I’d like to highlight this Twitter/X post by Lee Camp and his take on improving NPR’s BS headline:
Lee Camp: Ummm, NPR, I believe you meant to say “Nearly 300 peaceful unarmed people brutally attacked by fascist police for exercising their freedom of speech”
I’d add that students are protesting the Israeli government’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, and the U.S. government’s complicity in the same. They are not protesting against “the war in Gaza,” unless you modify that as “Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza.”
It’s funny indeed that NPR has a reputation as being “left” or even “far left.” Anything critical of Joe Biden is “radical left” in America (unless you’re a Trumper, in which case you’re “fascist”). Anyone that questions and challenges the U.S. government’s total subservience to Israel’s current genocidal agenda is dismissed as unrealistic or as Kremlin stooges. Or maybe apologists for China. It’s nonsense, of course, but it seems to work for some people.
Confuse and obscure the issue. Baffle with BS. And don’t forget Tasers, handcuffs, tear gas, rubber bullets, and good old-fashioned truncheons for those who refuse to obey.
I suppose deceptive headlines don’t hurt quite as much as being beaten to the ground and hauled off to jail. But they are even more effective, I think, at quietening dissent.
Update (4/29): At Indiana University, snipers and armored cars showed up as well as circling helicopters for a modest student encampment. The snipers were apparently escorted into rooftop and tower positions by university administrators. Check out this report:
“Biden administration faces pressure to step up its response to antisemitic incidents on college campuses”
“College campus protests over war in Gaza show no sign of ending”
Mention was also made of police breaking up a “pro-Palestinian protest” at Northeastern University.
You’ll note the framing and what’s missing: there’s no mention of genocide in Gaza, no mention of the more than 100,000 Palestinians already killed and wounded in Israel’s violent assault on Gaza and its people.
Students across America are protesting against genocide in Gaza. They want the mass killing to stop. They want America to apply pressure to Israel to halt murderous assaults by the IDF that end in mass graves for Palestinians.
But NBC is not in the business of admitting this. Instead, NBC is most worried about alleged antisemitism on college campuses. Or they frame the protests as anti-war, as if Israel and Gaza are engaged in a declared war between equals. Or they frame the protests as pro-Palestinian, not anti-genocide.
I especially like this subtitle: “The tumult spreading through college campuses is especially tricky for the president as he works to rebuild the voting coalition from his 2020 win.” See, the main concern for Biden is getting reelected, not trying to stop mass murder.
And I liked this lede: “As antisemitic incidents mushroom on college campuses, some Jewish leaders and lawmakers from both parties are accusing President Joe Biden’s administration of taking a lax approach toward enforcement of civil rights laws, exposing Jewish students to continued harassment.”
Harassment! We can’t have that. Arrest all those protesters. By the way, many of those protesters are Jewish. Are Jewish protesters harassing themselves by protesting against genocide in Gaza? Arrest them too.
Green Party candidate for president Jill Stein (center, in dark blazer) was arrested with students at Washington University in St. Louis. We must have order here!
I keep wondering where all these police are coming from. Shouldn’t they be fighting crime on the mean streets of America, taking on hardened criminals and upholding both law and order? Although I do admit that now the police have ample opportunity to don their riot gear (paid for by you the American taxpayer) and put their anti-riot and anti-terrorist training into practice. Fun fact: Did you know that more than a few police officers have learned anti-riot tactics and techniques from the Israeli military and police? Who says Israel doesn’t pay us back for all the scores of billions they get from us?
Tom Engelhardt Is the Post-9/11 Generation’s I.F. Stone
Today’s post has a simple goal: to praise TomDispatch, a regular, reliable, and highly effective “antidote to the mainstream media.”
Its creator, editor, and chief author, Tom Engelhardt, founded the site soon after the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Its remarkable longevity and brilliant perspicacity testifies to his integrity, his character, indeed his patriotism and his humanity.
What I.F. Stone was to the Vietnam generation, Tom Engelhardt has been to the post-9/11 one. If more Americans had read his articles and truly listened to his words of wisdom, disastrous wars like the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan would never have happened, and America itself would be a far better place.
