Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- Profiting From Human Misery
- Who Can Own Life? Farmer vs. Monsanto Before US High Court
- With Little More Than a Note, Obama Deploys US Troops To Niger
- 5 Reasons Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is Bad for the Economy
- Decolonize the Consumerist Wasteland: Re-imagining a World Beyond Capitalism and Communism
- Who Can Own Life? Farmer vs. Monsanto Before US High Court
- Profiting From Human Misery
- Decolonize the Consumerist Wasteland: Re-imagining a World Beyond Capitalism and Communism
- Scale Implosion: After Ruining America, the Era of Giant Chain Stores Is Over
- 5 Reasons Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is Bad for the Economy
Popular content
Today's Top News
How Americans Are Propagandized About Afghanistan
On February 12 of this year, U.S. forces entered a village in the Paktia Province in Afghanistan and, after surrounding a home where a celebration of a new birth was taking place, shot dead two male civilians (government officials) who exited the house in order to inquire why they had been surrounded. The Pentagon then issued a statement claiming that (a) the dead were all "insurgents" or terrorists, (b) the bodies of three women had been found bound and gagged inside the home (including two pregnant women, one a mother of 10 children and the other a mother of six children, and a teenage girl), and (c) suggested that the women had already been killed by the time the U.S. had arrived, likely the victim of "honor killings" by the Taliban militants killed in the attack.
Although numerous witnesses on the scene as well as local investigators vehemently disputed the Pentagon's version, and insisted that all of the dead (including the women) were civilians and were killed by U.S. forces, the American media largely adopted the Pentagon's version, often without any questions. But enough evidence has now emerged disproving those claims such that the Pentagon was forced yesterday to admit that their original version was totally false and that it was U.S. troops who killed the women:
After initially denying involvement or any cover-up in the deaths of three Afghan women during a badly bungled American Special Operations assault in February, the American-led military command in Kabul admitted late on Sunday that its forces had, in fact, killed the women during the nighttime raid.
One NATO official said that there was likely an effort to cover-up what happened by U.S. troops via evidence tampering on the scene (though other NATO officials deny this claim). The Times of London actually reported yesterday that, at least according to Afghan investigators, "US special forces soldiers dug bullets out of their victims' bodies in the bloody aftermath of a botched night raid, then washed the wounds with alcohol before lying to their superiors about what happened."
What is clear -- yet again -- is how completely misinformed and
propagandized Americans continue to be by the American media, which
constantly "reports" on crucial events in Afghanistan by doing nothing
more than mindlessly and unquestioningly passing along U.S. government
claims as though they are fact. Here, for instance, is how the Paktia
incident was "reported"
by CNN on February 12:
Note how the headline states as fact that the women were dead as the result of an "honor killing." The entire CNN article does nothing but repeat what an "unnamed senior military official said" about the incident, and it even helpfully explained:
An honor killing is a murder carried out by a family or community member against someone thought to have brought dishonor onto them.
The U.S. official said it isn't clear whether the dishonor in this case stemmed from accusations of acts such as adultery or even cooperating with NATO forces.
"It has the earmarks of a traditional honor killing," said the official, who added the Taliban could be responsible. . .
The operation unfolded when Afghan and international forces went to the compound, which was thought to be a site of militant activity. A firefight ensued and several insurgents died, several people left the compound, and eight others were detained.
Similarly, The New York Times, while noting that there were "varying accounts of what happened" among U.S. forces and Afghan police, also passed along the Pentagon's false version of events with no questioning. Here's the NYT's February 12 article in its entirety:
Several civilians were killed in Paktia Province on Friday when a joint Afghan-NATO force went to investigate a report of militant activity, but NATO and the Afghan police gave varying accounts of what happened. A NATO statement said the joint force went to a compound in the village of Khatabeh, in the Gardez district, where insurgents opened fire on them from a residential compound. Several insurgents were killed and a large number of men, women and children fled and were detained by the NATO force. Inside the compound, soldiers "found the bodies of three women who had been tied up, gagged and killed," the NATO statement said. The Paktia Province police chief, Aziz Ahmad Wardak, confirmed the episode but said the dead in the house were two men and three women, who he said were killed by Taliban militants. He said the killings took place while the residents were celebrating the birth of a baby.
