227.5 - Heroics: Soldiers are not heroes

Heroics: Soldiers are not heroes

This show is on the week following Veterans Day, so this seemed the right time to include my annual Veterans Day commentary. I have done this either on my blog or here - or both - for this will make it seven years now.

I gave up sometime back on worrying about how it will be taken. When I first did it, I tried various ways to start, wanting to make sure that I said what I meant and only what I meant. But I came to accept that there is no way that will not be misunderstood, either accidentally or, by some, deliberately. So I gave up trying to do anything other than say it outright. I regard it as an at least useful if not necessary counterpoint to the annual hyped praise of all things veteran, which too easily slides over into praise of all things military.

The thing is, November 11 has become so well-known as Veterans' Day that not many people remember that it was originally called Armistice Day. It was intended to commemorate those who died in World War I by an observation of the end of the war, which ended, at least on the Western front, on "the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month." But after World War II, the US changed its day to Veterans' Day and over time it's become not a commemoration of those who have died in war and a call for peace but a celebration of anyone who's ever been in the military.

This actually originally arose, what originally prompted it the first time I did this, was that I was (and still am) deeply disturbed by the increasing tendency among "progressives" to adulate all things military, and particularly disturbed by the practice of referring to soldiers routinely as "our heroes" or some similar formulation.

The attitude still exists: Do a Google search on "soldiers our heroes" and you get something over 16 million hits. So let me be clear here: Soldiers are not "heroes." A "hero" is by definition someone who is in some way extraordinary, remarkable, worthy of emulation. It is at best a risky business to define someone as "extraordinary" simply by virtue of wearing a uniform - which is exactly what has happened: Instead of being, again, a commemoration of the dead and of peace, November 11 has become a celebration of all things military, rife with paeans to the "nobility of sacrifice" and to veterans as the "true patriots" - apparently the only true patriots, as they are given due unavailable to everyone else.

This is not only unfortunate, it is potentially dangerous as it makes it too easy to slip into the militaristic attitude that what soldiers do goes beyond "necessary evil" or just necessary, beyond even honorable, to admirable, to something to celebrate, an attitude that makes it all too easy to promote additional enlistments, additional weapons, and even additional wars.

A perhaps revealing example of that attitude came a couple of years ago during an interview with then-Senator and liberal hero of the month Jim Webb on "The Daily Show," the audience for which, both on-air and in-studio, has a well-known lefty tilt. Most of that interview was a discussion about Webb's bill to expand veteran educational benefits, under which, in return for three years in the military, soldiers would receive four years' tuition at their best state college plus the cost of books, plus a monthly stipend. At one point, when Webb said that the least we can do for our soldiers is give them the chance for "a first-class future," the audience burst into loud applause.

And I thought then, as I have since, would there be any chance, any chance at all, of that same sort of reaction if the same proposal was made on behalf of any other group? What if someone proposed paying for four years of college for, say, firefighters? Or cops? How about volunteers in VISTA (now AmeriCorps VISTA)? Or the Peace Corps? The latter two provide some educational benefits for those who put in their time, but nothing vaguely approaching four fully-paid years at their best state college.

What about publicly-funded continuing education for doctors and nurses? Such continuing education is not only a good idea for health care professionals, it's often a requirement for maintaining their licenses to practice. And certainly having doctors and nurses who are up to date on the best knowledge and practice is beneficial to the public. So why not have public financing of that continuing education?

And while it's true that the idea of tuition-free, taxpayer-supported public education up through four years of college for anyone who can show themselves capable of meeting the educational standards involved has entered the political arena, that doesn't change the fundamental argument here: Propose an educational plan for a "first-class future" for veterans, and everybody will cheer wildly while proposing it for others doesn't even chart - and proposing it for everyone gets mostly moans about "Gee, how can we afford it?"

So why only soldiers? What does it say about us that the idea of paying soldiers' way through college gets ovations while the idea of anyone else getting the same benefit gets at best quizzical stares if not overt sneering rejections?

What it says is that we regard the work of soldiering as inherently more important, inherently more deserving of praise and reward, than the work of others, no matter what contributions they make or have made to society. And it means we regard the lives of soldiers as inherently more valuable than the lives of the rest of us.

But if it was only things like veterans' benefits, it might not seem particularly important. I say that despite the fact that the amount of money involved in such benefits is not trivial, being something over $80 billion a year and the arguments for them often quite misleading: Many such benefits were instituted in the wake of World War II. The avowed purpose of those benefits was to make up for what those soldiers had lost in regard to their civilian careers as compared to those who had not been in the military. That is, they were to insure that soldiers did not wind up being penalized for having been soldiers. They were not intended to give soldiers a leg up over others (or "a first-class future") and they most definitely were not presented as being a reward for military service. But that's what they have become over the years and that's how we continue to treat them.

I also want to make abundantly clear in case it's not or is willfully ignored that what I'm questioning here is not the right of veterans to get any medical care, rehabilitation, and counseling they need as the result of being wounded either physically or psychologically and the military's practice of giving soldiers less-than-honorable discharges precisely to avoid providing them with benefits is morally reprehensible.

But, yes, veterans benefits are too generous to the extent that they become a reward for being in the military - such as, for example, veterans' preferences in civil service jobs are - and especially when they single out veterans for opportunities such as for higher education and housing that are becoming increasingly financially impossible for most of the rest of us.

Put another way, I do not object to or resent any veteran taking advantage of any benefits to which they are legally entitled: They are there to be used. If you're legally entitled to it, take it. But that is born of the general principle that I would advocate for the right of anyone to get any help which they truly need.

Put yet another way, I am opposed to soldiers getting benefits simply for having been soldiers when those benefits are not equally available to others with equal need and equal opportunity for personal advancement.

But even so, even again, if that's all there was to it, it still might not seem like a great big huge deal. But that's not all there is to it. The emotional embrace of soldiers as "our heroes," as some sort of disembodied ideal, has implications beyond the immediate ones, beyond questions of public support and access to programs and beyond as well the immediate experience of our recent and present wars. Because within that embrace, it becomes easy to absorb, absorb so deeply that one is unaware of it, the idea that a veteran's take on military matters - and by extension, all of foreign policy - is inherently more valuable than that of others not by virtue of knowledge or logic or informed comment but simply by virtue of being a veteran. We regarded it (correctly) as a scandal several years ago when media outlets used retired generals who were actually Pentagon-trained PR flacks as "experts" on military and foreign policy questions - but an overlooked point is that the reason retired generals were so prominent in that number was that their status as military people gave them added credibility in the eyes of many viewers and the ears of many listeners.