Tom began his site as a simple Listserv. Soon after 9/11, he started by putting together lists of articles he’d read, together with some commentary of his own, sharing those links and thoughts via email with friends and other interested parties. An early article that stuck in his mind (that he mentioned to me) concerned America’s bombing raids against Afghanistan in 2001, attacks that would serve mainly “to bounce the rubble” there. (Afghanistan had already been the site of a devastating war in the 1980s conducted by the Soviet Union.)
Quickly, Tom’s Listserv messages proved popular, focusing as they so often did on the folly and fallacies of American empire. A colleague suggested that he should create a website featuring his “tomgrams.” Though not a tech or computer wiz, Tom embraced the challenge, overseeing the founding of a dedicated site for original articles that would serve as “a regular antidote to the mainstream media.”
Tom has now been posting his tomgrams for 22 years, usually three original pieces each week, on Sunday, Tuesday, and Thursday. It’s the side job that took over his life, he ruefully admits. (Tom has been a longtime editor for several publishing houses, as well as writing several of his own books, notably “The End of Victory Culture,” which I highly recommend.)
I first started writing for TomDispatch in 2007. I recently posted my 106th article at the site. Tom has made me work! He features articles that are typically 2000 words or longer, articles that often include a dozen or more links that readers can follow to confirm facts and deepen their knowledge. Each article Tom posts goes through a rigorous process of editing, far more so, it seems, than many print magazines use nowadays. Typically, when I write for Tom, he edits my pieces, after which three proofreaders offer their own suggestions and corrections, all of which I review along with Tom. It’s a laborious process that produces consistently high-quality pieces at the site.
If you’re a regular reader of his site, you’ll have noticed that Tom writes introductions to nearly every piece he posts at TomDispatch. Some of his intros end up being essays in their own right. He is seemingly inexhaustible.
Tom Engelhardt, the creator of TomDispatch, with the author
Articles initially posted at TomDispatch usually go to many other sites. My most recent piece for Tom went to Common Dreams, Counterpunch, Information Clearing House, The Nation, ZNet, and LA Progressive, among other sites. Most of these are broadly liberal or progressive, but Lew Rockwell, a libertarian site, picked up my last piece as well. In the past, mainstream sites like CBS News have picked up and posted TomDispatch pieces, and three of my “tomgrams” earned a mention in the New York Times (here and here and here). Another one was posted (in shorter form) by the LA Times. All this is to say that TomDispatch’s reach far exceeds that of the site itself.
It’s amazing the network of readers and publishers Tom has built over the last 20+ years. I’m amazed as well at how some of my articles have been translated into foreign languages, including German, French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese (in Brazil), Danish, Czech, and Arabic. Honestly, I never thought I’d be so widely read, and I owe that to Tom, who saw in 2001 the need for an alternative to the mainstream media soon after the events of 9/11 and all the mindless patriotic hoopla that followed.
What makes TomDispatch unique? Certainly, the length and rigor of its pieces. Most sites nowadays post shorter works of 600 words or fewer. I’m also struck by the diversity of authors at the site. And, if I may, I wish to applaud Tom for seeking out military and government dissenters, military officers like Andrew Bacevich and Danny Sjursen and State Department dissenters like Peter Van Buren. And Tom has enlisted people like Noam Chomsky, Chalmers Johnson, Barbara Ehrenreich, Adam Hochschild, and so many other authors for whom he’s served as an editor.
(Check out Tom’s incredible list of authors since 2002 here.)
Later this year, Tom will celebrate his 80th birthday. He tells me TomDispatch is nearing its end, that soon, perhaps in the next year or two, it’ll post its last article. When it does, a bright light of stimulating discourse and informed dissent will be extinguished. America will be worse for it.
I urge you to dip into the TomDispatch archive. It begins in 2002 and comes forward to the present day. Read a few articles, especially on war, militarism, and empire. And tell me: Isn’t it amazing how much Tom saw that those in officialdom either didn’t see or refused to see?