CNN conveyed its version of events without the slightest contradiction or doubt, and the NYT simply ignored entirely the claims of the residents of the village -- notwithstanding the fact that serious conflicts about what actually took place were known from the very beginning. Consider, for instance, this February 12 article by Amir Shah of the Associated Press, who actually bothered to pick up a phone to determine if the Pentagon's claims were true before "reporting" them as fact; this is what Shah found:
However, relatives of the dead accused American forces of being responsible for the deaths of all five people when contacted by The Associated Press by phone.
A man who identified himself as Hamidullah said he had been in the home as some 20 people gathered to celebrate the birth of a son when a group of men he described as "U.S. special forces" surrounded the compound.
When one man came out into the courtyard to ask why, Hamidullah said he watched U.S. forces gun him down.
"Daoud was coming out of the house to ask what was going on. And then they shot him," he said.
Then they killed a second man, Hamidullah said. The rest of the group were forced out into the yard, made to kneel and had their hands bound behind their back, he said, breaking off crying without giving any further details.
A deputy provincial council member in Gardez, Shahyesta Jan Ahadi, said news of the operation has inflamed the local community that believes the Americans were responsible for the deaths.
"Last night, the Americans conducted an operation in a house and killed five innocent people, including three women. The people are so angry," he said.
The Pentagon's version of events was vehemently disputed from the start. But there was not a hint of any of that in the CNN or NYT "reporting," which simply adopted the press release claims of NATO forces. That Press Release, false from start to finish, claimed that "a combined force of Afghan and international troops last night found the bound and gagged bodies of two women and the bodies of two men during an operation in the province's Gardez district," and "members of the combined force found the bodies inside." Ironically, the Pentagon Press Release ended this way: "'ISAF continually works with our Afghan partners to fight criminals and terrorists who do not care about the life of civilians,' ISAF spokesman Canadian army Brig. Gen. Eric Tremblay said." On March 16 -- more than a month later -- the NYT ran a story detailing the gruesome claims of residents about what really happened; click that link for the horrific details and to get a sense for how false were the Pentagon and U.S. media's original claims about what took place.
Contrast the pure propaganda dissemination of the American media with the immediate reporting of the Pajhwok Afghan News, an independent news agency created in Afghanistan to enable war reporting by Afghans. Here is how they reported the Pakita incident from the beginning, on Febraury 12 (via NEXIS):
US Special Forces have shot dead a district intelligence chief along with four family members in the volatile southeastern province of Paktia, a senior police officer claimed on Friday. Brig. Gen. Ghulam Dastagir Rustamyar explained that Daud and his family were celebrating the birth of his son. But acting on a misleading tip-off, foreign troops raided the intelligence official's residence. . . . He said the dead included Daud, his brother Zahir, an employee of the attorney's office, and three women. . . .
But the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) claimed Afghan and international forces found the bound and gagged bodies of three women during the operation in Gardez late Thursday night. "The joint force went to a compound near the village of Khatabeh, after intelligence confirmed militant activity. Several insurgents engaged the joint force in a firefight and were killed," the ISAF press office in Kabul said.
As a result of the raid, the multinational force added, a large number of men, women, and children exited the compound. They were detained by the joint force.
When the troops entered the compound, according to the press release, they conducted a thorough search and found the bodies of three women who had been tied up, gagged and killed. "The bodies had been hidden in an adjacent room."
Note the crucial difference: the Afghan news service shaped its report based on the statements of actual witnesses on the ground and local investigators, while also including the Pentagon's version of events. Put another way, anyone reading about what happened from American news outlets would be completely misled and propagandized, while anyone reading the Pajhowk Afghan News would have been informed, because they treated official claims with skepticism rather than uncritical reverence.
* * * * *
All of this is a chronic problem, not an isolated one, with war reporting generally and events in Afghanistan specifically. Just consider what happened when the U.S. military was forced in 2008 to retract its claims about a brutal air raid in Azizabad. The Pentagon had vehemently denied the villagers' claim that close to 100 civilians had been killed and that no Taliban were in the vicinity: until a video emerged proving the villagers' claims were true and the Pentagon's false. Last week, TPM highlighted a recent, entirely overlooked statement from Gen. McChrystal, where he admitted, regarding U.S. killings of Afghans at check points: "to my knowledge, in the nine-plus months I've been here, not a single case where we have engaged in an escalation of force incident and hurt someone has it turned out that the vehicle had a suicide bomb or weapons in it and, in many cases, had families in it. . . . We've shot an amazing number of people and killed a number and, to my knowledge, none has proven to have been a real threat to the force." And as I documented before, the U.S. media constantly repeats false Pentagon claims about American air attacks around the world in order to create the false impression that Key Terrorists were killed while no civilians were.