In our pursuit of "support the troops," we have fallen prey to that same attitude, one that regards the statements of war veterans as more valuable, more telling, than those of non-veterans. That is, we embrace the militarist, the Pentagon, view of world affairs simply because it is the Pentagon.

It even has become fairly common to hear dismissive references to those who "never saw combat." At first, that was a legitimate argument, because it was directed against those derided as chickenhawks, those rightwingers who were eager for fights, ready for wars, provided they did not have to take part in them. But increasingly it has been used as an all-purpose put-down, even against those on the left who have criticized soldiers - as, I imagine, it would be directed against me (a non-veteran and a Vietnam-era draft resister) were my voice loud enough to attract the attention.

Chelsea Manning

But the real danger is that as the attitude persists, it distorts our way of thinking, drops a magnet on our moral compass. I still recall with pain how during the Iraq war we dismissed, ignored, downplayed, the atrocities committed by US forces; how we refused to blame those who shot civilians even when the attacks were clearly acts of vengeance; how we downplayed the routine cruelties and closed our eyes to the evidence of war crimes; how we made excuses for those who shot the wounded or tortured prisoners; how even when an official Pentagon report casually mentioned how a US soldier summarily executed a wounded fighter and shot another wounded, unresisting fighter twice in the back, we paid little notice - and if we did, it was usually to brush off complaints with that all-purpose "you've never been in combat" defense. "These things happen in war," we said.

Yes, they do. And "our heroes" were doing them. Which was and is, even as the deniers seemed and still seem incapable of recognizing it, the point. We as a culture, as a society, as a people, wanted to give a blanket pass to all soldiers, to remove from them all their responsibility for their own actions. That is an idea we were supposed to have rejected nearly 70 years ago now; apparently, we haven't. Instead, we put our judgment not on those who commit the crimes but on those who tell us about them - such as Chelsea Manning, now spending 35 years in prison for having done precisely that.

Soldiers are not heroes. They can be heroes, they can become heroes, they can act heroically, they can do heroic things - but the act of putting on a uniform and agreeing to put your conscience in a lockbox for the next so many years does not make your life more important than others, it does not make your contributions more valuable than others, it does not make you more deserving of aid than others, it does not make your opinions and insights more worthy of respect than others, it does not exempt you from moral judgment.

It does not make you a hero.

And we should not fall prey to hero-worship.

Sources cited in links:
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/11/11/veterans-group-wants-return-of-armistice-day.html
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2008/06/heroics.html
http://crooksandliars.com/2008/06/10/sen-webb-on-the-daily-show-john-mccain-voted-against-a-first-class-future-for-our-veterans
http://www.va.gov/vetdata/docs/quickfacts/Gdx-trends.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chickenhawk_%28politics%29
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vI7r6Rjp-g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ngl33ucB7oE&feature=related
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgNInWQI-qU&feature=related
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2008/02/untucked.html

122.8 - Outrage of the Week: Bradley Manning sentenced to 35 years

Outrage of the Week: Bradley Manning sentenced to 35 years

We finish up this week with our other regular feature, the Outrage of the Week.

This week, the choice of Outrage was simple, straightforward, and obvious. Bradley Manning, as I expect you know, was the whistleblower who leaked a very large number of documents to WikiLeaks, resulting, ultimately, in his arrest, trial, and now sentencing. Manning has been sentenced to 35 years in military prison for the crime of enabling the American public to know about what its own government was doing and about the crimes, the war crimes, it was committing in Iraq and Afghanistan. He was also reduced in rank, dishonorably discharged, and had his pay and benefits stripped away.

This is a moral and ethical outrage.

The sentence was condemned by human rights groups. Amnesty International called on President Obama to commute Manning's sentence to time served "to allow his immediate release." The Center for Constitutional Rights called for a full pardon. The American Civil Liberties Union called Wednesday "a sad day for all Americans who depend on brave whistleblowers and a free press for a fully informed public debate."

There are a number of things notable here, primary among which is the fact that Bradley Manning is being sent to prison for 35 years for telling the American people about crimes committed in their names while the people who committed those crimes, who organized them, oversaw them, even came up with twisted supposed legal justifications for them, who were responsible for the murder, the torture, the illegal detention, the abuse, the war crimes, walk free, free because in the words of our esteemed president, we must look forward, not backward - words which, it's actually not necessary to say but I will anyway, were not applied to Bradley Manning.

After his arrest, Manning was held for several months in solitary confinement - which is regarded as torture by international treaty, but hey, y'know, who's gonna stop us - in a blatant attempt to break him and force him to testify against the person the Obama gang really wanted to get: Julian Assange, director of WikiLeaks.

And across that time, during his confinement in solitary, during his trial, all through it, across more than three years we heard government officials accuse Bradley Manning of murder. Members of Congress, the administration, the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the leaks endangered US interests and lives. He, we were told more than once, had blood on his hands.

But when it came to the sentencing portion of his trial, when the actual question of harm had to be addressed, when actual harm was supposed to be demonstrated, not just claimed in a Congressional or prosecutorial rant, the government was utterly unable to do so. The government could not, did not, produce any evidence that anyone died as the result of the leaks; it couldn't produce any evidence that anything rationally under the term "national security" was harmed by the leaks; it couldn't even produce evidence that international relations were harmed by the leaks. The closest they came was when one government witness said some allies, offended by what the documents revealed about US attitudes, got "chesty."

Some allies got "chesty?" That's the harm? That's the justification for 35 years in prison?

But that, almost unintentionally, raises an important point that almost no one seems to be mentioning. What we ultimately come down to is the fact that, according to our government, lying to our political allies is not a crime; letting those allies know about the lies is a crime. Torture is not a crime, letting people know about the torture is a crime. Even war crimes are not crimes, letting people know about war crimes is the crime. According to our government, by doing so Bradley Manning committed crimes worthy of 35 years in prison. But the fact is, if there had been no lying, if there had been no torture, if there had been no war crimes, there would have been nothing for Bradley Manning to leak!