Learning from Ashleigh Banfield’s Landon Lecture of April 2003
Early in 2003, Ashleigh Banfield was a star in the making. A rising journalist at MSNBC, she covered the opening stages of the Iraq War. Before that, she’d made a name for herself covering the 9/11 attacks and their aftermath. Smart, pretty, highly skilled, she was heading nowhere but up. Until she gave an honest lecture on her experiences in Iraq and the Middle East on April 24, 2003.
I’ve written before about Banfield’s honest and heartfelt critique of Iraq war coverage in the U.S. mainstream media, which won her no friends at NBC News. In fact, the NBC brass sidelined and essentially exiled her. I recently reread her Landon Lecture at Kansas State University and realized NBC wasn’t just angry about her critique of mainstream media war coverage: they were likely even more incensed at how she humanized and empathized with Palestinians and other Middle Eastern peoples and groups, including organizations like Hezbollah.
Here’s some of what she had to say back then in 2003:
But it’s interesting to be able to cover this [Israel and Palestine]. There’s nothing in the world like being able to cross a green line whenever you want and speak to both sides of a conflict. I can’t tell you how horrible and wonderful it is at the same time in the West Bank and Gaza and Israel. There are very few people in this world who can march right across guarded check points, closed military zones, and talk to Palestinians in the same day that they almost embedded with Israeli troops, and that’s something that we get to do on a regular basis.
And I just wish that the leadership of all these different entities, ours included, could do the same thing, because they would have an eye opening experience, horrible and wonderful, all at the same time, and it would give a lot of insight as to how messages are heard and how you can negotiate. Because you cannot negotiate when someone can’t hear you or refuses to hear you or can’t even understand your language, and that’s clearly what’s happening in a lot of places in the world right now, the West Bank, Gaza and Israel, not the least of which there’s very little listening and understanding going on. Our language is entirely different than theirs, and I don’t just mean the words. When you hear the word Hezbollah you probably think evil, danger, terror right away. If I could just see a show of hands. Who thinks that Hezbollah is a bad word? Show of hands. Usually connotes fear, terror, some kind of suicide bombing. If you live in the Arab world, Hezbollah means Shriner. Hezbollah means charity, Hezbollah means hospitals, Hezbollah means welfare and jobs.
These are not the same organizations we’re dealing with. How can you negotiate when you’ re talking about two entirely different meanings? And until we understand — we don’t have to like Hizbullah, we don’t have to like their militancy, we don’t have to like what they do on the side, but we have to understand that they like it, that they like the good things about Hizbullah, and that you can’t just paint it with a blanket statement that it’s a terrorist organization, because even when it comes to the militancy these people believe that militancy is simply freedom fighting and resistance. You can’t argue with that. You can try to negotiate, but you can’t say it’s wrong flat out.
And that’s some of the problems we have in dealing in this war in terror. As a journalist I’m often ostracized just for saying these messages, just for going on television and saying, “Here’s what the leaders of Hezbullah are telling me and here’s what the Lebanese are telling me and here’s what the Syrians have said about Hezbullah. Here’s what they have to say about the Golan Heights.” Like it or lump it, don’t shoot the messenger, but invariably the messenger gets shot.
We hired somebody on MSNBC recently named Michael Savage. Some of you may know his name already from his radio program. He was so taken aback by my dare to speak with Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade about why they do what they do, why they’re prepared to sacrifice themselves for what they call a freedom fight and we call terrorism. He was so taken aback that he chose to label me as a slut on the air. And that’s not all, as a porn star. And that’s not all, as an accomplice to the murder of Jewish children. So these are the ramifications for simply being the messenger in the Arab world.
Emphasis added. Original spelling retained. You can watch her speech here.
Banfield tried to be a real journalist for MSNBC. She tried to understand and report the Israeli perspective but also the perspectives of groups like Hezbollah, and for that she was severely punished.
