SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
The War on Terror's Grand Snafu
May 02, 2007
The story was so compelling, I sat in the driveway listening to it, hand hovering over the ignition, for almost half an hour. It turned out to be an update of This American Life's Peabody-Award-winning 2006 piece "Habeas Schmabeas". The goofy title completely undersells this blockbuster investigation of our government's horrifying treatment of Guantanamo detainees). What was particularly striking about the piece--beyond the bone-chilling description of an environment so bleak it is designed to provoke suicidal despair--was the complete incompetence of the U.S. government in apprehending people with no connection whatsoever to terrorist groups. Despite President Bush's repeated assertions that Guantanamo detainees are enemy combatants "swept up by the U.S. military on the fields of battle," only about 5 percent turn out to fit that description. Among the other 90 percent are people like Badr Zaman Badr and his brother, the Pakistani satirists interviewed on the show, who wrote an Onion-like spoof of the wrong government official and found themselves turned over to U.S. custody for supposed ties to Al Qaeda. Bounty hunters in Afghanistan have turned in their neighbors under similarly suspicious circumstances. And then there are the soft-spoken Chinese dissidents, whose only political crime appears to have been opposing the Communist government of China.
The conservative U.S. attorney who finally won the release of the Chinese detainees has a theory that part of what's driving Administration secrecy at Guantanamo is sheer embarrassment at the nonthreatening nature of its detainees there. Not only are these people tortured, refused access to the evidence against them, and hidden from the world indefinitely at our government's whim, many of them also appear to be totally unconnected to terrorism or any plot against the United States or its citizens. Worse still, the fact that they are giving up so little information of any use has, perversely, prompted our government to use harsher and harsher interrogation techniques against its schlub captives.
In addition to being a perversion of American and international norms of justice, It is a SNAFU of breathtaking proportions.
And here's another one: The State Department released a report this week that shows how the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is increasing the number of terrorist attacks globally. In other words, the War on Terror's main effect has been to generate more terror.
According to the Bush Administration's own State Department analysts, "International intervention in Iraq has brought measurable benefits. It has removed an abusive totalitarian regime with a history of sponsoring and supporting regional terrorism and has allowed a new democratic political process to emerge. It also, however, has been used by terrorists as a rallying cry for radicalization and extremist activity that has contributed to instability in neighboring countries."
Leaving aside the happy talk about a functioning government, let alone anything that could be called a "democratic political process" in Iraq, the report finds that terrorist attacks against noncombatants have nearly doubled there since 2005.
"Afghanistan remains threatened by Taliban insurgents and religious extremists," the report notes--not to mention "the surge in narcotics cultivation."
The most notable finding, pointed out by The New York Times today, is that the two countries with the largest U.S. troop presence have seen the biggest jump in terrorism. "The numbers underscore the ineffectiveness of battling terrorism with conventional military means," the Times quotes a Naval Postgraduate School terrorism expert, John Arquilla, as saying.
They also underscore the tragic waste of lives by this Administration, which invokes fear of terrorism to justify policies that damage our conscience and make us less safe.
Ruth Conniff covers national politics for The Progressive and is a voice of The Progressive on many TV and radio programs.
(c) 2007 The Progressive
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 The Progressive
Ruth Conniff
Ruth Conniff is Editor-in-chief of the Wisconsin Examiner. She formerly served as Editor-in-chief of The Progressive Magazine, and opened the Progressive's office in Washington, DC, during the Clinton Administration, where she made her debut as a political pundit on CNN's Capital Gang Sunday and Fox News. Se moved to Oaxaca, Mexico, for a year in 2017, where she covered U.S./Mexico relations, the migrant caravan, and Mexico's efforts to grapple with Donald Trump.
The story was so compelling, I sat in the driveway listening to it, hand hovering over the ignition, for almost half an hour. It turned out to be an update of This American Life's Peabody-Award-winning 2006 piece "Habeas Schmabeas". The goofy title completely undersells this blockbuster investigation of our government's horrifying treatment of Guantanamo detainees). What was particularly striking about the piece--beyond the bone-chilling description of an environment so bleak it is designed to provoke suicidal despair--was the complete incompetence of the U.S. government in apprehending people with no connection whatsoever to terrorist groups. Despite President Bush's repeated assertions that Guantanamo detainees are enemy combatants "swept up by the U.S. military on the fields of battle," only about 5 percent turn out to fit that description. Among the other 90 percent are people like Badr Zaman Badr and his brother, the Pakistani satirists interviewed on the show, who wrote an Onion-like spoof of the wrong government official and found themselves turned over to U.S. custody for supposed ties to Al Qaeda. Bounty hunters in Afghanistan have turned in their neighbors under similarly suspicious circumstances. And then there are the soft-spoken Chinese dissidents, whose only political crime appears to have been opposing the Communist government of China.
The conservative U.S. attorney who finally won the release of the Chinese detainees has a theory that part of what's driving Administration secrecy at Guantanamo is sheer embarrassment at the nonthreatening nature of its detainees there. Not only are these people tortured, refused access to the evidence against them, and hidden from the world indefinitely at our government's whim, many of them also appear to be totally unconnected to terrorism or any plot against the United States or its citizens. Worse still, the fact that they are giving up so little information of any use has, perversely, prompted our government to use harsher and harsher interrogation techniques against its schlub captives.