At the Nieman Watchdog Foundation, Jeremy Starkey, the Afghanistan
war reporter for The Times of London, has a
crucial, must-read piece on all of this. Amazingly, his piece was
written three weeks ago, and recounted in
detail: (a) how clearly the U.S.-led forces had lied about what
happened in Paktia; and (b) the reasons why the U.S. media continuously
spews false government propaganda about the war. Starkey wrote under
this headline:
In this mid-March piece, Starkey explained how he had discovered that NATO's claims about the Haktia incident were false (he recounted his evidence in gruesome detail in the Times on March 13), and more importantly, highlighted why the U.S. media so frequently disseminates false NATO claims with no questioning:
The only way I found out NATO had lied -- deliberately or otherwise -- was because I went to the scene of the raid, in Paktia province, and spent three days interviewing the survivors. In Afghanistan that is quite unusual.
NATO is rarely called to account. Their version of events, usually originating from the soldiers involved, is rarely seriously challenged. . . .
It's not the first time I've found NATO lying, but this is perhaps the most harrowing instance, and every time I go through the same gamut of emotions. I am shocked and appalled that brave men in uniform misrepresent events. Then I feel naïve.
There are a handful of truly fearless reporters in Afghanistan constantly trying to break the military's monopoly on access to the front. But far too many of our colleagues accept the spin-laden press releases churned out of the Kabul headquarters. Suicide bombers are "cowards," NATO attacks on civilians are "tragic accidents," intelligence is foolproof and only militants get arrested.
Starkey describes the some of the understandable reasons so many reporters do nothing more than regurgitate officials claims: resource constraints, organizations limits, dangers of traveling around, and the "embed culture." But he also recounts how NATO tries to intimidate, censor and punish any reporters like him who report adversely on official claims. Illustratively, in response to Starkey's March 13 article detailing what really happened at Paktia and the cover-up that ensued, NATO issued a formal statement naming him and insisting that this article was "categorically false." As recently as mid-March, NATO was still claiming -- falsely -- that the women in Paktia were killed prior to the arrival of American troops.
There are some very courageous and intrepid reporters in Afghanistan, including some who work for American media outlets. It was, for instance, a superb and brave investigative report by the NYT's Carlotta Gall in Afghanistan that uncovered what really happened in that air attack Azizabad and documented the Pentagon's false claims. But far more often, Americans are completely misled about events in Afghanistan by the combination of false official claims and mindless stenographic American "journalism." And no matter how many times this process is exposed -- from Jessica Lynch's heroic firefight to Pat Tillman's death by Al Qeada -- this propaganda process never diminishes at all.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



150 Comments so far
Show AllI do it to keep the asteroids away......:) and see it works!!
SOCRATES would wrap all the arguments in one phrase, which he said:
"ALL FOREIGN WARS are for Rape and Pillage, and Theft of the Resources of other People.."
another version goes:
"ALL FOREIGN Wars are waged for Money and Power".
my response to the idea that America is the world's Peacekeeper and MUST therefore continue to be militaristic, and thereby as the "superpower" give an example of "how to go" (which is clear in history's development as it stands - the "arms race") ...is that whatever the world IS - or WAS before america - and with america -
NO ONE authorised the USA , except itself by using its power to coerce for "authoriztion" (NATO, is an example, the attempt by Powell to convince the world of WMD's in IRAQ, the CIA undermining countries is another, the propaganda about endless "GLOBAL THREATS", etc..) , to POLICE the world.
America Policing the world and acting as the SHERIFF is like asking someone that really doesn't know or understand the different neighborhoods with their different mores , and then swashbuckles his way in everywhere , brandishing his pistols, and then expects that people will OBEY this OUTSIDER.
whatever difficulties there are ALREADY within territories - ONLY BECOMES WORSE with the addition of a NEW ELEMENT of POWER - the Sheriff - whose idea of "order" SIMPLY will NOT BE TOLERATED by the others in THEIR OWN NEIGHBORHOODS.
it is as simple as turning americans' OWN common attitude about foreigners coming to america - or countries :
"They are going to change our way of life and threat to our ways".......
but THAT is EXACTLY what the USA - acting as Sheriff has been doing across the globe.
to the RUSSIANS - america IS a threat to "our way of life".
to the CHINESE - america is a threat to their sovereignty and have HISTORY to PROVE IT through general smedley butler's OWN admission.
to the Vietnamese and southeast asians - it si AMERICA that threatened their way of life - heck it actually BOMBED them to kingdom come because they wouldn't ACCEPT america AS SHERIFF.
the point being:
America behaves like the world's Sheriff even if NO ONE Asked it to! and even the "asking" as america shows it is (japan "wants our protection, europe wants our protection, etc.-- and now perhaps, "AFRICA WANTS our protection with AFRICACOM")...
is a result of AMERICA's COERCING countries to "want" to be protected...as PART of ITS IMPERIAL design to have ITS fingers in every nook and cranny of the world to service ITS supernationalistic Capitalism.
