-Caveat Lector-
SELECTIVE INDIGNATION: bin Laden's Inhumanity, and Ours
By Tim Wise
December 20, 2001
http://www.zmag.org/ZNET.htm
The reviews came in quickly. And to no one’s surprise, the verdict was
"two thumbs down."
"Can you believe how ruthless this man is? How cold blooded?"
"That monster has no regard for human life."
"What kind of person laughs about the deaths of thousands of innocent people?"
These are but a few of the righteously indignant comments heard over the
course of the last two weeks: the reactions of journalists, U.S.
political leaders, and everyday folks to the recently aired Osama bin
Laden tape. Therein, bin Laden appears to take credit for the atrocities
of 9/11 and to cavalierly dismiss any moral concerns about the loss of
life involved.
To the extent the tape is an accurate translation, it is certainly a
disgusting display of ethical depravity. But really now, did we need
grainy VHS footage to demonstrate that Osama bin Laden was a thug? Or
was its dissemination primarily for the purpose of re-inflaming the
American public?
Of course there is nothing so true about indignation as the simple fact
that it’s usually applied in a highly selective fashion. So it was easy
to condemn the horrific rationalizations for brutality offered up by
Soviet Commissars or their proxies during the cold war, for example, but
much more difficult to apply the same moral calculus to the statements
of America’s allies: often brutal dictators whose regimes we supported
no matter how many innocent civilians they butchered, tortured or
"disappeared."
Certainly there is little reason to doubt that if someone had trained a
video camera on U.S. clients like Duvalier, Marcos, Somoza, Pinochet or
Suharto, we would have had the chance to be regaled with dismissive
rationalizations of murder from them as well. Inhumanity, cruelty and
barbarity, as it turns out, have never been deal-breakers for gaining
the support of the United States government, after all.
What is of course interesting -- or at least would be to a nation
insistent on something so mundane as consistency -- is how Americans
react with horror to the cold, calculating comments of bin Laden, and
yet brush aside (or fail to even learn about) the equally cold,
calculating ways in which their elected officials and other U.S.
spokespersons have regularly dispensed with human life, absent so much
as a twinge of remorse.
After all, are the things bin Laden said really any more morally
troublesome than the comments of former Secretary of State Madeline
Albright? Remember, it was Albright who explained, also on camera, that
even though roughly half-a-million children in Iraq had died from U.S.
sanctions and bombing, ultimately, this cost was "worth it." (1)
In fact, the calculation that civilian deaths are "worth it" has a
healthy pedigree, even extending to the Bush family itself. While George
W. might become apoplectic at the dismissive manner in which Osama bin
Laden shrugs off innocent lives, one doubts that he has ever lectured
his father about the same thing. This, despite the fact that when Poppa
Bush was asked whether capturing Manuel Noriega had been worth the
deaths of the thousands of innocent Panamanians killed by U.S. forces in
1989, he responded that while "every human life is precious," ultimately
"yes, it has been worth it." (2)
Are we to suppose that merely mouthing the words "every human life is
precious," somehow makes the acceptance of mass killing less
objectionable?
More decent? Or instead, might not such a schism between what we say and
what we do be even more disconcerting than similar pap spewing from the
lips of bin Laden? At least Osama isn’t a phony.
As we bask in our rage over the bloodthirsty ruminations of our current
Public Enemy Number One, perhaps we should also be willing to roll the
tape, so to speak, on any number of equally disturbing comments by red,
white and blue Americans.
Like the U.S. soldiers who bombed Iraqi forces even after they had
surrendered on the field of battle in Operation Desert Storm -- a
certifiable war crime -- and laughed about their actions, calling the
strafing "a turkey shoot," and likening it to "shooting fish in a
barrel." As one of America’s finest put it: "It’s the biggest Fourth of
July show you’ve ever seen. And to see those tanks just ‘boom,’ and more
stuff keeps spewing out of them...it’s wonderful." (3)
Or how about Ed Korry, Ambassador to Chile in 1973, when the U.S.
sponsored
the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Salvador
Allende,
and replaced it with one of the most brutal dictatorships in the
hemisphere’s history? Prior to Allende’s victory, Korry was on record as
saying: "Once Allende comes to power we shall do all within our power to
condemn Chile and Chileans to utmost deprivation and poverty." (4)
Or what of former Undersecretary of State, U. Alexis Johnson? In 1971,
as the U.S. seared the Laotian countryside with phosphorous bombs and
napalm, killing tens of thousands of civilians, Johnson described the
slaughter as "something of which we can be proud as Americans." He
explained further that, "what we are getting for our money there is, I
think, to use the old phrase, very cost effective." (5)
Or how about Robert Martens, who served in the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta
at the time of the Indonesian coup that brought Suharto to power in
1965, and resulted in the mass murder of roughly 500,000 people? In
discussing how the CIA provided the Indonesian military with a list of
suspected subversives to assassinate, Martens noted: "It really was a
big help to the Army. They probably killed a lot of people, and I
probably have a lot of blood on my hands, but that’s not all bad.
There’s a time when you have to strike hard at a decisive moment." (6)
Little doubt that the head of al-Qaeda would second that emotion.
Then there’s Fred Sherwood, a former CIA pilot who was involved in the
U.S.-led coup that overthrew the elected government of Guatemala in
1954. Later he took up residence in the country and became President of
the American Chamber of Commerce there. In the late 1970’s, as the
United States continued its two-decade long support of death squads and
military dictators, Sherwood could think of nothing wrong with their
murderous deeds: "Why should we be worried about the death squads?