Which is the real point. This case, this trial, this sentence - a sentence 17 times longer than any previous sentence for leaking classified documents to the media (by the way, a long-forgotten facet of this is that Manning first tried to go to the Washington Post and the New York Times and it was only after the Times ignored him and the Post wouldn't take him seriously that he went to WikiLeaks) - this trial, this sentence, is not really about Bradley Manning. It's about any future Bradley Mannings.

It's a warning to anyone in government, in or out of the military, who may have any moral qualms about what they learn, who may be upset or even outraged by what they find, to just shut up, keep quiet, don't let anyone know, because if you raise your voice, we will track you down and destroy you.

Bradley Manning is a patriot and a hero. And don't you forget it.

Footnote: I'm going to repeat here something I said about this a few weeks ago:

There was one significant effect of Manning's actions: The end of US participation in the Iraq War.

The Bush gang had been forced by the Iraqi government into an agreement to remove US troops from Iraq by the end of 2011. But the Obama gang was pressuring the Iraqis to allow for perhaps tens of thousands of US troops to stay beyond that deadline under a new "security agreement." Among the things Bradley Manning leaked was a video of US soldiers on a helicopter gunship shooting up a group of people and then going back to shoot up a van that came to take away the wounded. The video was put on YouTube under the title Collateral Murder. You can see the video at collateralmurder.com. The Pentagon decided the soldiers had acted within "the rules of engagement" and there would be no punishment.

In the wake of that, the Iraqis demanded that any US troops remaining in Iraq be subject to Iraqi law. The Obama gang refused, so there was no new agreement - and all US troops left Iraq on schedule. I can't help but wonder if the extremism of the case against Bradley Manning and the furious attempts to crush WikiLeaks were an outgrowth of frustrated egomania.

This is the simple hard truth: This case was not about protecting the nation. It was - and is - about protecting the privileges of the powerful, this was - and is - about control, this was - and is - about the imperious condescension of a government and military elite treating the rest of us as, the joke has it, mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed shit. It was - and is - about the Obama gang getting another skin to hang on its wall of secrecy. That's what this was and is about. And don't you forget it.

Left Side of the Aisle #122

Left Side of the Aisle
for the week of August 22-28, 2013

This week:

Clown Award: Orson Scott Card
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/04/orson-scott-card-gay-marriage-amendment-one_n_1478936.html
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/chris-christie-gay-conversion-therapy-new-jersey-95666.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/15/orson-scott-card-racist-obama_n_3762891.html
http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2013-05-09-1.html

Hero Award: Sharon Snyder
http://www.kansascity.com/2013/07/28/4373583/jackson-county-circuit-judge-fires.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/15/sharon-snyder-robert-nelson_n_3759185.html

Update #1: Ray Kelly on short list to replace Janet Napolitano
http://justsaynow.firedoglake.com/2013/07/15/why-ray-stop-and-frisk-kelly-possibly-being-nominated-to-dhs-would-be-so-dangerous/
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/ray-kelly-stop-and-frisk-homeland-security-95628.html

Update #2: Gov. Scott Walkalloveryou admits watching a protest is not illegal
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/08/left-side-of-aisle-120-part-5.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/09/1229961/-Walker-forced-to-back-off-from-arresting-observers-of-Solidarity-Sing-
http://www.thedailypage.com/daily/article.php?article=40587
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/state-officials-say-they-won-t-issue-citations-to-solidarity/article_b976c2fb-e5f6-59af-a53b-b6eb9f3d362e.html
http://www.thedailypage.com/daily/article.php?article=40690

Update #3: PBS Newshour considers civil forfeiture
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/08/left-side-of-aisle-120-part-1.html
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/nation/july-dec13/assets_08-19.html

Update #4: Strike three for State Dept. report approving Keystone XL pipeline
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/04/left-side-of-aisle-102-part-8.html
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/315351-state-dept-watchdog-launches-inquiry-into-keystone-environmental-report#ixzz2cQqCIRKl
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/20/interior-state-keystone-xl-pipeline-impact?google_editors_picks=true
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jul/28/obama-reservations-keystone-pipeline-project

I laugh so I don’t weep: Texas replies to DOJ suit over redistricting
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/06/left-side-of-aisle-114-part-3.html
https://www.aclu.org/voting-rights/voting-rights-act-0
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/08/1216-update-voter-suppression-comes-to.html
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/06/25/that-was-quick-texas-moves-ahead-with-discriminatory-voting-laws/
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/07/25/feds-to-sue-to-force-texas-to-keep-pre-clearing-voting-changes/
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/13/1230932/-Texas-Defends-Voting-Laws-We-Don-t-Want-Democrats-To-Vote?detail=email
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/08/10/texas-on-voting-rights-its-not-about-race-just-politics/
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/07/08/sec-3-the-secret-weapon-for-protecting-minority-voters/
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/07/19/conservatives-prepare-to-finish-off-the-voting-rights-act/

Outrage of the Week: Bradley Manning sentenced to 35 years
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/judge-to-sentence-bradley-manning-today/2013/08/20/85bee184-09d0-11e3-b87c-476db8ac34cd_story.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/bradley-manning-sentenced_n_3787492.html
http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/bradley-manning-s-sentence-doesn-t-mean-his-story-is-going-away-20130821
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/bradley-manning-prison_n_3789867.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/03/bradley-manning-sentence_n_3696501.html
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-manning-trial-20130801,0,3249325.story
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/01/us/in-sentencing-us-tries-to-prove-harm-by-manning.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/21/us-usa-wikileaks-manning-idUSBRE97J0JI20130821
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/21/bradley-manning-trial-six-things
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/07/left-side-of-aisle-119-part-6.html

Left Side of the Aisle #119 - Part 6

On the Bradley Manning verdict

Bradley Manning - remember him? I wouldn't be surprised if you went "oh, yeah, him, the leaker guy. Whatever happened with that?" Despite the significance of his actions and the importance of the case - including charging a military whistleblower with "aiding the enemy" for the first time since the Civil War - the media, at least in this country, pretty much let the whole three years now of his confinement and trial slide by with just the occasional reference, a lack of coverage which was encouraged by the military court, which put major burdens on the ability of the media to report on the trial, including, most recently, subjecting reporters and their cars to invasive searches and having armed guards stand directly behind them as they worked at their laptops in the press area. This was because of, the judge said, earlier repeated breaking of court rules - even though no one could tell the reporters what rules had been broken.