THAT"s what it's about.
america "keeping the peace" is like a sheriff telling everyone to behave so that the SHERIFF's FRIENDS and CRONIES can control everyone.
how much more obvious can it really be?
but the world is NOT america - the world has cultures and civilizations far, far older than america. to THEM
big and powerful and wealthy and bristling with weapons as america is -- it is STILL just a JOHNNY COME LATELY in the story of civilizations...like an over-grown boy , grown big and tall and muscular beyond his years - but his HEAD does not understand his real place ...he IS A CHILD that can not control himself and should NOT be allowed to run around without SUPERVISION or checks because he is bound to topple tables, chairs, muddy the drinking water, and create plain chaos all around with HIS notions of "law and order" in his own make-believe "I am the Sheriff" bullying.
Veritas - you said that america became overtly militaristic due to the bad leadership of bush/cheney , neocons, etc...due to "we were attacked on 9/11"
well and good -- but that was itself just a consequence of america's playing the Sheriff in afghanistan DECADES ago - in an effort to "change" russia - and change the geopolitical realities to suit america's OWN "evil empire" as IT TURNS OUT has BEEN the case after all.
"they attacked us"......everyone in the world knows "they" did (or were allowed to to get justification to take off the gloves) - because it WAS the CIA that created the foundations for the enlargement of AL qaeda AND the taliban giving them succor (which is ALSO part of a very complex tradition of the "host retaining honor by protecting the guest...BUT preventing the guest from causing harm to the host" ).
consequence of america's acting as the sheriff of the world.
but even if it COULD or the results are "good"....the still more basic question is:
WHAT RIGHT does america have to ACT as sheriff of the world?
NONE whatsoever.
but more to the point in its behavior...that acting as sheriff is itself designed to SUIT america - at the expense of OTHERS.
and THOSE "others" DON'T LIKE IT one bit!
because america herself WOULDN"T like it if the shoe was on the other foot.
isn't THAT what americans have ALWAYS shouted about?
to "Defend america" from those that "want to change our way of life?"
SO --- what is america DOING elsewhere CHANGING other peoples' WAYS of life?
as Patrick Buchanan wisely asks:
"WE didn't like it when the USSR was in our neighborhood in cuba..........so.........what are WE doing in Russia's neighborhood?......we have threatened and acted against russia's sense of sovereignty and security around her own borders....doesn't Putin have a point?...we should get out of thsi business of empire and liquidate it...and get out of those lands, before they kick us out".
THAT can be applied to CHINA - a very jealous guard of her sovereignty, no matter what else china is like.
simply put - it is NOT AMERICA's BUSINESS to order or demand other countries to behave or be "democratic" or "open your markets" whether it is at the point of a gun or otherwise.
other countries are NOT america. the world is NOT america.
and it is not america's business to tell the world to behave the way america wants.
it has its own history of MISBEHAVING towards others...starting with the Native Indians.
for that ALONE - but more - america has NO MORAL authority whatsoever to put itself in that position. no country has.
but most certainly LEAST of all - the USA that can't even stand up to ITS own claims of democracy or BEHAVIOR that it orders others to follow.
RUSSIA or china do NOT pretend to be democracies....they adhere to what they ARE - authoritarian and with CLEAR limits to "personal liberty" ...that is how they evolved as cultures and it is THEIR destiny to find their own way.
it is NOT america's part to TELL THEM what to do...just as THEY don't order america to "become socialist or communist or learn confucius or lenin".
I believe you are wrong in every one of your assertions. Cool!
"You have no more idea if that happened than I do."
WTF are you talking about? Did you not read the other articles? Are we simply to say, 'well, who knows what to believe, blah, blah, blah???'
A complete fool can see what has happened here, based on real reporting on the ground. To babble on otherwise is total, dishonest, concern-trolling crap, and you know it.
lucky
You really believe because you read some articles here and elsewhere you know the truth?
