,088 posts)bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)brush
(53,740 posts)Why isn't that mentioned in the OP?
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)Autumn
(44,976 posts)Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)funny but not as good as the master.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)Now I don't care WHO you are,
Thats FUNNY!
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)and should be respected, and honored as such!
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)That's a bald faced lie, and all three are chronic truth-twisters. Nothing against anyone's admiration of them, though I think it's misplaced, or against xchrom for posting this, and I'm glad he did, but let's not pretend this crew is anything but a pack of propagandists.
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)That those who speak the truth are labeled as propagandists.
lol
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)twisted ....
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)The man speaking at the podium is named Barack Obama, not George Bush:
Amy, Noam and Jeremy seem to think we don't know the difference, and oddly enough, some of us don't. Imagine that.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)negotiated by the Bush Administration in 2008 To The Letter.
The Obama Administration actually requested an extension to the Withdrawal of American Forces Deadline,
and were told by the Iraqis,
"Not just NO, but F**k NO" to the requested extension.
You may not like it, but those ARE The Facts.
Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq
It established that U.S. combat forces would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011.[1] The pact required criminal charges for holding prisoners over 24 hours, and required a warrant for searches of homes and buildings that were not related to combat.[1]
U.S. contractors working for U.S. forces would have been subject to Iraqi criminal law, while contractors working for the State Department and other U.S. agencies would retain their immunity. If U.S. forces committed still undecided "major premeditated felonies" while off-duty and off-base, they would have been subjected to an undecided procedures laid out by a joint U.S.-Iraq committee if the U.S. certified the forces were off-duty.
Iraqs Government, Not Obama, Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence
http://world.time.com/2011/10/21/iraq-not-obama-called-time-on-the-u-s-troop-presence/#ixzz2TajMCZIa
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their promises or excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]
marmar
(77,052 posts)G_j
(40,366 posts)and courageous investigative reporter, and one of the best.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)When the first order of business is to push a ridiculous RW and -- in my humble O -- racist canard giving W credit for one of Obama's signature accomplishments, I'd say we're dealing with a distinctly untrustworthy truth-teller.
TransitJohn
(6,932 posts)Here's a hint: If leftists are criticizing POTUS, it's because POTUS is behaving right wing.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)long before Jacko every latched onto it. It's their way of saying "this isn't really happening."
G_j
(40,366 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)joelz
(185 posts)long but well worth the time to read,you guy have a great national treasure in Jeremy Scahill real journalism is so rare now days.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)KG
(28,751 posts)Solly Mack
(90,758 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)It is an important and sobering book.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)TakeALeftTurn
(316 posts)Extracts :-
Citing a page at US Central Commands (CENTCOM) website, they highlight the areas of responsibility publicly listed:
The US Central Command (CENTCOM) is active in 20 countries across the Middle Eastern region, and is actively ramping-up military training, counterterrorism programs, logistical support, and funding to the military in various nations. At this point, the US has some kind of military presence in Afghanistan, Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, U.A.E., Uzbekistan, and Yemen.
US Africa Command (AFRICOM), according to the paper, supports military-to-military relationships with 54 African nations.
[Gosztola points out that the U.S. military is also conducting operations of one kind or another in Syrian, Jordan, South Sudan, Kosovo, Libya, Yemen, the Congo, Uganda, Mali, Niger and other countries.]
Altogether, that makes 74 nations where the US is fighting or helping some force in some proxy struggle that has been deemed beneficial by the nations masters of war.
.....
There are legal restrictions on what the CIA can do in terms of covert operations. There has to be a finding, the president has to notify at least the Gang of Eight [leaders of the intelligence oversight committees] in Congress. JSOC doesnt have to do any of that. There is very little accountability for their actions. Whats weird is that many in congress whod be very sensitive to CIA operations almost treat JSOC as an entity that doesnt have to submit to oversight.
TakeALeftTurn
(316 posts)Last October, senior Obama officials anonymously unveiled to the Washington Post their newly minted "disposition matrix", a complex computer system that will be used to determine how a terrorist suspect will be "disposed of": indefinite detention, prosecution in a real court, assassination-by-CIA-drones, etc. Their rationale for why this was needed now, a full 12 years after the 9/11 attack:
Among senior Obama administration officials, there is a broad consensus that such operations are likely to be extended at least another decade. Given the way al-Qaida continues to metastasize, some officials said no clear end is in sight. . . . That timeline suggests that the United States has reached only the midpoint of what was once known as the global war on terrorism."
On Thursday, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing on whether the statutory basis for this "war" - the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) - should be revised (meaning: expanded). This is how Wired's Spencer Ackerman (soon to be the Guardian US's national security editor) described the most significant exchange:
"Asked at a Senate hearing today how long the war on terrorism will last, Michael Sheehan, the assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict, answered, 'At least 10 to 20 years.' . . . A spokeswoman, Army Col. Anne Edgecomb, clarified that Sheehan meant the conflict is likely to last 10 to 20 more years from today - atop the 12 years that the conflict has already lasted. Welcome to America's Thirty Years War."
Continued at:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/17/endless-war-on-terror-obama
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)socialsecurityisAAA
(191 posts)If you are pro-war or pro-invasion you are part of the war religion. It's not built on reasoning, historical facts or an honest motivation. People support it because they feel more comfortable living in a comfortable lie than they would if they were forced to take responsibility for the MILLIONS murdered so that America can maintain global dominance. People ignorantly say and most likely believe we are spreading democracy(which is rarely true, and when it is, is of little practical consequence considering human rights abuses continue or worsen) It is no different whatsoever than believing nations should be invaded simply to convert them, not different one bit. Our dollars are used to kill, torture and deprive under both Republican and Democratic candidates.
Meanwhile few see the facts as they stand, and are often chastised for voicing their views.. Few understand war is a result of a HUGE arms/energy lobby and the power they wield combined with an ignorant, arrogant greedy legislature(with few exceptions Bernie Sanders, Alan Greyson and on the war issue Ron Paul)
I find it baffling that the same people who rightly want to restrict the ownership and use of dangerous deadly weapons also avidly support war, as long as a democrat is at the helm. ABSOLUTELY BAFFLING. It's no different than a conservative pro-lifer supporting the death penalty, 100% hypocritical!