But after months in solitary confinement under conditions that if it was done to an American by another country, we would call torture, torture inflicted with the intent of breaking him so he would testify against Julian Assange in the trial of which the Obama gang still dream, Bradley Manning was brought to trial.

On July 30, Col. Denise Lind, the judge in that military trial - I'm reminded of an article I read some years ago which was titled "Military justice is to justice as military music is to music" - the judge released her verdict: She convicted Bradley Manning of almost all of the charges against him but, be thankful for what you can, acquitted him of "aiding the enemy."

That was the charge everyone was focused on for two reasons beyond its rarity: One, it was the most severe, carrying a potential penalty of life without parole. Two, the impact of a conviction on the future ability of the public to learn what it should know but the government for whatever reason doesn't want to tell, would have been severe. You have to understand: Bradley Manning was not accused of giving important information to al-Qaeda. He was not accused of actually helping al-Qaeda. He was not accused of wanting to help al-Qaeda. He was accused of giving information to a media organization knowing that al-Qaeda would be able to see whatever that organization published. And even if the information in and of itself was of no assistance to al-Qaeda, it potentially could be analyzed in coordination with other information, thereby revealing something that would be of assistance. That, believe it or not, was the actual basis for, the actual argument the government used in pursuing, the charge of "aiding the enemy."

A conviction would have set a precedent that any leak of information relating to the military or foreign policy that the government wanted to keep secret, any leak of information the government found inconvenient or embarrassing, any leak of information which could even hypothetically be linked with other undetermined information in a way that could be useful to any of our enemies even if we don't know who those enemies are because that information is also classified, could be the basis for a charge of "aiding the enemy."

So we as a people dodged a bullet - but it's not over: We got hit by shrapnel. Manning was convicted of a computer fraud charge and some other, lesser, military infractions as well as, bizarrely, five counts of stealing government documents. Exactly how the documents were "stolen" since obviously he sent copies to WikiLeaks and the originals never left the military's possession is unclear: I remember that in the many-ways similar Pentagon Papers trial of Daniel Ellsberg the feds made the same charge and were faced with the same dilemma: Ellsberg had provided copies to the New York Times, not originals. Prosecutors were reduced to the farcical claim that copying was stealing, that he had stolen "the arrangement of words on the page." Yes, that's a quote.

Apparently, that was not a dilemma for Col. Lind.

More importantly and more seriously, something else that did not trouble Col. Lind was convicting Manning of six counts of espionage for providing documents to WikiLeaks. Six counts of espionage for leaking information to the media. And in all six of those cases, Manning had pled guilty to a lesser offense but Lind and prosecutors refused to accept that plea and found him guilty of the original charge. In fact, Manning had earlier pled guilty to a lesser offense on nine of the 21 charges facing him; Lind and prosecutors accepted only two.

So despite the acquittal on "aiding the enemy," Bradley Manning still faces a possible 136 years in prison for daring to tell the people what they deserve and in fact need to know. And remember this: The government has ranted and raved about "damage to national security" but in the three years since his arrest has not offered one single shred of evidence, not a single strand of an argument, that such national security has in fact been harmed by Bradley Manning.

But I will say this, there was one significant effect of Manning's actions: The end of US participation in the Iraq War.

The Bush gang had been forced by the Iraqi government into an agreement to remove US troops from Iraq by the end of 2011. But the Obama gang was pressuring the Iraqis to allow for perhaps tens of thousands of US troops to stay beyond that deadline under a new "security agreement." Among the things Bradley Manning leaked was a video of US soldiers on a helicopter gunship shooting up a group of people and then going back to shoot up a van that came to take away the wounded. The video was put on YouTube under the title Collateral Murder. You can see the video at collateralmurder.com. The Pentagon decided the soldiers had acted within "the rules of engagement" and there would be no punishment.

In the wake of that, the Iraqis demanded that any US troops remaining in Iraq be subject to Iraqi law. The Obama gang refused, so there was no new agreement - and all US troops left Iraq on schedule. I can't help but wonder if the extremism of the case against Bradley Manning and the furious attempts to crush WikiLeaks were an outgrowth of frustrated egomania.

This is the simple hard truth: This case was not about protecting the nation. It was -and is - about protecting the privileges of the powerful, this was -and is - about control, this was -and is - about the imperious condescension of a government and military elite treating the rest of us as, the joke has it, mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed shit. It was - and is - about the Obama gang getting another skin to hang on its wall of secrecy. That's what this was and is about. And don't you forget it.

And don't you forget one other thing: Bradley Manning is a hero.

Sources:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/how-the-bradley-manning-verdict-avoided-a-serious-chill-on-whistleblowing-20130730
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bradley-manning-guilty-charges-aiding-enemy/story?id=19797378
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/31/us/bradley-manning-verdict.html?_r=0
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57596093/bradley-manning-acquitted-of-aiding-the-enemy-for-giving-secrets-to-wikileaks/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/judge-to-announce-verdict-in-bradley-manning-case-today/2013/07/29/e894a75c-f897-11e2-afc1-c850c6ee5af8_story.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/30/usa-wikileaks-manning-idUSL1N0G00PY20130730
http://boingboing.net/2013/07/25/journalists-at-bradley-manning.html
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/national/south/2013/07/bradley_manning_acquitted_of_aiding_the_enemy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0&feature=youtube_gdata
http://collateralmurder.com/
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2011/06/wars-and-not-rumors-of-wars.html

Left Side of the Aisle #119

Left Side of the Aisle
for the week of August 1 - August 7, 2013
This week:

Update 1: NC passes abortion restrictions
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/29/pat-mccrory-abortion-bill_n_3673393.html?ref=topbar
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/12/pat-mccrory-motorcycle-abortion-bill_n_3588466.html

Update 2: Impact of gutting of Voting Right Act increasing
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/06/us/politics/after-Supreme-Court-ruling-states-rush-to-enact-voting-laws.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/25/black-america-2013_n_3647789.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/24/florida-voter-purge_n_3649516.html
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/07/congress-wont-fix-the-voting-rights-act.php?ref=fpb
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/25/eric-holder-texas-voting-law_n_3652367.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Chtmlws-sb-bb%7Cdl2%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D349180