For Hezbollah, you could say something similar of Hamas today. As Banfield says, you don’t have to praise groups like Hamas (or, for that matter, Israel). But what you should try to do as a journalist is to understand them and to report on them as clearly and honestly as possible. As she says, her reward was to be defamed and dismissed as a slut by a fellow reporter, even called an accomplice to murder, after which her bosses at NBC punished and demoted her!
It’s no wonder that mainstream media coverage by most reporters today is so slavishly pro-Israel. Who wants to be slut-shamed and demoted? Who wants their career ruined just because they sought to understand more than one side (the Israeli/U.S. one) of complex situations in the Middle East?
My brother once quipped: “We learn, good.” MSM reporters in America “learned good” that being rabidly pro-Israel (and, of course, pro-U.S. government and pro-war) is always the safest bet to accolades and promotions from their corporate overlords.
With admirable honesty, Banfield spoke of the horrific face of war at Kansas State Univ. in 2003. Soon after her speech, she was demoted (Image courtesy of KSU)
And, as I wrote in my previous piece on Banfield: Any young journalist with smarts recognizes the way to get ahead is to be a cheerleader for U.S. military action, a stenographer to the powerful. Being a critic leads to getting fired (like Phil Donahue); demoted and exiled (like Banfield); and, in Jesse Ventura’s case, if you can’t be fired or demoted or otherwise punished, you can simply be denied air time.
Banfield tried to tell us there’s a difference between journalism and coverage; that far too many voices of dissent had been silenced in America before and during the opening stages of the Iraq War; that war coverage was (and is) far too often both one-sided and sanitized.
Again, it’s worth a few minutes of your time to listen to her lecture and reflect on her honesty and integrity—and how she was punished for it.
After watching this, you’ll understand why the reporters you see today on U.S. TV and cable networks are nothing like Ashleigh Banfield.
“War is ugly and it’s dangerous” and it fuels hatred. Yes it is and yes it does, Ms. Banfield. Thank you for your honesty, your integrity, and your courage.
If you’re like me, you subscribe to news services like the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, and Reuters, which send daily news reports and quick highlights. Given the busy pace of life, most people probably read those headlines and short summaries and little else. The mainstream media is counting on that.
Consider this quick summary I received today from Reuters’ “Daily Briefing”:
ISRAEL AND HAMAS AT WAR
More than five months into Israel’s ground and air campaign, launched in response to Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack, there are widespread shortages of food, medicines and clean water in Gaza, doctors and aid agencies say. Starving children fill hospital wards as famine looms.
Note the framing here. It’s a war between Israel and Hamas, with history beginning on October 7, 2023. Most of all, note how widening famine is described: it’s just happening, apparently due to a war that Hamas started.
You’re not told that the famine is man-made. That the Israeli government is blocking thousands of trucks loaded with food, medicine, and clean water for Gaza. Instead, you’re encouraged to think it’s much like a natural disaster, if not entirely the fault of Hamas, which allegedly started all the trouble on October 7th.
Sorry, kid: the Israeli government won’t let the aid trucks roll. Blame Hamas!
If challenged to write my own summary for Reuters, I’d pen something like this:
Israeli government policies are producing mass famine in Gaza. Israel has already killed or wounded more than 100,000 Palestinians since the October 7th Hamas attacks. An Israeli blockade on most aid to Gaza promises death tolls in the hundreds of thousands over the next few months. Meanwhile, the U.S. continues to send weapons to Israel while providing diplomatic cover in the UN, making it complicit in genocide.
We see similar narrative elision with the Russia-Ukraine War, which in the mainstream media is all the fault of Vladimir Putin, who woke up in February 2022 and decided to invade Ukraine because he’s a power-hungry maniac, a new Hitler—or worse. Meanwhile, Putin blew up his own highly profitable Nordstream pipelines, or maybe a rogue element from Ukraine did it. Who can tell, right?
Dishonest and disingenuous reporting is facilitating genocide in Gaza and a horrendous war in Ukraine that is hollowing out that country. In each case, what we’re supposed to focus on is something else: the crimes of Hamas and the alleged megalomania of Putin.
