Abby Martin goes over some of the phrases and terms that are used by politicians in order to dehumanize victims of war and absolve top policy makers from responsibility.
Tag Archives | War On Terror
Accountability for those responsible for the post 9/11 US torture program is a very slow process, but a new federal trial is a major step forward.
Judge Gladys Kessler of the DC District Court is hearing a case brought by Guantanamo detainee Abu Wa’el Dhiab and his lawyers against the very brutal method of force feeding used on the hunger strikers. Mr. Dhiab has been on hunger strike for over six years and was cleared for release in 2009, but is still in Guantanamo.
The case is about the method itself. Riot squads violently “extract” the detainee from his cell, strap him in a chair with five-point restraints and insert the tube in especially painful ways. (This procedure was shown in Doctors of the Dark Side with a description by a lawyer who succeeded in getting a more humane force feeding method for his client in a 2008 case.)
Judge Kessler recently ruled that videotapes of the force feeding procedure must be made public.… Read the rest
No single review or interview can do justice to Pay Any Price: Greed, Power, and Endless War — the new book by James Risen that is the antithesis of what routinely passes for journalism about the “war on terror.” Instead of evasive tunnel vision, the book offers big-picture acuity: focusing on realities that are pervasive and vastly destructive.
Published this week, Pay Any Price throws down an urgent gauntlet. We should pick it up. After 13 years of militarized zealotry and fear-mongering in the name of fighting terrorism, the book — subtitled “Greed, Power, and Endless War” — zeros in on immense horrors being perpetrated in the name of national security.
As an investigative reporter for the New York Times, Risen has been battling dominant power structures for a long time. His new book is an instant landmark in the best of post-9/11 journalism. It’s also a wise response to repressive moves against him by the Bush and Obama administrations.… Read the rest
Aaron Dames writes for Divided Core.
Naturally the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine 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. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to 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 any country.
– Hermann Goering
The problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by skeptics or cynics whose horizons are limited by the obvious realities.… Read the rest
The long-awaited roll-out of Hillary, Inc. is underway. Big interviews with ABC and NPR were timed with the launch of her memoir “Hard Choices“. The full-on media blitz is likely to keep pretenders to the 2016 nomination throne only slightly less viable as challengers than Ned Stark’s disembodied head. But it also means more questions about her time at the State Department. Benghazi is numero uno on every Republican’s top ten list, but the question generating the most GOP buzz is her inability to name a “top accomplishment” from her time as America’s top diplomat.
That’s an easy one to answer. She weaponized it. From Newsvandal.com:
… Read the rest
On May 23, 2012, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went to the Special Operations Forces Industry Conference (SOFIC) trade show in Tampa, Florida to share her vision of “smart power” and to explain the State Department’s crucial role in extending the reach and efficacy of America’s growing “international counterterrorism network.”
First, there is such a thing as a “Special Operations Forces Industry Conference trade show.” Without some keen reporting by David Axe of Wired, that peculiar get-together might’ve flown completely under the radar—much like the shadowy “industry” it both supports and feeds off of like a sleek, camouflaged lamprey attached to a taxpayer-fattened shark.
The White House is “mulling over” whether or not to use a drone to knock off an “American al-Qaeda.” But nearly 13 years after 9/11 and after the oft-mentioned decimation of the original group, no one in the mainstream media seems to ask one simple question:
What exactly is al-Qaeda?
Is it a group of committed jihadists previously led by Osama bin Laden? Or is it a “brand?”
Is the enemy just the so-called “core” al-Qaeda, or is it now an amorphous conglomerate of affiliates, franchisees and enthusiasts?
If “core al-Qaeda” is, as Director of National Intelligence James Clapper just said in his most recent congressional testimony, those “remnants” of the original ideological core still in Pakistan and Afghanistan, by what criteria are other groups not self-identifying as “al-Qaeda” then deemed as “designated al-Qaeda”
Considering the President’s State of the Union anti-terrorist to-do list of Yemen, Somalia, Iraq and Mali, is al-Qaeda really “on the path to defeat?” Is it “resurgent?” Or is the to-do list just a broad wish list of militants and insurgents not really associated with “core” al-Qaeda?… Read the rest
(TSA) isn’t as effective at detecting suspicious characters as one might think. The Government Accounting Office (GAO) has reviewed the TSA’s Screening Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT) program was evaluated at being “the same or slightly better than chance.”
The SPOT program since 2007 cost $900 million. The TSA has failed to collect consistent data to prove the effectiveness of the behavioral detection program; worse yet, the SPOT program was initiated without any scientific validation. For reason, the GAO has recommended that Congress cut off funding to this program, something that the Department of Homeland Security disagrees with.
You think that’s bad? That’s only the tip of the damning iceberg.
Anti-TSA activist Johnathan Corbett, who filed a lawsuit against the agency on the faulty nature of their body scanners found a particularly revealing document that declares the probability of terrorists hijacking planes in the United States.
… Read the rest
Jonathan Corbett, a long-time vocal critic of TSA body scanners, has been engaged in a lawsuit against the government concerning the constitutionality of those scanners.
Well, I know this is old news, but it’s heartening to see more and more professionals addressing the issue. In this case, The Institute on Medicine as a Profession. If you can stand a deeper look at the topic you might be interested in our documentary “Doctors of the Dark Side“. Trailer below the cut.
… Read the rest
An independent panel of military, ethics, medical, public health, and legal experts today charged that U.S. military and intelligence agencies directed doctors and psychologists working in U.S. military detention centers to violate standard ethical principles and medical standards to avoid infliction of harm. The Task Force on Preserving Medical Professionalism in National Security Detention Centers (see attached) concludes that since September 11, 2001, the Department of Defense (DoD) and CIA improperly demanded that U.S. military and intelligence agency health professionals collaborate in intelligence gathering and security practices in a way that inflicted severe harm on detainees in U.S.
In response to 9/11, on September 20, 2001, then President George W. Bush delivered a speech in which he deflected and trivialized the reasons for the grievances that many around the globe have regarding U.S. foreign policy. In his address to a joint session of Congress and the nation, in his attempt to answer America’s questions as to “Why do they hate us?”, he stated:
“They hate what they see right here in this chamber: a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.”
Now that most of us are well aware that the situation is a lot more complicated than they hate us because of “our freedoms”, let’s hear what some of those reasons are.
Abby Martin looks back at the signing of the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) as the catalyst for America’s global War on Terror, and highlights US Rep. Barbara Lee as the lone voice who opposed the legislation following the 9/11 attacks.