Saturday, October 01, 2011

Natural Born Killers

NPR gives the tiniest blip of airtime to dissenting views of the blatantly anti-Constitutional and illegal assassination of US citizen, and terrorist suspect, Anwar al-Awlaki.  Most of NPR's coverage is decidedly favorable US security establishment - such as Friday afternoon's summary by CIA spokesperson Dina Temple-Raston and Pentagon Sock Monkey, Rachel Martin's Saturday defense of the murders of al-Awalki and Samir Khan.  

Friday afternoon and evening's 5-minute news summary featured Abu Ghraib criminal interrogator/and trainer for the Iraqi Torture Interior Ministry - Professor Matthew Degn - plugging the glorious successes of the endless War on Terror:
[Jack Spear] "In what US officials are deeming a significant blow to al-Qaeda's most active affiliate...the man believed to directed the attempt to blow up a plane over Detroit on Christmas day among other plots was killed in a missile strike in Yemen today.  Matthew Degn is Director of Intelligence Studies at American University he says the attack is significant in the ongoing war with al-Qaeda.  [Degn] 'You win a war by defeating its leaders. You win a war by defeating the organization, and to do that you have to eliminate its leaders - capture or kill the leaders and that's what we're doing right now in Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere around the world.'" [Now you know WTF we are doing in Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan, and elsewhere!]
The little squeak of dissent permitted occurred during Friday's ATC promisingly titled piece "Debate Erupts Over Legality of Awlaki's Killing." Carrie Johnson ran the briefest little clip of Hina Shamsi from the ACLU: 
[Shamsi] "The government should not have the unreviewable authority to carry out the targeted killing of any American, anywhere whom the American president deems to be a threat to the nation."
That was it for the dissenting viewpoint on Johnson's report.  The rest of the time was given to apologists for the assassination.  First was the Justice Department who Johnson tells us "responded that Awlaki wasn't just any American....[but] an operational leader who helped equip terrorist plotters with bombs." Next was Bushist lawyer, John Bellinger, who weighed in with this brilliant analysis: "The requirements of the Constitution with respect to due process for killing an American are not clear." [I swear I'm not making this crap up.]  To deliver a coup de grace to the concept of due process, Johnson found Ken Anderson, a professor who, according to Johnson, "says the analysis starts with whether Awlaki amounted to a lawful target, U.S. citizen or not." 

Probably the most grotesque defense of the assassination came from Rachel Martin on Saturday morning with Scott Simon.  Scott opens the discussion with an evidence free conviction of al-Awalki: "he was a key operative for al-Qaeda's affiliate in Yemen," and it's downhill from there.  Here are quotes from Martin - essentially her talking points - and they are indistinguishable from those of the Obama administration, the CIA, and the Pentagon:
  • "...this was a man directly linked to several high profile terrorist attacks over the last couple of years." 
  • "...part of why he was so important - because he INSPIRED others to violent action with his message." 
  • "...he was the architect of that plot [Xmas day underwear bomber] against the United States.  This is what al-Awalki was all about...
  • "one one side there is an argument that he is a US citizen, he has legal rights...but the US government is clear here Scott, they say this was legal..."
  • "the US government argues that when someone, even an American citizen, joins the enemy in an ongoing war against the US that person becomes a legitimate target."
As our Constitution withers in the face the assaults of US corporate/security state with its promotion of endless war, NPR has made it clear which it is on.  To anyone still supporting NPR with donations, you do so at your own peril...


Anonymous said...

The one thing you have to bear in mind is that most of the people at NPR have probably never taken an American history course so they probably have never even read the US Constitution.

Remember, these folks are the rejects from journalism and even the ones with actual journalism degrees have usually restricted their course "menu" to the easiest courses like "communications" and other such drivel.

At the university where I got my degree, the 'communications" majors were all the party animals and druggies, so that's basically what we are dealing with at NPR.

Can't expect much from this crowd in the way of actual thought -- independent or otherwise.

Anonymous said...

Disgusting, grotesque, repugnant...

I'm running out of words to describe New Pravda Radio

Maybe someone could put together a list that MTW could put on the side bar for easy reference.

Anonymous said...

It just gets worse, JP Morgan donates to the NYC police!

Anonymous said...

He had a "funny" name and obviously he would have made Juan Williams "unconfortable" on a plane so . . . isn't that enough?

It is coming up on pledge run at WHYY (don't know about others) and I think the coverage of the Wall Street protests is only being done because of the hue and cry of the listeners and thus the potential donor pool.


Anonymous said...

It's called "determing what to cover by sticking your finger in the air to see which way the donor wind is blowing".

NPR really has become pathetic.

It's a joke and I think even some folks at NPR must recognize that.

If I were working for NPR right now, I'd be looking to abandon ship before the NPR Titanic goes down.

Cuz once it goes down, there will be WAY more radio-heads looking for jobs than there will be jobs that they are "qualified for" (if they are indeed qualified for anything other than working at NPR).

Anonymous said...

4-6m from JP Morgan to Wall Street PD? Never found that at NPR.

Cain saying he "should have" defended gay soldier. Never heard that on NPR.