Gaza is especially egregious since a genocide is in progress there, enabled and empowered by massive weapons shipments from the United States to Israel. But I guess there’s nothing we can do to help those starving Palestinian children “as famine looms.” I guess we can construct a temporary pier that will take two or three months to build; I hope the starving children can hold on that long. Whether that pier will facilitate relief efforts or serve mainly as a Trojan horse to evacuate Palestinians from Gaza (ethnic cleansing by the boat load) remains to be seen.
Mainstream Media Outlets Say No One Was Harmed in the Israeli Embassy while Denying the Reality of Genocide
A young Air Force airman set himself on fire outside the Israeli Embassy in DC to protest genocide in Gaza. Aaron Bushnell, 25, died after being taken to a hospital.
Aaron Bushnell before he set himself on fire. Mainstream media sites chose not to feature any images of Bushnell, focusing instead on the Israeli Embassy or “the crime scene”
This was an extreme and deadly act of political protest directed against the Israeli government’s killing and wounding of 100,000 Palestinians in Gaza and its ongoing war of annihilation there, a war abetted by the U.S. government’s political and military power. Bushnell shouted “Free Palestine!” as he burned.
Bizarrely, an officer at the scene pointed a gun at him as he burned before another first responder asked for fire extinguishers. How a man on fire posed a threat to others is unclear.
[Update 2/27, 0820 EST: Disgracefully, this was the headline of a story at the Washington Post on Bushnell: Airman who set self on fire grew up on religious compound, had anarchist past. At this link. It appears Bushnell grew up in a Christian society in Orleans on Cape Cod, that he joined the Air Force in 2020, served as a cyber defense ops specialist in Texas, and was interested in U.S. history, socialism, and anarchism. The Washington Post article is at pains to portray him as being raised by a weird, possibly abusive, Christian cult while putting a heavy stress on his interest in anarchism. He also liked cats and Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, so you just know he was a misfit. In all seriousness, Bushnell seems to me to have been an unusually principled and sensitive man who acted out of strong moral conviction.]
Aaron Bushnell, an unusually principled, determined, and thoughtful young man
Coverage in the mainstream media is revealing. I checked three sites: NBC, CBS, and the Guardian in Britain. Let’s look at NBC first. NBC said that Bushnell’s act was an “apparent protest” against the “Israeli-Hamas war.” NBC later added that Israel’s “crackdown” in Gaza was termed a genocide by Bushnell. NBC itself stuck to the narrative that Israel is engaged in a defensive war, a “crackdown,” against Hamas.
Next, let’s look at CBS. CBS repeated the narrative of “an apparent protest of Israel’s actions in its war against Hamas.” CBS did mention that Bushnell’s stated motivation was that he could no longer be complicit in an ongoing genocide in Gaza, followed by a lengthy denial by Netanyahu and the Israeli government. Claims of genocide are “false” and “outrageous,” as CBS gave Netanyahu the last word.
Turning to the British Guardian, its first sentence is more blunt: An active-duty member of the US air force has died after setting himself on fire outside the Israeli embassy in Washington DC, while declaring he will “no longer be complicit in genocide”.
It also included a key statement Bushnell apparently included on his Facebook page: “Many of us like to ask ourselves, ‘What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?’ The answer is, you’re doing it. Right now.”
Nevertheless, the Guardian downplayed the 100,000 killed and wounded in Gaza as numbers generated by the “Hamas-run health service” there.
The final site I’d like to consider is Antiwar.com, an example of alternative media, I suppose. This site gets it right, in my view, so I’m posting the article here in its entirety:
US Airman Sets Himself on Fire in Front of Israeli Embassy to Protest Gaza Genocide
The airman said he would ‘no longer be complicit in genocide’
An active duty US airman set himself on fire in front of the Israeli embassy in Washington DC to protest the US-backed slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza.
According to Talia Jane, an independent journalist who obtained the video of the incident, the airman, who was identified as Aaron Bushnell, 25, died of his wounds late Sunday night.
According to Axios, a video of the incident shows the airman saying he would “no longer be complicit in genocide” and that he was about to “engage in an extreme act of protest.”
