A Tale of Two Teens

If the security apparatus of the United States assists a client state in disappearing and detaining an American citizen, torturing him, and keeping him imprisoned so the FBI can aggressively interrogate him - how long does it take NPR to report on this assault on the rights of a citizen?

The horse hasn't even left the gate on that one. The story of Gulet Mohamed's detention and alleged torture was broken by the NYT on January 5, 2011, and as of the evening of January 18, 2011, NPR has yet to give ANY airtime to the case. As of tomorrow we'll be at two weeks and counting...

However, if you are an American citizen arrested on the evening of November 26, 2010 for planning to bomb a public event in Portland, Oregon, how long will it take NPR to jump on the case? The answer is four days (that does not include the immediate on-air hourly news-updates which NPR doesn't archive for searches). On November 30, 2010 there will be a full story on the case itself, and additional report featuring confrontational questioning of the mayor of Portland challenging the wisdom of his city's not fully joining a federal security "anti-terror" organization.

The complete lack of coverage of Gulet Mohamed's ordeal is no accident. It has been written about extensively since January 6, 2011 by Glenn Greenwald - and a "big follower" of Greenwald's writing is none other than NPR's go-to "Counterterrorism Correspondent," Dina Temple-Raston. Here is what Temple-Raston said to Greenwald on Nov. 5th at the NYU Constitution and National Security Conference [beginning and ending time is indicated]:

(53:16) "Hi there, I'm Dina Temple-Raston with National Public Radio, and I'm a big follower of yours Glenn and I like your stuff very much, but I'm sorry I'm going to have to correct you on a number of very basic points that clearly, uh, our representative from the FBI feels uncomfortable correcting you on..." (53:32)

The stark nature of attention and promptness NPR devotes to stories promoting the enhancement of state encroachment on individual liberties versus its complete lack of interest in reporting on the crimes of the US security apparatus is telling in this case. Both central figures in these events are about the same age, are American citizens, and were born in Somalia - and when it involves Somalia and the US "war on terror," Dina Temple-Raston is usually all over it.

Bobble Siegel's Profound Humanity

After Rachel Martin's pumped up assessment of Plans A & B on Monday's ATC [see previous post], we were treated to further explanations of the Global War on Terror from Robert Siegel - a reporter of "intellectual heft and profound humanity." Robert Siegel's sympathetic attitudes toward criminal secrecy, the slaughter of civilians, and the erasure of history are breathtaking.

Siegel opens the interview stating, "

I'm joined by Ben Venzke, CEO of IntelCenter. It's a counterterrorism contractor. And we're going to hear about other fronts in the war against al-Qaeda and its allies."

We are already in a propaganda minefield here. The first problem is the non-information provided about Ben Venzke. He runs IntelCenter that distributes "terrorism" videos of questionable sourcing, and he worked with iDefense before starting his company. At iDefense, Venzke worked closely with military intelligence operative, Jim Melnick, a Rumsfeld propaganda operative. Given his background, he is an untrustworthy "expert" at best. The second issue in this brief opening is Siegel's description of "other fronts in the war against al-Qaeda." The media's use of the language of conventional war (e.g. "other fronts") to describe US operations against a minuscule number of al-Qaeda operatives has to be one of the great propaganda triumphs of the US security/permanent-war state.

If this were the only problem with Siegel's interview, I'd chalk it up to typical NPR laziness, and would not have bothered working on this post. But after its lackluster opening, it becomes truly pathological. Siegel asks a direct question about US involvement in Yemen, and Venzke says, "Well, I can't comment because of our involvement with the government...." To which, Siegel follows up with

"According to one of the biggest disclosures in the WikiLeaks cables, one of the biggest contributions of Yemen's president is not bombing al-Qaeda targets, but saying he is and letting the U.S. bomb al-Qaeda targets. Is there a vigorous local counterterrorism effort in Yemen? Or is it more simply permitting the United States to do what it has to do there?"