Based on real reporting on the ground? Real reporting? Like that that told me all thiose good things about GW that turned out to be BS? Or like the ones that told me that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?
To suggest that its difficult to take eye witness reports as gospel since they are usually unreliable, or to accept one reporters article because it confirms what you want to believe while rejecting another because they arent reliable because they don't say what you like? All this is babbling and if you don't jump out there and say YEAH George...Go, Tell em to "bring it on"! it's crap?
My point was simply don't believe everything youn hear on first report. If you don't like my point, fine, but frankly you can take your incivility somewhere else.
Sure - none of US really, really, really know the truth, right? - We might all be ants on mind-boggling drugs walking on one of a big collection of soap-bubbles floating over a meadow on a sunny day while birdbrained tripods forage below us waiting for us to pop our soap-bubble so we'll fall down right into their mouths. Right? I mean who can know, in the unfathomably big picture of the Universe? - That's just as likely as the US military killing women and babies deliberately, right? Because that would be a first, right? - Oops, wrong: There once was this place called My Lai...
Veritas 12:55 ------ I know your trying your best, but, the USA has kept the peace since WWII ? Please !
This could only be true if your definition of peace is no world war.
Are 4.5 million dead SE Asians, 1 million Iraqi's,1 million Indonesians, 100,000's Latin Americans, Afghans, Pakistanis ad nauseum is Peace? Support for every zionist crime.
Even now one could argue that this crusade against Muslims is a world war.
I guess those GI driving around in a pickup with Iraq teens heads deserve our support.
"This could only be true if your definition of peace is no world war"
That is exactly what I mean.
Come on Glenn, you aren't obtuse.
Even if the USA has prevented a nuclear holocaust, other than Japan, your commendation is like commending a serial rapist and batterer for not murdering anyone.
And please do not even think of claiming that the USA needed to murder 6 or 7 million people it has murdered, in order to prevent a nuclear holocaust.
>>Europe hasn't spent diddly on self defense because she hasn't had to, watch what happens when we do withdraw our forces
WRONG! You make things up. You do not even bother to Check the numbers.
France spends 65 BILLION a year on arms. That is more then Russia. The United Kingdom spends 65 BILLION a year on arms, that is more then Russia. Italy spends 40 billion a year on arms. Those three countries combined spend 170 BILLION a year on arms. That is 3 times MORE then Russia.
Japan spends 46 billion a year.
So how is this diddly squat? If you add the REST Of Europe in, outside the three I listed you are outpsending Russia by 10 to one and more and thats "diddly squat?
More importantly. Something which you have never been able to absorb into that head of yours.
Give me a list of Countries that are a THREAT TO ATTACK EUROPE.
Who is the USA defending Europe against? Forget this fiction of the Russian bear wanting to Gobble up all of Europe. People have long outgrown that fable. It was meant to scare Children. They have problmes as it is controlling their own territories which is why they gave UP so much of what was once under the USSR.
WHO IS A THREAT to attack Europe? Iran?
Poland? Nauru? Where is this enemy that will attack as soon as the USA pulls out?
The straight and honest truth is the USA spends 800 billion a year FOR NOTHING. There is no enemy now or in the forseeable future that is a threat to the USA or that is a threat To Europe.
The TRUTH is that your media and propaganda machine MANUFACTURED the threat posed by the old USSR and even admitted openly in testimony to Congress that they LIED as to the Military strength of the USSR to ensure more US MIlitary spending.
The TRUTH is the citizens of the USA have been suckered and have been suckers for the past 50 years and your claiming you are "defending the world" is just nonsense told by fools to fools so that they do not appear as fools.
Why on Earth should the rest of the World play the fool along with the USA?
including in your disagreements on details and maybe even your individual bases for your views -- I MUST commend both GWnorth and Veritas for a thoroughly bracing and refreshing exchange we can all learn from. Thank you, guys.
my small input is this:
as far as I know, it was an "inner circle" person from the nixon administration ( i believe, from his own advisers ) that said something like this:
"our line about Russia and the Communists threatening us and the world was really for AMERICAN PUBLIC consumption...it was always an exaggeration".
the classic "gremlin in your closet" ploy and americans swallowed it all, hook, bait and sinker.
one can say - it really began even as the second world war was winding down...faced with the prospect of the USA being the sole superpower that was UNSCATHED in large part in its home territory ...while all the others were ruined for their geographic, physical proximity to the war in BOTH the pacific and atlantic theatres..and therefore poised to become the new global empire - complete with its Dollar Hegemony taking over from the British Empire's pound sterling to control and shape global imperial finance (such as "the USA's advantage is in the ability to PRINT MONEY at will to service ITS own debt" : "we print the dollars ...and it's YOUR problem" , as a high US official said in the 1970's ) ...