“But compared to what people have been experiencing in Palestine at the hands of their colonizers, it’s not extreme at all. This is what our ruling class has decided will be normal,” Bushnell said right before lighting himself on fire.
Washington DC’s Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department said in a post on X that the airman was transported to a hospital with “critical life-threatening injuries.” The department also said the officers who extinguished the fire were members of the US Secret Service.
The dramatic protest comes as the number of Palestinians killed in Gaza by the Israeli campaign is approaching 30,000, and over 69,000 have been wounded. About two-thirds of the casualties are women and children.
The International Court of Justice has ruled that it’s “plausible” Israel is committing genocide and decided to take up the case brought to the court by South Africa. Despite the massive civilian casualty rate and international pressure, the US continues to provide unconditional support for the slaughter.
This morning, an article on Diana Rigg caught my eye. I loved her in “The Avengers,” which I watched in reruns in the 1970s. She was sexy, smart, vivacious, and tough, and I saw where Vanessa Redgrave said that Rigg was ahead of her time, that she was sexy and smart when women as actors were supposed to be either/or, not both.
Rigg as Emma Peel in “The Avengers,” 1968
This snippet caught my eye: “I spoke out when I was doing the Avengers and learned I was earning less than the cameraman. I was called ‘money grabbing.’”
Rigg was an absolute star of that show, yet she earned less than a crew member. While the cameraman probably deserved a raise, Rigg deserved to be paid what her male costar, Patrick Macnee, earned. She was as good as gold and better.
The article on Rigg references her painful battle with cancer and how she wished to die with dignity. Death with dignity is something I fully support. I see no reason why people should suffer and die in agony when drugs are available to prevent this. But of course the idea of assisted suicide raises all kinds of ethical and legal questions. And our inhibitions about talking about death and dying contribute to a status quo in which people are expected to “rage against the dying of the light,” no matter how much pain they’re in and no matter how fruitless the raging.
Diana Rigg with costar Patrick Macnee in “The Avengers”
Diana Rigg was a fighter. She wasn’t afraid to speak out for what she believed in. I hope her example inspires others to fight for equity and for dignity in all aspects of life, even death.
The Curious Case of Dean Phillips and the Democratic Party
I first noticed Dean Phillips, a Democratic Congressman from Minnesota, a few months ago. He started appearing on mainstream media shows like Meet the Press to suggest that Joe Biden might be a bit too old to run for reelection and that he, Dean Phillips, might be a viable option, a Biden 2.0, if you will. (I say Biden 2.0 because Phillips praises Biden and basically agrees with everything he’s done.) Subsequently, Mr. Phillips has announced a bid for the presidency, garnering notices in outlets like The Guardian and The Atlantic (the latter magazine is a neocon mouthpiece for establishment Democrats).
Biden 2.0? Congressman Dean Phillips (Wikipedia)
Whereas Democratic progressive challenger Marianne Williamson has been completely ignored by the mainstream media, Phillips has won considerable praise. Take this gushing beginning to a piece posted at the end of October at The Atlantic:
DEAN PHILLIPS HAS A WARNING FOR DEMOCRATS
By Tim Alberta
OCTOBER 27, 2023
To spend time around Dean Phillips, as I have since his first campaign for Congress in 2018, is to encounter someone so earnest as to be utterly suspicious. He speaks constantly of joy and beauty and inspiration, beaming at the prospect of entertaining some new perspective. He allows himself to be interrupted often—by friends, family, staffers—but rarely interrupts them, listening patiently with a politeness that almost feels aggravating. With the practiced manners of one raised with great privilege—boasting a net worth he estimates at $50 million—the gentleman from Minnesota is exactly that.
But that courtly disposition cracks, I’ve noticed, when he’s convinced that someone is lying. Maybe it’s because at six months old he lost his father in a helicopter crash that his family believes the military covered up, in a war in Vietnam that was sold to the public with tricks and subterfuge. I can hear the anger in his voice as he talks about the treachery that led to January 6, recalling his frantic search for some sort of weapon—he found only a sharpened pencil—with which to defend himself against the violent masses who were sacking the U.S. Capitol. I can see it in his eyes when Phillips, who is Jewish, remarks that some of his Democratic colleagues have recently spread falsehoods about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and others in the party have refused to condemn blatant anti-Semitism.