To do what it has to do there? One has to assume that Siegel is talking about slaughtering 55 human beings - including 14 women and 21 children; after all, that is what the WikiLeak cable is about. To this question Venzke again hides behind secrecy, "That's not something that I could comment on." And Siegel's response? He laughs. I'm not kidding; here's the transcript from NPR:

Siegel: "Can't comment on that. (Soundbite of laughter)"

In the finale of this bloodsport of an interview Siegel directs his line of questioning to Somalia. After Venzke explains the supposed terrorism threats posed to the US by Somalia's al-Shabab, Siegel asks,

"And is there any countervailing authority in Somalia that's doing anything there? Or do they really have a dysfunctional state and have the run of the place?"

Of course the direct US role [involving a grotesque level of indiscriminate slaughter] in creating this "dysfunctional state" (by pressuring and then assisting a reluctant nation to invade Somalia when it was beginning to stabilize) is never mentioned. And why would it be? - on NPR it was never covered in the first place.

JACKPOT!

Shhhhh...whatever you do, don't say scramble on NPR when you talk about Africa. No matter how obvious (and crass) the military, energy and economic objectives of US foreign policy in Africa are - and no matter that others know a scramble when they see a scramble - keep the focus on the US military or State Department talking points about how noble the aims of the US in Africa are - or at least how they will stop the spread of terrorism there. Zwerdling interviewed Fisher of the BBC about Clinton's trip to Africa:

Zwerdling: "What are a couple of the countries there the US has the most potential problems ahead and what could they do to help you know ameliorate them?"

Fisher: "....but it seems like perhaps Somalia seems to have been a real focus of this trip meeting with that president in Kenya and also Zimbabwe here...two areas...hoping to push things forward..."

Zwerdling: "For example, Somalia, it's been an endless civil war there are apparently huge numbers of militants and extremists crossing the border into Kenya almost unchecked. What realistically could the US do about that?"

Fisher: "...al-Shabab this Islamist group which is causing great concern in Washington, it's said to have links to al-Qaeda and the great fear is that Somalia as a failed state might act as a springboard for further terrorist activity....so Somalia is one of these very difficult problems which Africa has had to grapple with. It's been in a state of almost non-stop civil war since the early 90s so it's not a problem which is going to be solved overnight..."

Not only are the real motives of expanding US hegemony not discussed, but when the focus is on Somalia the recent history of US destruction of stability in Somalia is censored, as it always is on NPR (see April 2007 and November 2007 for two glaring examples). You can't help but sense that to honestly discuss what Uncle Sam is up to in the world might just lead someone to connect the dots and conclude that...STOP! We are not an empire, we are not an empire, we are not, not, not, not....

Birth of a Notion

Somalia? History? Who the hell needs research when there's a a movie that tells you everything you need to know - a movie so accurate and so truthful that its Washington premier "attracted Vice-President Dick Cheney, Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Oliver North and other military top brass."

Can you guess what the movie is? A listen to NPR's Thursday morning coverage of Somalia piracy might help:

Tom Bowman checks in with Ari Shapiro who asks, "What options does the US, and do American allies, have in these kinds of situations?" Tom responds:

"....there aren't that many great alternatives. Admiral Gortney, the commander of the 5th Fleet says that the best way to deal with this is to create a more stable government in Somalia, but of course the United States tried that before back in 1993, going after the warlord Mohamed Aideed and it led to a lot of bloodshed, in a movie and book called Blackhawk Down."

After Bowman and Shapiro, NPR has a second report with Renee Montagne interviewing familiar "expert" - Maj. General Tom Wilkerson of the US Naval Institute. Wilkerson explains that dealing with Somali piracy "is not a Navy problem; it is an American problem and the American leadership has to decide at some point when they're going to accept that the pirates can not have a safe haven on land...." Montagne interjects

"when you suggest trying to deal with a safe haven on land in Somalia - again as Tom Bowman and Ari have just spoke about - that brings up some pretty bad memories for the US: Blackhawk Down and what happened in the early 1990s when they tried to tackle Somalis' militias."

Let's review our NPR history movie lesson: The US tried to bring stability to Somalia back in 1993 but that "led to a lot of bloodshed" and "brings up some pretty bad memories for the US."