but even THAT was just a continuation and expansion of US imperial designs which REQUIRED a continuing array of "threats" to justify its existence and expansion.
first : the Native Indians were a "threat"...they had to be "exterminated" (thomas jefferson's words)
then the spaniards, then the french, then the british themselves, then the "negros", then the negroes in haiti, then the latin americans, then the asians, then the communists, then hitler, then the arabs, then the persians, then the afghanis, then the vietnamese, then cuba and castro, then allende, etc...
and the rest - we already know the changing rationales...but ALWAYS, ALWAYS to serve EMPIRE.
"SHOULD THIS NATION FALL....it will not be from foreign threats, real or imagined; it will be because the people are corrupt".....BENJAMIN FRANKLIN.
Study up on the difference between "then" and "than." It's a particularly annoying and recurrent misunderstanding in here.
Yes just like arguement. Man does that get folk annoyed.
It does not take much to set you off does it? This is akin to the people worried about what Tiger Woods is doing rather than what their own Government is up to.
Thank you, Glen Greenwald! This is an excellent piece of investigative journalism. I will share this article with all of my dear friends who still don't believe that gov't propaganda floods the US media system on a daily basis.
The New York Times is currently running an annoying commercial where it is stated, "The best journalists in the world work for the times and there's no disputing that". I'll dispute that. When two of your headliners are Thomas Friedman and David Brooks, two no-talent gasbags who never met a war they didnt't like, you've got some 'splaining to do.
I second that emotion.
Greenwald is spot-on with this article.
Another false perception was this myth that Marja was a city, an urban area. At least in the NY Times on Sunday, they now referred to it as an "80 square mile area that is a patchwork of lush farmland and small bazaars and villages" I saw one set of photos on the Washington post site that captioned one as "downtown Marja"
Take a trip on Google Earth and try to find Marja.
Once again Greenwald is challenging Americans to do something about their sorry press sector. What if anything is happening on that front? Is the "super rich" going to save you or will you have donations based web papers, taking over from the NYT?
If Helen Thomas is to be believed, you are sleepwalking into another war. Nothing has changed in the official press since the Iraq invasion. So it is hard to be optimistic.
Which war does Helen consider "other"? I've run out of fingers and toes and I'm not done counting.
All governments lie and much of the world's media is nothing but propaganda but in most democracies a larger portion of the population is better informed than even the best informed americans. You also cannot ignore the blind support for so many corrupt wars that the United States has started without provocation. Americans love war and violence more than most people on earth and that is why the Empire keeps rolling on unimpeded.
Sioux Rose
THALID: They are TAUGHT from the cradle to the grave to love war. This is not a naturally occuring phenomenon!
American military and American media are all cowards and deserve cowards deaths. I have no pity for American soldiers who murder and their deaths mean nothing to me.
The only way that America will leave Afghanistan if significant numbers of Americans die.
The Americans are the bad guys here and the rest of the world knows it.
How Americans Are Propagandized About Afghanistan
Some Americans don't believe Uncle Sam's shit . . . or anything else the government says.
I believe you Mordechai ....
not only because there is evidence, even HERE and in other ways that americans have shown how their conscience as human beings are truly horrified about what is happening and has been promoted and in the culture even acceded to by OTHER americans as the "norm" and "truth".
but, at least in MY personal experience outside of forums - such as these....
in person to person encounters, whether acquaintance, in passing, overhearing, sensing, direct discussions....
I am very disappointed NOT to have found that to be the case...or so rarely...and not even memorable to convince me that there are MORe americans who detest such horrid things than the other way around.
it actually has made me VERY frightened that this is more the "norm" than I HOPED would otherwise be.
i am beginning to be convinced that people like yourselves here - thoughtful, even with our differences around here....ARE in the MINORITY in america...and that the MAJORITY . perhaps even a LARGE majority is either in the "camp" of being in support of such things if it came down to final Moral and ethical choices - or passively supportive and just can not be bothered by THOUGHT and consideration - or are willfully ignorant or trying to cocoon themselves from what they SENSE to be TRUE : that the policies are NOT GOOD - they are in many ways - in fact, EVIL.