Clown Award: Lauren Green, Fox News
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/25/virginia-foxx-make-college-affordable_n_3654419.html?ref=topbar
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/26/ted-cruz-immigration_n_3660728.html?ref=topbar
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/29/house-gop-acorn_n_3672557.html?ref=topbar
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/10/acorn-accusations/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/27/reza-aslan-fox-zealot_n_3665211.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/07/idiocracy-in-full-effect.html
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/fox-news-anchor-to-religious-scholar-why-would

Outrage of the Week: List of al-Qaeda's "associated forces" is classified
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/26/pentagon-war-classified_n_3659353.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/07/the-long-classified-war/
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/07/22/is_the_us_ramping_up_a_secret_war_in_somalia_al_shabab?page=0,0&utm_source=Africa%20Center%20for%20Strategic%20Studies%20-%20Media%20Review%20for%20July%2023,%202013%20&utm_campaign=7%2F23%2F2013&utm_medium=email

Food Stamp (SNAP) benefits to be cut in November
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/29/food-stamp-cuts_n_3671142.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/24/food-stamp-work-requirements_n_3649357.html?ref=topbar
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3899
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/06/26/2220511/americans-paycheck-to-paycheck/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/28/poverty-unemployment-rates_n_3666594.html
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/07/23/2340411/the-rich-feel-poor-if-they-make-less-than-5-million/

On the Bradley Manning verdict
http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/how-the-bradley-manning-verdict-avoided-a-serious-chill-on-whistleblowing-20130730
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bradley-manning-guilty-charges-aiding-enemy/story?id=19797378
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/31/us/bradley-manning-verdict.html?_r=0
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57596093/bradley-manning-acquitted-of-aiding-the-enemy-for-giving-secrets-to-wikileaks/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/judge-to-announce-verdict-in-bradley-manning-case-today/2013/07/29/e894a75c-f897-11e2-afc1-c850c6ee5af8_story.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/30/usa-wikileaks-manning-idUSL1N0G00PY20130730
http://boingboing.net/2013/07/25/journalists-at-bradley-manning.html
http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/national/south/2013/07/bradley_manning_acquitted_of_aiding_the_enemy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0&feature=youtube_gdata
http://collateralmurder.com/

Left Side of the Aisle #110 - Part 6

Patriotism

So we just had the Memorial Day weekend and the semi-official start, if not the actual astronomical start, of summer.

And of course, as always, the weekend was festooned with flags and bunting and celebrations of things military and effusive expressions of thanks to all our men and women in uniform linked to declarations of patriotism that seem invariably to involve swirling flags and martial music.

I want to raise a dissenting voice. I want to talk about patriotism.

When I've talked or written about this general subject before, I've always noted at the beginning that I know that what I say will be misunderstood by some and deliberately twisted by others - and I've never been disappointed in that expectation. So I say it again here. I will try to be clear but I know that no matter how hard I try, for some I will fail.

To start: I am not a patriot.

And right away, I have to amend that. I am not a patriot in the shallow way the term is usually understood. I do not wear a flag pin. I do not put my hand over my heart during the national anthem (which, I’ll note in passing, I was taught as a child was something that some folks did but was not required). I do not sing along with the national anthem. In fact, I don’t even stand up for the national anthem. I will note that I certainly don't intend to give offense that way, so I usually manage to be out of the room at the time.

And I don't celebrate soldiers, nor do I, as candidate Barack Obama called on us to do, "always express our profound gratitude for the service of our men and women in uniform. Period," thus exempting those folks from any and all moral judgment. I can and do celebrate individual soldiers - but not "soldiers" as a category. As I have said and written several times, soldiers are not heroes. They can be heroes, they can act heroically, they can do heroic things - but the act of putting on a uniform does not make you a hero, it does not make you or your life more worthy of honor or respect than anyone else's.

Joseph Darby, the soldier who revealed the abuses at Abu Ghraib, is a hero. The soldiers in his unit who in response threatened him to the point that he had to be shipped out early for his own safety, are not. Bradley Manning, the man who revealed war crimes committed by US troops in Iraq, is a hero. The soldiers who committed those crimes, such as those in the video called "Collateral Murder," are not.

So, I say again, I am not a patriot. Except that I am. How? Let me explain.

Patriotism that consists in, that is measured in terms of, wearing flag pins, singing the national anthem, and the like is worthless and even dangerous. It is a shallow, a hollow “patriotism,” a shell that prefers form to substance and too easily, as we have seen over the last years, slides from “patriotism” into jingoism. If, as someone said a while back, “patriotism requires no apologies,” neither should it require conscious demonstration.

And to try to head off some of that misunderstanding I expect, don’t bother claiming I said wearing a flag pin or whatever is itself “hollow.” I said that a patriotism measured or defined in those terms rather than by a deeper commitment is hollow. And it is.

But that obviously raises the immediate question of "what deeper commitment." What does it consist of - or, more exactly here, what do I think it consists of?

Well first, saying it consists of a commitment to "flag and country" is meaningless, empty, it's the vapid patriotism of bumper stickers and needlepoint homilies. It doesn't mean anything. Saying it's based on the supposed fact that "this is the greatest country in the world" is nothing short of absurd - unless, that is, you want to tell me which country is the 7th greatest or the 14th greatest or the 63rd greatest. Because to say this is the greatest country means you must have some objective standard by which countries can be judged and ranked. I can't imagine what such a standard could be since on so many social scales - inequality, poverty, child poverty, access to health care, the list goes on - we rank so embarrassingly low and even on some of our proudest achievements, such as the Bill of Rights, we are losing ground.

And a patriotism based on calling out Stephen Decatur's famous line "my country, right or wrong" is downright dangerous. Unless, that is, you want to amend it to the version of then-Senator Carl Schurz, who said in the 1870s "our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: Our country - when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right."

BTW, look up Carl Schurz. Interesting guy. And his quote about "true patriotism" points toward my own convictions.

In addition to embracing the comment I read some years ago that “it is natural to have an abiding affection for the land of one’s birth,” I say being an US patriot means being dedicated to the ideals on which the country was supposed to have been founded and which, at its best moments, it strives to uphold to as full a measure as possible: Ideals such as “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” as the right to rebellion against oppression, as “promot[ing] the general welfare,” as political freedoms, as representative government “of, by, and for the people” - the ideal of, to sum up in a single phrase, an intent to “establish justice,” a justice I say must include the economic and the social as well as the political if it is to have real meaning.

