-Caveat Lector-

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/nov2002/yem-n09.shtml

The Washington Post and the killings in Yemen: "Liberal" press extols CIA’s
Murder Inc.

By Bill Vann
9 November 2002

The CIA assassination of six men in Yemen, carried out November 3, has
drawn widespread praise from the US news media. The strike, by a missile
fired from an unmanned Predator drone, was hailed by most media outlets as
“payback” for anti-American terrorism. Among the most significant comments
was a November 6 editorial published by the Washington Post, responding to
criticism of the attack in the Arab world and elsewhere.

“Bush administration officials described the missile strike on a car
carrying six Al Qaeda operatives in Yemen on Sunday as a battlefield
operation in the war on terrorism, even though it occurred far from
Afghanistan and in a country where no conventional military conflict is
under way,” the editorial began. “Other observers called it a targeted
assassination, or even an extrajudicial killing—terms usually reserved for
violations of human rights or international law. Such condemnation is not
justified.”

With this bald declaration, the Post forfeits any lingering claim to
uphold basic democratic and human rights, and casts its lot wholly and
completely with the exponents of imperialist war and neocolonial conquest
in the Bush administration. It is a devastating self-indictment that
underscores the degradation of American liberalism.

Why is condemnation of the CIA’s assassination of six men unwarranted? The
Post asserts that those killed were not “political or criminal figures,
but trained combatants of an organization that has declared war against
the United States.”

The newspaper does not attempt to buttress its case by citing
international treaties or human rights agreements that make it acceptable
for one country to covertly enter the territory of another and kill its
citizens when no state of war exists between them. Of course, no such
documents exist.

On the contrary, there are clear and internationally recognized statutes
that make the CIA’s action a war crime. If Washington launched the attack
without Yemen’s permission—the Yemeni regime has remained silent on this
question—then it is an unauthorized use of force and a gross violation of
Yemeni sovereignty. If the government of Yemen collaborated in the
operation, then both governments are guilty of a summary execution,
precisely the kind of extrajudicial killings that are barred by human
rights conventions.

The Post does not bother to provide any facts to substantiate its
position. It merely cites unnamed US government sources speaking after the
CIA has already acted as judge, jury and executioner. World public opinion
is expected to accept on face value the US claim that those killed were
guilty as charged.

Only one of the dead men—Qaed Sinan Harithi—has been identified. US
sources claim he is “suspected” of involvement in the 2000 attack on the
US destroyer Cole, which claimed the lives of 17 American sailors.

According to media reports, one of those killed was an American citizen.
Thus the American government, with the support of the supposedly liberal
press, claims the right to assassinate its own citizens. All it has to do
is brand a targeted victim as a terrorist.

How does the public know these men deserved to die? The executioner says
so. The same method applied domestically would eliminate any need for
courts, judges, juries, prosecutors and defense lawyers. Police could
merely identify “suspected” criminals and send out death squads to
eliminate them.

The words chosen by the Post editorialists are significant. Because the
six were “combatants,” it was not a crime to kill them. “Enemy combatant”
is the term of art devised by the Bush administration’s Justice Department
to define those US citizens who are deemed terrorists based on the
unchallengeable say-so of the president. Once so designated, they are
denied the right to hearings, trials or legal counsel. They can be held
incommunicado indefinitely without a shred of evidence presented against
them.

The same political interests and dictatorial methods that have ripped up
democratic rights at home have led, on the world arena, to the CIA’s open
return to the methods of Murder Incorporated.

The Bush administration made no attempt to hide its responsibility for the
assassinations. On the eve of the midterm elections, White House officials
boasted that the action was carried out under an edict issued by Bush last
year loosening restrictions on CIA participation in assassinations.
Clearly, the administration felt that news of the bloodletting would
“energize” the Republican Party’s right-wing base.

The professed job of the media, however, is to remain skeptical and demand
evidence, rather than act as cheerleaders for government killings and
covert operations. The Post —like the media as a whole—has abandoned that
role, acting more and more as a semi-official propaganda arm of US
imperialism.