Well, what a surprise that the armed forces and the media lie about wars that are based on lies upon lies, from WMD to the mother of all lies: the official narrative of 9/11, the sole justification used for the oil/pipeline war in Afghanistan.
I appreciate Greenwald's tireless attempts to strip away the lies, but he has a long way to go. If and when people like Greenwald (who has already tackled the lies swirling around the anthrax case) and Scahill, both of whom I greatly admire, finally get to the heart of the matter, perhaps the lid will come off at last.
Here's hoping.
Greenwald and Scahill have deliberately cordoned off topics for themselves that are 'safe.' Meanwhile, others are doing the heavy lifting on investigating 9/11. It is being covered elsewhere, but not here on Common Dreams. In a way, the lid has come off for anyone with curiosity. Most people don't have the time or inclination to do the research and, at the end of the day, it is research that takes on into dark corners and fewer people who care to know, or have the time do research. We've seen a breakdown of 'resistance' and 'activism' into several sectors (or information ghettos?). Anti-war left, Ant-war libertarian, general left-wing media (like this site), 911-related news and information (911blogger.com for example), peak oil (The Oil Drum is popular), and so on. Sometimes we see a little crossover from one site to another, but usually it is remarkably segregated news. This is an issue that deserves an article itself. For example, I discovered that there is a conference on "Deep Politics" in Santa Cruz with Cynthia McKinney, David Ray Griffin, Michael Parenti, Peter Dale Scott, and Peter Phillips May 14 to 16. But it can't be mentioned here--it's too controversial and deals with taboo topics.
I guess what I meant was that if a few more of these investigative journalists, such as Greenwald and Scahill, violated the "taboo" of 9/11, then the lid would come off FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC. I am well aware that a great deal of serious work has been done on the 9/11 issue, and that is why I would like to see the likes of Greenwald and Scahill take the plunge. For those with eyes to see, the material is all there, and it is very damning. But the pressure has to be maintained on these people. The very fact that the last Hedges piece posted on CD quoted Cynthia McKinney at considerable length seemed to me a positive sign that Chris might be finally getting the picture. We'll have to wait and see. As it is, polls show that about 1/3 of the U.S. population believes that there was at least some involvement by the government in the events of 9/11. That's far too big a percentage for the liberal "progressives" to keep ignoring.
I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment of the taboo on September 11, 2001.
The most obvious 'not able to talk about that' point is the acceleration of matter due to gravity 32.174 ft/s2
What does that mean for the Towers going down? Here are the speeds at the end of each second starting from 0 to 15 of a body at rest, 32.174, 64.348, 96.522, 128.696
160.87, 193.044, 225.218, 257.392, 289.566, 321.74, 353.914, 386.088, 418.262, 450.436, 482.61
The Height of 1 WTC: 1,727 ft (526.3 m)
The math has been done and the towers fell very closely to that like a body in free fall due to the force of gravity, the towers fell in approximately 16.5 seconds. Pancaking, (deck 87 caves in on deck 86 which causes deck 85 to cave in on deck 84, etc) would have taken many, many second longer
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/freefall.html
The topic of the downward acceleration of the buildings at the World Trade Centre has been frequently discussed. The discussion is usually brief and combined with other lines of evidence for explosive demolition and its significance is thereby obscured. Acceleration is an important topic because it is based on evidence readily available to all, namely videos, and also because the calculations involved
are not complex and can easily be verified by the reader. The conclusion reached that explosives were used in the demolition of these buildings is therefore not only compelling but readily accessible.
http://911research.wtc7.net/papers/legge/AccelerationCloseToG15.pdf
Cant you guys give it a rest for one freaking minute? Never mind that you are so far off the topic here that you cannot even see it. It matters not what you believe about that day, what matters is your hijacking of threads to push your beliefs.
A fanatic is someone who cannot change his mind and will not change the subject.
Screw the "taboos". You could at least provide a link. I assume you're refering to http://understandingdeeppolitics.org/
There is so much inertia keeping us in Afghanistan: First, the president's misreading of history; second, the Republican Party's fondness for all war; third, a declined media that can only deal with trivial subjects and never a big one.
Even Mr. Obama's worst enemies support him on the war. What therefore is the chance that he will ever change his mind? If the philosopher/historian in him was ascendant, he would do the U-turn in a minute. Sadly, he appears a mere lawyer/politician.
Behind him is the American public so ready like him to debate the fine points of anything but never an overall premise.
Three truths have emerged recently for people who didn't know them already: 1) We always kill the wrong people-- McChrystal, 2) We are invaders, not saviors of Afghanistan-- Karzai, 3) Our rationale for conducting this war constantly shifts, indicating that we don't really know what we're doing.