What a guy that Dean Phillips is! He’s earnest! A gentleman! Yet he’s tough too, ready to defend the Capitol armed with a pencil! He’s rich and Jewish and ready to take on his fellow Democrats, who are hesitant to condemn “blatant anti-Semitism”!
Maybe Phillips is simply on a quixotic quest, an ego trip, but I don’t think so. I think he’s been given permission by the Democratic establishment to run against Biden. In essence, he’s a younger, richer, Biden, a 2.0 version in case Joe falters in the next year.
Again, my guess (I stress “guess”) is that he’s been given the nod to run so that Democrats can say Biden does have challengers within the party, that the DNC supports democracy, while at the same time providing a viable backup in case Biden stumbles badly, whether due to advanced age or dramatically falling poll numbers.
If Biden remains relatively strong, Mr. Phillips will quietly slip away, with a couple of winks and perhaps a clap on the back from the DNC. But if Biden is behind catastrophically to Donald Trump next spring or early summer, Phillips may emerge as the Democratic version of Trump: not quite as rich, not nearly as radical, but the model of a successful businessman who allegedly knows how to fix America and put us all “back to work.”
In the person of Dean Phillips, the owners and donors are hedging their bets. With Kamala Harris and Mayor Pete not ready for prime time, Phillips could be the new Biden. The DNC most certainly prefers Phillips to a Democratic challenger like Williamson or (obviously) third-party/independents like Jill Stein, RFK Jr., and Cornel West.
Stay tuned, America. If Biden falters, Biden 2.0 is already ready to roll in the person of Dean Phillips.
Here’s a typical quick summary of the dire situation in Gaza from CNN this AM:
The US is seeking to delay an Israeli ground offensive in Gaza amid calls to free more hostages held there by Hamas and allow aid into the besieged enclave. A senior Israeli official told CNN there will be “no ceasefire” in Gaza, but emphasized efforts are ongoing to free the more than 200 hostages in the region “as quickly as possible.” However, the official added, “humanitarian efforts cannot be allowed to impact the mission to dismantle Hamas.” More than 4,600 people have been killed in Gaza since October 7 and over 14,200 others wounded, the health ministry there said.
Conditions on the ground in Gaza continue to deteriorate as Israel repeatedly bombards the strip with airstrikes.
For “Israeli ground offensive,” substitute massive military assault. Note the mention of hostages held by Hamas but no mention of hostages/prisoners held by Israel. “Besieged enclave”–open-air prison or concentration camp under constant bombing would be more telling. “Dismantle Hamas”: the IDF goal is the total destruction of Hamas, with the death of civilians being blamed on Hamas because “they” allegedly use human shields, i.e. the Israeli government and military is never to blame.
Note the passive voice: 4600 people “have been killed in Gaza” — well, who’s killed them? Who’s wounded 14,200 others? With weapons provided by which countries?
Conditions in Gaza continue to “deteriorate”: What does this mean, specifically? Lack of food, water, power, people dying in hospitals due to lack of supplies, people screaming in agony due to lack of anaesthesia, etc. And why are they “deteriorating”? It’s not just due to airstrikes by Israel. The Israeli government’s decision to stop food, fuel, electricity, and water to Gaza is creating the conditions for death and illness on a massive scale.
Looks like bombs over Gaza today—what can you do? It’s just the weather (Caitlin Johnstone)
Caitlin Johnstone has a fine critique about how Israeli bombing is being reported by the Western press. In essence, it’s reported as if bombs are simply dropping from the sky on Gaza: massive bombing as a very bad hail storm that must be endured and over which humans have no control.
Pay very close attention to how this war is being reported, especially in the Western mainstream press. For we all know the saying that the first casualty of war is truth.