They’re bumping off the commies, our enemies. I’d give them more
power...The death squad -- I’m for it…Shit!" (7)
And last but not least, what should we make of Dan Mitrione? Mitrione
was the former head of the U.S. Office of Public Safety in Uruguay. In
that capacity, Mitrione’s job appears to have been instructing Uruguayan
police and military officials on how to torture their political enemies
more effectively. His favorite slogan, according to those with whom he
worked, was "the precise pain, in the precise place, in the precise
amount, for the desired effect." Since torturers need to practice their
craft, Mitrione would have his students test out all manner of
devices--including electric shock to the genitals -- on homeless
beggars, kidnapped from the streets. Once Mitrione and his charges were
finished with these torture models, they were routinely murdered. (8)
And yet in 1970, when Mitrione was himself kidnapped and killed by an
Uruguayan rebel group, Secretary of State William Rogers attended his
funeral, as did Frank Sinatra and Jerry Lewis, who staged a benefit for
the family. White House Spokesman Ron Ziegler said of Mitrione, that his
"devoted service to the cause of peaceful progress in an orderly world
will remain as an example to free men everywhere." (9)
Yes indeed, the willingness to snuff out human life with absolutely no
remorse or sense of guilt goes back a long way. At the risk of spoiling
the patriotic mood, one might recall that the founding of this nation
was dependent on the butchering of millions of indigenous people, who
were typically dispatched gleefully by those "settlers" and pioneers who
saw fit to steal their land. So too were we dependent on the stuffing of
black
bodies into the cramped bowels of slave ships, utterly indifferent as to
how many would die on the long trip from Africa to the Americas. And
millions did, while others laughed about it.
Ruthless? Cold-blooded? No regard for human life? To be sure, these
statements describe Osama bin Laden, and on that we can all agree. But
so too do they describe far too many of our own leaders, our own
political and military elites. Unless and until we show as much interest
in condemning this kind of bloodthirsty rhetoric from all quarters, and
not just those defined for the moment as our adversaries, we will
continue to stand as hypocrites to the rest of the world. We will
continue to be seen as a people who don’t mean what we say. Or rather,
as a nation that applies one standard of morality to ourselves, and a
completely different standard to everyone else. And still we wonder,
"why do they hate us?"
--------------------------
Tim Wise is a writer, lecturer and antiracist activist. He can be
reached and footnotes for this article can be procured from him at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------
Notes
(1) CBS, "60 Minutes," interview with Madeline Albright, conducted by
Lesley
Stahl, May 12, 1996. In discussing the effects of sanctions in Iraq, the
following exchange took place:
Lesley Stahl: We have heard that a half million children have died. I
mean,
that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price
worth it?
Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think
the
price is worth it.
(2) New York Times, December 22, 1989, p. 16
(3) Blum, William 1995. Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA
Interventions Since World War II. Common Courage Press: 336; also, "Road
to Basra," Washington Post, February 27, 1991: 1.
(4) Quoted in "Controlling Interests," documentary film (San Francisco:
California Newsreel), 1978, cited in Parenti, Michael. 1989. The Sword
and the Dollar: Imperialism, Revolution and the Arms Race. St. Martin's
Press: 57
(5) Testimony before the US Senate Armed Services Committee, Hearings on
Fiscal Year 1972 Authorizations, July 22, 1971: 4289; cited in Blum,
1995: 140
(6) Blum, 1995: 194; also, Kadane, Kathy, "CIA Lists," San Francisco
Examiner, May 20, 1990; also, Covert Action Information Bulletin. Number
35, Fall 1990: 59, contains excerpts of interviews with U.S. Diplomats
conducted by Kadane for SF Examiner article.
(7) Pearce, Jenny. 1982. Under the Eagle: U.S. Intervention in Central
America and the Caribbean. Latin American Bureau, London: 67; also,
Schlesinger, Stephen and Kinzer, Stephen. 1999 (updated edition). Bitter
Fruit: The Story of the American Coup in Guatemala. Harvard University
Press; also, Lernoux, Penny. 1984. In Banks We Trust. Doubleday Books:
238,
citing a CBS News Special, March 20, 1982 ("Update: Central America in
Revolt")
(8) Blum, 1995: 200-203; Extracts from the report of the Senate
Commission of Inquiry into Torture, accompanying the film script for the
documentary, State of Siege. 1973, Ballantine Books: 194-196; also,
"Death of a
Policeman: Unanswered Questions About a Tragedy," Commonweal, September
18, 1970: 457; also, Langguth, A.J. 1978. Hidden Terrors. Pantheon: 249;
also,
New York Times, August 5, 1978: 3
(9) Blum, 1995: 203; also Langguth, 1978: 305.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Tiny Wireless Camera under $80!
Order Now! FREE VCR Commander!
Click Here - Only 1 Day Left!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/WoOlbB/7.PDAA/ySSFAA/KlSolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
***************************
Share with us your ideas.
***************************
The things here are a collection from
various places or persons and I am not
responsible for the contents. The
content is not meant to offend anyone.
Anyone can post here.
Please get your friends to join our list. The more
people we have, the better the list will be.
Community email addresses:
?? -- Post message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:-) -- Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:-( -- Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
;-)> -- List owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
See our "links page" for other conspiracy sites.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
<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:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>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