You know the reasonable conclusion from these facts, dear reader, maybe in spite of yourself, believe I.
It comes in three words. The first is "Get" and the third is "now."
Let me add my vote for "out"
Not just on war but getting people to peacefully withdraw from jobs tied to the MIC. It may sound like it's an impossible task at first but think of this. It is best to desert an uncorrectable ship than it is to try to correct it.
To hear the government tell it--we can't leave. We also can't stay. My advice--don't listen to the government.
Oil and gas routes brought us there; also a need for a Christian military in a Muslim region.
Get out now--we are losing much more that we can possibly get from being in Afghanistan. I'm sure we will be still get our oil and gas and, maybe, with some effort from these two religions, we can learn to live and let live.
dr wu
"Get out now--we are losing much more that we can possibly get from being in Afghanistan. I'm sure we will be still get our oil and gas and, maybe, with some effort from these two religions, we can learn to live and let live."
Intelligent advise.
Glenn, would you please run for POTUS against Obama in 2012??
The planet needs a guy like Glenn Greenwald to be the leader of the "free" world.
We need some serious truth telling and you are the man to do it.
I am serious as a heart attack.
Glenn, would you please run for POTUS against Obama in 2012??
The planet needs a guy like Glenn Greenwald to be the leader of the "free" world.
We need some serious truth telling and you are the man to do it.
I am serious as a heart attack.
I think Glenn would make a better Chief Justice than President.
Remember, you-all ye olde anti-Vietnam war protesters, when we murdered Vietnamese, they all magically became "Vietcong?" ameerican imperial has been repeating itself since 1898, when we slaughtered some two hundred thousand Filipinos who did not cotton up to being subjects of a US colonial occupation. Just do a search on "US imperialism" on the internet and learn a little truth about the vile ameerican history of corporate interference in the third world.
The fall of the fascist/ imperialist amerikan is long overdue.... World Peace is then possible !
The reference to Vietnam is correct. There were any number of corresponding incidents involving civilians, falsely portrayed by military spokespersons and dutifully reported as Vietcong atrocities in the US press. This is why portions of the war resisitance in the US turned against returning soldiers - something that these days has been used by the right as a demonstration of the perfidy of the anti-war movement in those times, but was really a lucid response to murderous mendacity.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Who did you vote for that made you sin free?
You sound like you are in Hell.
I'm as aghast as Greenwald and all the other commenters on this post at the "propaganda" that comes through not just the obvious media like Fox News but from our "all the news that's to print (air)" agencies like NYT or CNN or BBC.
But how many of us (honestly) seek out "authentic journalism" like the reporting under that title of the Narco News network led by Al Giordana for reporting on the realities of Latin American politics? And I, for one, (mea culpa) had never heard of the corresponding Pajhwok Afghan News agency quoted by Greenwald in this article.
So rather than just cursing the darkness of the overall pall of opacity cast over our information about the world around us by the MSN, let us continue to celebrate those like Greenwald who light candles of illumination in bringing forth the lumina to be found in authentic journalism.
the world is in the hands of international criminals...is this news?
these criminals hold and wield power via national governments, religions, banks and schools, etc...is this news?
they use 'their' nations' young men and women as their armed 'gangs', and national weapons as their own...is this news?
they lie about their activities via the media...is this news?
no, none of this is news...and there is only one topic worthy of pursuit...
what are we going to do about it?
stop it all!
Global Start Date: Septmeber 22, 2012...unanimous, global rejection of the modern world...local, acoustic and agrarian living...no more work, no more school...no more income or taxes...just you and your neighbors, and the resources available...
Let's get those gardens growing!
It is news to 95% of Americans.
How about praying FROM THE HEART to the Lord of the Universe—the Lord of Peace, Love, Truth, (etc.), for FORGIVENESS AND FOR THE STRENGTH TO JOIN THE STRUGGLE TO CHANGE OUR ULTRA-DEMONIC WAYS?
I have a horrible feeling that any such effort would be nullified by the earnest congressional prayers of "representatives" beseeching the poor confused Lord of the Universe for exactly the opposite outcome.
Yes, that poor Lord of the Universe - turns out to be called "Our Collective Responsibility" a.k.a. "Sum of our attitudes".
I think the Lord of the Universe and his Commander in Chief, General Feeling, is very depressed these days with the behavior of US troops - particularly the military ones...