Don't get distracted by the fact that from 1977 to 1991 the US poured weapons and support to Somali dictator Barre who wreaked havoc on traditional Somali social structures and pitted clans against each other. And definitely don't bring up the sudden rise in piracy (and death and misery) that followed the US/Ethiopian invasion of Somalia late in 2006. And please don't worry about the basic distortions of events and facts in the Pentagon-approved (and revised) movie about Somalia. And...

Let's just say that there's a wee bit of danger in relying on racist, grossly inaccurate movies to simplistically retell and reshape the past. Then again movies like Blackhawk Down, in which there are good guys (us) and evil bad guys (them) do give one (or certain reporters at least) a certain warm, clannish reassurance about our past - what a notion!

Mission Accomplished

Amazingly, the two following letters ended up by accident in my inbox:

Dear NPR,

Thanks so much for your loyal news summary this morning; I couldn't have scripted it better myself. Michele Kelemen did an excellent job representing the US State Department point of view regarding the Somali piracy issue. I've really appreciated your stellar record on muting any analysis of how our own foreign policy has lead to the dramatic rise in piracy. I also appreciate that bit about peacekeeping - nice - we definitely plan to keep Somalia in pieces for as long as possible.

Sincerely,
Condeleezza Rice

The other letter was from the big dog himself:

Dear NPR Reporticators,

I felt very gratificated for your kind warm-up for the War Collage speech that I'm going to presentify this afternoon. I just loved how Carl Kasell pointed out that there hasn't been any big terrorism attack on the Fatherland since I assumptioned to power on 9-11. He really warmed to my successful domestic security blanket successfulnesses. I definitely would like to have Carl fill out my legacy report card.

Mr. Kasell defintitely went above and out of the bounds of dutifulness in crediting my securification of America for my undisputed electoral reelection victoriousness in 2004. And it was a nice little twist of argumentation for him to note that the problem with the Iraq Freedom Campaign is weariness.

Thanks Carl, oh and I'm a big fan of the wit and suffocafistication of that Wait Wait funny show you do on NPR. I just loved the funnin' you had with CIA Hayden.

Sincerly,
George W. Bush

If you missed the news summary this morning, here are the sections that Rice and Bush were referring to:

Kelemen: "Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who was in the Security Council for the vote says the resolution goes a long way to help countries coordinate their response to what she called 'the scourge of piracy.' It authorizes nations to pursue pirates not only at sea, but on land in Somalia. Rice said the council should also address the root causes of the piracy problem: the poverty, instability and lawlessness that have plagued Somalia for decades. She said it's time for the UN to consider a peacekeeping operation though that will be a much longer diplomatic battle."

* * *

Kasell: "President Bush speaks today at the US Army War College in Carlyle Pennsylvania. He plans to return to the theme that helped him win a second term: preventing another terrorist attack against the United States. The President is expected to point to his record on national security emphasizing that terrorists have not struck again since the 9-11 attacks when Homeland Security became his focus. The President is also expected to promote the steps the administration has taken such as reshaping the intelligence community and disrupting terrorist financing. Mr. Bush won a tough reelection battle in 2004 largely because of his advantage among voters on the national security issue. Since then a turbulent second term has eroded his public approval, the country has grown weary of the war in Iraq, and more recently the staggering economy."

History? Arrr!

On Tuesday morning one listens in vain for any contextual history as the shallow Gwen Thompkins reports on the seizure of a Saudi supertanker by Somali pirates. Anytime NPR covers Somalia be ready to have your memory scrubbed and reprogrammed.

On the other hand, if you turn to some far-flung leftist, conspiratorial news source like...say...the Voice of America you'll find this little nugget of information:

Pirate activities in Somalia stopped briefly in 2006 under the Islamic Courts Union, the group that seized power from Mogadishu-based factional leaders and quickly gained popular support by restoring law and order in many parts of the country. A ban on piracy was strictly enforced.