Patriotism means embracing those ideals; it means striving to hold this country to the highest of those ideals instead of the lowest of its prejudices, as committing to a notion of what the US, of what we as a people, can be and have at times approached being.

Patriotism, that is, lies in the devotion to the ideals, not in any symbolic outward expression of it. Further, patriotism thus does not lie in support for or opposition to any particular administration or any particular policy except insofar as that support or opposition is an expression of that internal commitment to those ideals. Someone who during the Bush administration who opposed the Iraq War and was angered by Bush's usurpation of power was much more patriotic than the war supporters who kept referring to Bush as “the commander-in-chief” as if we were all soldiers expected to obey orders rather than citizens with an obligation held by any free people to “question authority.” And someone during the Obama administration who denounces his unprecedented attacks on whistleblowers and is outraged by his mad claim that he can on his own authority order the assassination of Americans without trial or charge is more patriotic than the Obamabots who stand silent in the face of the drone war and are incapable of seeing the very obvious distance between dissent based on political rejection and dissent based on racism.

So on that basis, on that understanding of patriotism, I submit to you that I am as patriotic as they come. And I have neither patience with nor tolerance for those who would make patriotism a matter of gestures and decorations rather than conviction. And I have even less of either patience with or tolerance for those who would try to prove their patriotism by impugning mine.

I am not a patriot. Except that I am.

Sources:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-2238188.html
http://www.bradleymanning.org/
http://collateralmurder.com/
http://www.bartleby.com/73/1641.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Schurz

Left Side of the Aisle #100 - Part 8

Hero Award #2: Bradley Manning in his own voice

The other Hero Award, very quickly.

Last week I said I was giving Bradley Manning a Hero Award, a very well-deserved one. This week I wanted to formalize that, using as an opening to do so the fact that an audio recording of the statement he made to the military court has been made available to the Freedom of the Press Foundation. They don't know who did it or how they did it, but they have it, they have verified it, and now they have released it. A link to it is at my website. [See below.]

To appreciate this, you've got to realize the restrictions on covering his court-martial. Among the rules governing the trial are ones that bar not only all video or audio recordings of the proceedings, but even taking any photographs of Manning. You can't even get a transcript of what is said in court.

What all that means is that this is our first chance actually to hear Bradley Manning in his own voice. Use it.

Sources:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-ellsberg/bradley-manning-military-court-speech_b_2859353.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/12/bradley-manning-tapes-own-words
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/group-aims-to-be-a-conduit-for-wikileaks-donations/
https://www.pressfreedomfoundation.org

The link to the recording of Manning's statement:
https://www.pressfreedomfoundation.org/blog/2013/03/fpf-publishes-leaked-audio-of-bradley-mannings-statement

Left Side of the Aisle #100

Left Side of the Aisle
for the week of March 21-27, 2013

This week:
Good News #1: Same-sex marriage advances
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/14/gay-marriage-inevitable-americans_n_2876601.html
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/poll-new-high-of-58-percent-support-same
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/03/18/gay-marriage-support-hits-new-high-in-post-abc-poll/
http://www.twincities.com/politics/ci_22769152/gay-marriage-bill-faces-crucial-committee-votes-tuesday?c=upworthy
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/15/rob-portman-gay-marriage_n_2881805.html
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2006/06/06/5669/inhofe-gay-marriage/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/15/james-inhofe-cpac-gay-marriage-rob-portman_n_2884724.html?ir=Politics&ref=topbar
http://greenstreetchurch.org/public-statement-weddings-green-street-united-methodist-church/#public-statement-weddings
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/18/n_carolina_church_stops_performing_straight_marriages_until_gay_marriage_becomes_legal/?source=newsletter

Good News #2: Maryland repeals death penalty
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/15/maryland-death-penalty_n_2885162.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20130315/us-death-penalty-maryland/
http://jobsanger.blogspot.com/2013/02/executions-are-becoming-rare-in-us.html
http://www.aclu.org/capital-punishment/death-penalty-101
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_capital_punishment_by_country

Good News #3: Being overweight is not a disease
http://www.everydayhealth.com/sanjay-gupta/heavy-and-healthy-overweight-today-was-perfect-in-1913.aspx
http://www.digitalnewsrelease.com/?q=jama_3867

Good News #4: NSLs held unconstitutional
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/15/national-security-letter-_n_2886130.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303567704577519213906388708.html
http://75.101.159.206/documents/367107-104697082-us-dis-cand-3-11cv2173-2011-10-02.html#document/p6/a59670
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/03/nsl-found-unconstitutional/
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/07/doj-sues-telecom-over-nsl/

Good News #5: Occupy protesters winning in court
http://www.care2.com/causes/5-exciting-verdicts-occupy-keeps-winning-in-court.html
http://articles.philly.com/2013-03-07/news/37503495_1_nina-n-wright-padilla-paul-hetznecker-trespass-charge
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2013/03/why_the_police.php
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2013/03/jury_finds_occu.php
http://app1.kuhf.org/articles/1361550856-Court-Case-Involving-Occupy-Protesters-Resolved.html
http://www.fightbacknews.org/2012/9/28/cook-county-court-dismisses-more-90-cases-against-occupy-chicago-protesters
http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/cleveland_metro/ohio-court-hands-a-victory-to-occupy-protesters
http://www.care2.com/causes/first-ows-trial-ends-in-acquittal-thanks-to-citizen-journalism.html
http://wallstreetonparade.com/2013/02/occupy-movement-files-lawsuit-against-every-federal-regulator-of-wall-street/

Good News #6: Nancy Pelosi questions Keystone XL pipeline
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/key-democrat-pelosi-voices-doubts-on-keystone-as-mulcair-visits-us/article9810656/

Hero Award #1: Croatian-Serb kiss
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mostar
http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/19wsy5/when_an_old_lady_asked_croatian_girl_how_she/?limit=500
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_World_Colleges
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/10/croatian-girl-kisses-serb_n_2839945.html