Update: I’m involved with an effort, “Words About War Matter,” and the group led by David Vine has posted guidance for language related to Israel, Hamas, and Gaza. The link is https://www.wordsaboutwar.org/gaza.html.
When others asked the truth of me, I was convinced it was not the truth they wanted, but an illusion they could bear to live with. — Anaïs Nin
War, among other things, is a place of illusion. With the Russia-Ukraine War, the illusions are many. For the mainstream media in America, the illusion promoted is this: Ukraine, a quasi-democratic country, is enduring an unprovoked invasion by authoritarian Russia, now in its 18th month. The freedom-fighters of Ukraine have been greatly assisted by benevolent military and economic aid freely offered and given by the Biden administration and NATO countries. Ukraine fights for a noble cause that the U.S. should and must support, since allowing Russia to prevail would lead to further unprovoked Russian invasions of other freedom-loving peoples in Europe.
It’s an illusion that’s comforting for Americans to live with, since it flatters us while vilifying an old enemy, the former Soviet Union and now Russia. It’s flattering to the Biden administration, which can pose as a stalwart defender of Ukraine, and certainly flattering to U.S. weapons makers, who can pose collectively as the new arsenal of democracy. It’s an illusion, moreover, that elides or disguises any economic motives the U.S. might have in supporting Ukraine so generously since the war began.
Even something as simple as smoke contains great complexity, as I recall from my fluid dynamics classes
The best illusions, the most seductive ones, have elements of truth to them. Yes, Russia did invade Ukraine; yes, Russia is authoritarian; yes, Ukraine has defied the odds and stymied Vladimir Putin’s designs; yes, NATO and U.S. weaponry has been important to Ukraine’s endurance. But partial facts are generally not impartial.
Briefly put, NATO expansion eastwards since the collapse of the Soviet Union is seen by Russia as provocative, constricting, and aggressive. Ukraine itself is very much an imperfect democracy, rating “high” on government corruption indices. U.S. meddling in Ukraine, especially in 2014, is most certainly problematic. The destruction of the Nordstream pipelines and subsequent profits by U.S.-based energy companies can’t be ignored. And, not surprisingly, U.S. weapons manufacturers are enjoying boom times. Not only does Ukraine need weaponry and ammunition, but U.S. and NATO stocks of the same must be replenished as arms and ammo are gifted to Ukrainian fighters. Nor is Ukraine completely free of neo-Nazi influences, which is to say that the situation is muddier and more complex than the comfortable illusion that’s so often sold by the mainstream media.
Which brings me to CNN’s report today, that showed up in my morning email:
President Joe Biden is asking Congress for more than $24 billion in aid for Ukraine and other international needs as he works to sustain support for the war amid signs of softening support among Americans. The request — which includes more than $13 billion in security assistance and $7 billion for economic and humanitarian assistance for Ukraine — sets up a potential battle with Republicans in Congress. Biden has promised support will last “as long as it takes,” but an increasingly skeptical Republican Party has cast doubt on US involvement going forward. This comes after a CNN poll released last week found 55% of Americans believe Congress should not authorize additional funding to support Ukraine.
As the Russia-Ukraine War drags on with neither side apparently having a quick victory in sight, questions accelerate. How much are Americans prepared to pay to Ukraine? Is an open-ended, “as long as it takes” commitment truly wise? What happens if the war escalates even further? And, perish the thought: What happens if someone uses a nuclear weapon or another form of WMD?
Many Americans today are in dire straits. Credit card debt for Americans recently exceeded $1 trillion and rising. The Biden administration has failed to provide promised and significant student debt relief; a public option for health care; a $15 federal minimum wage; while acting to break a railroad strike and promoting more fossil fuel drilling on fragile federal lands as well as offshore.
Americans are not stupid to wonder about the priorities of the Biden administration and why Ukraine gets a blank check as Americans continue to suffer. Illusions may be comfortable, but they don’t put food on the table or pay health care bills. And the price they come at may be high indeed, which is one reason, I think, a majority of Americans are none too comfortable with this illusion.
Bracing Views 