As the Islamic courts began consolidating under the control of militants, neighboring Ethiopia, with the support of the United States, intervened in December 2006, ousting the Islamic Courts Union and installing a secular - but deeply unpopular transitional government.

I'm not saying that the Islamic Courts Union (ICU) was a noble government, but for God's sake they were bringing much desired stability to Somalia and were even sending overtures to the US. Instead of encouraging the moderate elements of the ICU and dealing with them diplomatically, the US opted for the Ethiopian invasion and violent overthrow of the ICU. This policy has been linked not only to a rise in Somali piracy, but has had the effect of strengthening the most radical and dangerous Islamist factions in Somalia. (Can you say, "Blowback.")

You'd would think any story on Somali piracy would have at least some mention of this history - unless, of course, the goal of the reporting is to obscure the historical context and misinform listeners.

Zero Recall

Morning Edition first ran a piece about Cambodia and the brutal Khmer Rouge years. Funny, I never once heard any questions about the US aerial slaughter unleashed on Cambodia that helped create the conditions for the Khmer Rouge takeover. And, handily, it never came up how the US backed the Khmer Rouge once the Vietnamese invaded Cambodia and ousted them. (It's interesting how this twisted version of history so resembles the text that Bush is reading from.)

But heck, that was 30 years ago and the memory does get a bit fuzzy. How about something more recent, like say the joint US-Ethiopian invasion of Somalia way back in December 24th of last year (kind of a little Bushist Christmas present for the people of Somalia).

Listen, if you can stand it, to Gwen Thomkins give her report of the sad plight of Somalis streaming out of Mogadishu. It's one of those Africans as poor, herd-like, violence-prone, hungry, diseased folks pieces that is pretty revolting - especially coming from Thomkins who was complicit in running propaganda operations for the US aggression against Somalia in January of 2007. This kind of "Ministry of Truth" trimming of history is typical NPR fare; in fact just three short months after the US and Ethiopia helped install the "transitional" regime in Somalia, NPR had already erased the US from the list of armed parties involved - imagine that!

Partial Recall

Yesterday on ATC Debbie Elliott reported on the terrible violence raging in Somalia, especially in the capital, Mogadishu. She mentioned the many civilians killed and the more than 300,000 refugees fleeing the city--BUT failed to include one important detail: the United States was involved in creating the devastating conditions that currently exist. The US military was intimately involved with the Ethiopian invasion of Somalia and overthrow of the Islamic Courts Union back in December. This involvement is not new, in fact the US helped back an alliance of warlords which may well have facilitated the rise and popularity of the Islamic Courts Union.

Clearly the situation in Somalia offers no clear case of good guys vs. bad guys, but ignoring the hamfisted-military approach of the Bush administration in this case is unfortunate. And it is not an isolated case; it seems that the Bushists have a sort of civil war Midas touch in foreign policy - something that others have noted and commented on as early as April 2003 and more recently in December of 2006.

From the Horse's...

You'll have to decide how to finish the title of this post after listening to this Somalia insight from NPR's "senior news analyist Ted Koppel. Renee Montagne brings Ted on, assuredly telling us that "he’s been talking with a senior US military official with first hand knowledge of operations in Somalia." Wow, a "senior" official - and with first hand knowledge too!

Regarding the blistering air attack(s) attributed to the US in Somalia, Montagne asks Koppel, "and do we know exactly who is being targeted?" Based on information from his unnamed connection, Koppel answers decisively:

• Well they know that there are senior members of what they call the Council of Islamic Courts...and several members of that council are believed to have very close ties with Osama Bin Laden’s organization al-Qaeda and they believe that two or three of the members of that council were directly involved in the bombing of the US embassies in East Africa about eight years ago.

Okay, I don't know about you but I'm convinced! Koppel just overwhelmed me with evidence. I mean if US intelligence sources say there are direct ties to Osama Bin Laden's organization, they must know. In fact I bet they know right where Bin Laden is! And I'm sure if that vague "they" believes that two or three members of the council were "directly involved" it's because they've got the overwhelming evidence to prove it - just like before the Iraq invasion.

If it were a joke it would be amusing.