For a quarter of a century, the stated policy of the US government was to
ban the participation of its intelligence agency in such killings. A
presidential order barring the practice followed the revelations in 1975
of CIA plots to assassinate foreign leaders, from Cuba’s Fidel Castro to
Congolese independence leader Patrice Lumumba and Chile’s president,
Salvador Allende.

The reason for the official ban on CIA assassinations was self-interest.
More astute members of the US establishment recognized that assassination
was an act of terrorism that discredited Washington throughout the world.
At the same time, they knew that carrying out such actions only
legitimized terrorist actions against the US itself.

The Post glosses over such concerns, insisting that the attack on the
alleged Al Qaeda members in Yemen is unique. It argues that the presence
of the men in Yemen made any attempt to capture them impossible.

Yet this was not the first time that the CIA has used missile-armed drones
to deadly effect, and it certainly will not be the last. The new policy of
assassination is far more wide-ranging than the Post cares to admit.

In Afghanistan, similar devices were used in unsuccessful assassination
attempts against the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar,
a former Afghan prime minister and head of the Islamic fundamentalist
Hezb-e-Islami. Neither of the two have been directly implicated in
September 11 or any other act of terrorism against the US. In fact, both
men had in the past carried out extensive dealings with Washington. In
both cases, the only ones killed were innocent bystanders.

In another incident, the US reported that it had tracked down a group of
“terrorists” and killed them with a Hellfire missile fired from one of the
CIA drones. It later emerged, however, that those who died were
impoverished Afghan villagers, killed while trying to eke out a living by
collecting scrap metal.

In addition to the CIA, the Pentagon has its own fleet of missile-carrying
drones, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has made it known that he
intends to carry out his own death squad operations.

The chief concern of the Post’s editorialists is that other nations might
use the US action to justify their own assassinations: “If the United
States can fire a missile at an Al Qaeda leader in Yemen, some ask,
shouldn’t Israel aim one at Yasser Arafat in Ramallah, or Russia target
exiled Chechen leaders in Turkey and Azerbaijan?” The newspaper gently
chides the Bush administration for failing to spell out the “fundamental”
differences between when Washington kills and when anyone else does. It
makes no attempt to accomplish this feat on its own.

In point of fact, the attack in Yemen underscores American support for
“targeted” assassinations carried out by the Israeli regime, which has
murdered scores of Palestinian leaders, together with family members and
civilians caught in the missile blasts. As for the Russians, the US gave
its tacit support to the recent operation in Moscow in which defenseless
and drugged hostage takers were systematically executed by special forces
troops.

The Post’s sophistry cannot conceal a basic fact: it agrees that
Washington has the right to do whatever it pleases anywhere in the world.
International law is something that applies only to lesser countries, not
the world’s “sole super power.”

Enthusiastically calling the killings in Yemen a “clean shot,” the Post
concludes, “The success of Sunday’s operation, which seems to have
eliminated one senior Al Qaeda figure and avoided innocent casualties, is
therefore cheering.”

Thus, the editors of one of the most influential newspapers in the country
adopt not only the outlook, but also the language of the hit-man. This
type of journalistic vomit is the expression of a deluded ruling elite
that has embarked on a policy of international criminality—one that holds
grave dangers for the people of the US and the entire globe.

The policy of state assassinations carries with it an immense potential
for catastrophe. Israeli use of the same methods against Palestinian
leaders in the West Bank and Gaza provoked a wave of suicide bombings that
have claimed hundreds of lives. Will the result of the US Hellfire attacks
be any different?

The CIA’s drones allow the agency’s assassins to kill from hundreds of
miles away with the stroke of a computer key and without fear of
retribution. Those most likely to pay the price for this reckless and
criminal policy, however, will be innocent American civilians. They will
be the ones targeted by enraged and misguided people who will be recruited
for terrorist attacks, carried out in the name of avenging Washington’s
acts of murder.

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http://archive.jab.org/ctrl@;listserv.aol.com/
 <A HREF="http://archive.jab.org/ctrl@;listserv.aol.com/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to