Hero Award #2: Bradley Manning in his own voice
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-ellsberg/bradley-manning-military-court-speech_b_2859353.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/12/bradley-manning-tapes-own-words
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/group-aims-to-be-a-conduit-for-wikileaks-donations/

And Another Thing #1: Billboard produces fresh water from the air
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/18/billboard-lima-peru-water-crisis_n_2901882.html

And Another Thing #2: FCC proposes free nationwide wifi
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/tech-telecom-giants-take-sides-as-fcc-proposes-large-public-wifi-networks/2013/02/03/eb27d3e0-698b-11e2-ada3-d86a4806d5ee_story.html

And Another Thing #3: Viking sunstones
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27Anse_aux_Meadows
http://www.polarization.com/viking/viking.html
http://www.ibtimes.com/viking-sunstone-evidence-found-sixteenth-century-english-wreck-1120939#
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/03/10/first-evidence-viking-sunstone-found/

And Another Thing #4: Curiosity finds chemicals for life on Mars
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/sciencefair/2013/03/12/mars-top-five/1982783/
http://www.dailytech.com/NASA+Curiosity+Rovers+Rock+Sample+Suggests+Life+on+Mars/article30108.htm
http://cosmiclog.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/12/17285137-curiosity-rover-sees-life-friendly-conditions-in-ancient-mars-rock?lite
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/12mar_graymars/

And Another Thing #5: Astronomers measure spin of supermassive black hole 56 million light-years away
http://www.world-science.net/othernews/130228_blackhole

Left Side of the Aisle #99 - Part 4

Update: Bradley Manning

Hopefully, you remember Bradley Manning. He's the Army private being court-martialed for crimes up to and including “aiding the enemy” for daring to be a whistleblower and revealing, via WikiLeaks, the truth about US foreign policy and particularly what the US was doing in Iraq. He is being court-martialed after being held in solitary confinement for over a year in what appears to have been a futile attempt to break him to force him to provide testimony that could be used against Julian Assange, the director of WikiLeaks. I should do and I have been meaning to do a thorough update on his case and situation, and I still should, but this brief update will have to do for now.

Manning has plead guilty to 10 of the least serious of the 22 charges filed against him. All of those 10 involve unauthorized disclosure of some document or group of documents, each document or group being a separate charge. In effect, he has acknowledged what everyone already assumed: He was the source for WikiLeaks. He is pleading not guilty to the other charges, including not only "aiding the enemy," but violations of the Espionage Act, and various accusations of having "stolen" the documents in question - which is a rather silly charge since these are computer files and he took copies; the originals are right where they always were.

Seemingly in exchange for his plea, the judge in charge of the court-martial, one Col. Denise Lind, allowed Manning to read into the record a 35-page statement explaining in detail his actions and reasons for them. Unlike what that might make you think, a 35-page statement, this was no rambling manifesto à la the Unibomber, it was a tight chronology of his career as a soldier and what he learned which caused him to become a whistleblower - in the course of which he noted that he had offered the material to the Washington Post and the New York Times, and neither one was interested.

[A link to the statement is below.]

One other update on this: For the third year in a row, Bradley Manning has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. I can't give him that, but I can give him my Hero Award, which is given to people who in some way, big or small, just do the right thing.

Sources:
http://www.bradleymanning.org/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/28/bradley-manning-pleads-guilty_n_2781855.html
http://www.salon.com/2013/02/28/manning_offers_his_plea/
http://daisysdeadair.blogspot.com/2013/03/bradley-manning-nominated-for-nobel.html
http://www.globalresearch.ca/bradley-manning-nobel-peace-prize-nomination-2013/5325138

Link to Bradley Manning's statement:
http://www.bradleymanning.org/news/update-3113-bradley-mannings-statement-taking-responsibility-for-releasing-docs

Left Side of the Aisle #99

Left Side of the Aisle
for the week of March 14-20, 2013

This week:
The murder of Marco McMillian
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/28/marco-mcmillian-dead_n_2780698.html
http://abcnews.go.com/US/miss-mayor-candidate-marco-mcmillian-found-dead/story?id=18614617
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/marco-mcmillian-beaten-burned_n_2806435.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/26/17103321-a-year-after-killing-trayvon-martins-father-says-parents-will-never-move-on?lite

Clown Award: Wall Street bankers
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1720/work-work-place.aspx#2
http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/03/06/americans-stressed-underpaid-overworked-survey/
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2013/03/employee-needs.aspx
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/11/bankers-underpaid_n_2853961.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/09/wall-street-average-salary_n_1952352.html

Update #1: Deepwater Horizon; BP knew the risk
http://www.salon.com/2013/02/27/bp_exec_admits_knew_of_big_risk_of_explosion/?source=newsletter
http://grist.org/news/bp-knew-of-deepwater-risk/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=tweet&utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_content=mill
http://www.salon.com/2013/02/25/trial_begins_for_bp_over_gulf_oil_spill/
http://business.time.com/2013/03/08/bp-warns-of-rising-costs-from-spill-settlement/#comments

Update #2: Bradley Manning
http://www.bradleymanning.org/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/28/bradley-manning-pleads-guilty_n_2781855.html
http://www.salon.com/2013/02/28/manning_offers_his_plea/
http://daisysdeadair.blogspot.com/2013/03/bradley-manning-nominated-for-nobel.htmlhttp://www.globalresearch.ca/bradley-manning-nobel-peace-prize-nomination-2013/5325138

Bradley Manning's statement:
http://www.bradleymanning.org/news/update-3113-bradley-mannings-statement-taking-responsibility-for-releasing-docs

Update #3: Antonin Scalia is a scumbag
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/03/insensitive-remarks-led-to-young-scalias-firing-by-kinkos.html

Hero Award: Google reveals having received National Security Letters
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/03/06/fbi-ecretly-spying-on-google-users-company-reveals/
http://www.aclu.org/national-security-technology-and-liberty/national-security-letters
https://epic.org/privacy/nsl/
https://www.eff.org/issues/national-security-letters

Global warming: new scary graph
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Count_Floyd
http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2013/03/new-hockey-stick-graph-scarier
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/recent-heat-spike-like-nothing-in-11000-years.php
http://www.wisegeek.org/how-did-agriculture-begin.htm