In addition to being a perversion of American and international norms of justice, It is a SNAFU of breathtaking proportions.
And here's another one: The State Department released a report this week that shows how the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is increasing the number of terrorist attacks globally. In other words, the War on Terror's main effect has been to generate more terror.
According to the Bush Administration's own State Department analysts, "International intervention in Iraq has brought measurable benefits. It has removed an abusive totalitarian regime with a history of sponsoring and supporting regional terrorism and has allowed a new democratic political process to emerge. It also, however, has been used by terrorists as a rallying cry for radicalization and extremist activity that has contributed to instability in neighboring countries."
Leaving aside the happy talk about a functioning government, let alone anything that could be called a "democratic political process" in Iraq, the report finds that terrorist attacks against noncombatants have nearly doubled there since 2005.
"Afghanistan remains threatened by Taliban insurgents and religious extremists," the report notes--not to mention "the surge in narcotics cultivation."
The most notable finding, pointed out by The New York Times today, is that the two countries with the largest U.S. troop presence have seen the biggest jump in terrorism. "The numbers underscore the ineffectiveness of battling terrorism with conventional military means," the Times quotes a Naval Postgraduate School terrorism expert, John Arquilla, as saying.
They also underscore the tragic waste of lives by this Administration, which invokes fear of terrorism to justify policies that damage our conscience and make us less safe.
Ruth Conniff covers national politics for The Progressive and is a voice of The Progressive on many TV and radio programs.
(c) 2007 The Progressive
Ruth Conniff
Ruth Conniff is Editor-in-chief of the Wisconsin Examiner. She formerly served as Editor-in-chief of The Progressive Magazine, and opened the Progressive's office in Washington, DC, during the Clinton Administration, where she made her debut as a political pundit on CNN's Capital Gang Sunday and Fox News. Se moved to Oaxaca, Mexico, for a year in 2017, where she covered U.S./Mexico relations, the migrant caravan, and Mexico's efforts to grapple with Donald Trump.
The story was so compelling, I sat in the driveway listening to it, hand hovering over the ignition, for almost half an hour. It turned out to be an update of This American Life's Peabody-Award-winning 2006 piece "Habeas Schmabeas". The goofy title completely undersells this blockbuster investigation of our government's horrifying treatment of Guantanamo detainees). What was particularly striking about the piece--beyond the bone-chilling description of an environment so bleak it is designed to provoke suicidal despair--was the complete incompetence of the U.S. government in apprehending people with no connection whatsoever to terrorist groups. Despite President Bush's repeated assertions that Guantanamo detainees are enemy combatants "swept up by the U.S. military on the fields of battle," only about 5 percent turn out to fit that description. Among the other 90 percent are people like Badr Zaman Badr and his brother, the Pakistani satirists interviewed on the show, who wrote an Onion-like spoof of the wrong government official and found themselves turned over to U.S. custody for supposed ties to Al Qaeda. Bounty hunters in Afghanistan have turned in their neighbors under similarly suspicious circumstances. And then there are the soft-spoken Chinese dissidents, whose only political crime appears to have been opposing the Communist government of China.
The conservative U.S. attorney who finally won the release of the Chinese detainees has a theory that part of what's driving Administration secrecy at Guantanamo is sheer embarrassment at the nonthreatening nature of its detainees there. Not only are these people tortured, refused access to the evidence against them, and hidden from the world indefinitely at our government's whim, many of them also appear to be totally unconnected to terrorism or any plot against the United States or its citizens. Worse still, the fact that they are giving up so little information of any use has, perversely, prompted our government to use harsher and harsher interrogation techniques against its schlub captives.
In addition to being a perversion of American and international norms of justice, It is a SNAFU of breathtaking proportions.
And here's another one: The State Department released a report this week that shows how the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is increasing the number of terrorist attacks globally. In other words, the War on Terror's main effect has been to generate more terror.
According to the Bush Administration's own State Department analysts, "International intervention in Iraq has brought measurable benefits. It has removed an abusive totalitarian regime with a history of sponsoring and supporting regional terrorism and has allowed a new democratic political process to emerge. It also, however, has been used by terrorists as a rallying cry for radicalization and extremist activity that has contributed to instability in neighboring countries."
Leaving aside the happy talk about a functioning government, let alone anything that could be called a "democratic political process" in Iraq, the report finds that terrorist attacks against noncombatants have nearly doubled there since 2005.
"Afghanistan remains threatened by Taliban insurgents and religious extremists," the report notes--not to mention "the surge in narcotics cultivation."
The most notable finding, pointed out by The New York Times today, is that the two countries with the largest U.S. troop presence have seen the biggest jump in terrorism. "The numbers underscore the ineffectiveness of battling terrorism with conventional military means," the Times quotes a Naval Postgraduate School terrorism expert, John Arquilla, as saying.
They also underscore the tragic waste of lives by this Administration, which invokes fear of terrorism to justify policies that damage our conscience and make us less safe.
Ruth Conniff covers national politics for The Progressive and is a voice of The Progressive on many TV and radio programs.
(c) 2007 The Progressive
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.