Outrage of the Week: Death by drone?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/10/paul-filibuster-drones-progressives
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/03/06/rand_paul_is_waging_an_epic_mr_smith_style_filibuster_right_now.html
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2013/03/something-i-never-thought-id-be-saying.html
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2010/04/its-just-question.html
http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/rand-pauls-paranoid-rant-they-called
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/03/rand-paul-drones-filibuster-fundraising-campaign
http://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/democrats-give-excuses-for-not-joining-anti-drone-filibuster
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/paul-13-hour-filibuster-word-reply-article-1.1282182

Left Side of the Aisle #55 - Part 5

Afghanistan and the advance of the national security state

This past week saw the first anniversary of the execution of Osama bin Laden, an event the Obama crowd has been more that willing to exploit for its own political gain. As Glenn Greenwald recently noted, in the wake of bin Laden's death, there were those who thought that the War on Terror^{(reg.)(c)(pat.pend.)} might wind down some. After all, International Enemy #1 was dead and the minions of the national security state kept going on about how badly al-Qaeda had been damaged, so it would seem logical that we might step back a bit.

As you obviously know, it hasn't worked out that way. In fact, Greenwald came up with a list of things that have happened since the killing of Osama bin Laden:

- Congress renewed, and PHC* signed, the Patriot Act without a single reform. During Senate debate, Harry Reid claimed that anyone seeking reforms was putting the country at risk of a terrorist attack. (Remember when the Patriot Act was controversial?)

- A US citizen was murdered by the CIA on orders from the President. It was done far from any battlefield without a shred of due process or presentation of any evidence. Two weeks later, his 16-year-old American son was also killed by the US government.

- The Attorney General gave a speech claiming the President has the legal authority to order US citizens be killed by government agents, with no oversights or checks on that power, based solely on unproven, secret accusations of connections to terrorism.

- With large bipartisan majorities, Congress enacted, and PHC* signed, the National Defense Authorization Act, which contains provisions codifying into law the power of a president to order the indefinite detention without trial or charge of any "suspected terrorist" anywhere in the world, including potentially within the US. The bill also contained an expanded statutory definition of the War on Terror^{(reg.)(c)(pat.pend.)}.

- In Utah, construction neared completion for a sprawling new site to enable the National Security Agency to engage is massive domestic surveillance and to achieve what Greenwald accurately called “the realization of the ‘total information awareness’ program created during the first term of the Bush administration.”

- PHC* authorized the use of “signature” drone strikes in Yemen, under which the CIA can target people for death “even when the identity of those who could be killed is not known.”

- The US expanded its use of drone attacks in Somalia, even reopening a base in the Seychelles to make it easier.

- The FBI increased aggressive attempts to recruit young Muslim-American males into phony terrorism plots which the FBI concocts, funds, encourages, directs, and enables, and then uses as a pretext to prosecute those it manages to lure in. Meanwhile, more and more American Muslims are being prosecuted for crimes that are about their political views rather than their actions.

- NATO airstrikes have continued to kill Afghan civilians.

Even at that, Greenwald's list is incomplete: It leaves out the continued refusal to prosecute self-admitted war criminals, including those who have publicly acknowledged their crimes during this past year. It leaves out his ignoring of the War Powers Act in Libya and his essentially declaring unilateral control over all war and peace decisions, denying Congress any role at all. It leaves out the continued attacks on whistleblowers. It leaves out the persecution of Bradley Manning. The list could go on for some time.

But that last item on Greenwald's list brings up the recent news from Afghanistan.

So the Great Mr. O zipped into Afghanistan, where we have achieved so much in 12 years of blood, death, and treasure that he had to go in secret into a fortified compound and give his speech to we serfs flanked by armored vehicles.

No matter, he earlier told the assembled troops, there is a light at the end of the tunnel! No, wait, that's not right. A light at the end of the tun- sorry - "there is a light on the horizon." We will withdraw from Afghanistan, he declared, but we must do it "responsibly." "Peace with honor," as we used to call it.

But wait - withdraw? Are we? It now seems we're going to have some as yet unknown number of military "advisors" and "trainers" in Afghanistan for another 12 years - until the end of 2024.

There are 88,000 US troops in country now, a number that is supposed to be down to 68,000 by September. But there are no indications, no announcements, of any more withdrawals after that. Now, all "combat" troops are supposed to be out by the end of 2014 - but "combat troops" has no particular meaning, it's however the military and the White House choose to define the term. There is already talk of some 20,000-25,000 troops (and maybe more) staying after 2014, troops that will "train" Afghan soldiers "and fight alongside them where necessary."

So I hope you enjoy a pleasant little war - because it seems were going to have one for a long time to come.

Enjoy your Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. President.

Sources:
http://www.salon.com/2012/05/01/since_bin_ladens_death/singleton/
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/billions-dollars-thousands-lives-lost-afghanistan-war/story?id=16256292#.T6DyFNWpOSo
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/9240356/Barack-Obama-in-Afghanistan-we-must-finish-the-job.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/02/opinion/missed-chance.html
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2012/04/left-side-of-aisle-52-part-5.html
http://whoviating.blogspot.com/2011/05/little-more-bad-news-so-is-this.html

Left Side of the Aisle #46 - Part 4

Bradley Manning has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Bradley Manning, the US Army Private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks, appeared before a military judge at Fort Meade near Baltimore on February 24 to hear the formal reading of the charges against him. If convicted at his coming court-martial on all 22 counts, he could face life in prison.

He chose to defer his plea and a decision for trial by judge or jury until the case is continued in a couple of weeks.

The idea that the whole thing is a sham, a kangaroo court, was given credence by the insistence of the judge that she had no prior knowledge of the case whatsoever beyond Manning's name and that the case involved classified material.

On the other hand, someone not so reticent about their knowledge of the case is Barack Obama, who declared last April that Manning was guilty, that he "broke the law." So much for innocent until proven guilty for our Constitutional lawyer prez.

However, I really said all that to give me the excuse to say this: Bradley Manning is among this year's nominees for the Nobel Peace Prize. I really doubt he'll win - for one thing, there are 230 other nominees - but frankly I really hope he does.

Sources:
http://www.inthesetimes.com/ittlist/entry/12788/bradley_manning_arraignment/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/feb/24/bradley-manning-quest-for-justice
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/27/nobel-peace-prize-2012-nominees_n_1303614.html
http://rt.com/news/manning-nobel-peace-prize-631/