On bad guys

From Christopher Hayes discusses the use of the phrase "bad guys" at The Nation:

The phrase is self-consciously playful but also insidious. An adult who invokes it is expressing a layered set of propositions. What “bad guys” says, roughly, is this: “I’m an adult who has considered the nature of the moral universe we live in and concluded that it really is black and white. I’ve decided that my earliest, most childlike conception of heroes and villains is indeed the accurate one, which only later came to be occluded by nuance and wishy-washy, bleeding-heart self-doubt. I reject that more complicated, mature conception as false. I embrace the child’s vision of the world.”

“Bad guys” was a phrase that channeled our rawest emotions in the wake of 9/11, emotions that we collectively mythologize.

Continue ReadingOn bad guys

Photographs will end these wars

Jon Stewart has had it with these expensive, gory and secret wars. Secret? Yes. There are no photos. The wars fought by America are covered-up wars. They are wars we don't care about because there are no photos of our gristly business of war. Nor do we see any photos of the alleged good things that have been going on for the past year in Iraq and Afghanistan. I wrote about this lack of war photos previously in a post I titled "Where are the Photos of Good Things Supposedly Happening in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our media is doing its damned best to make these happy wars, bloodless wars.   We are therefore supposed to trust the government that we have made ten years of progress in Afghanistan for our $2 Billion dollars per week.  Bullshit.  I'm equally angry at  our federal government, including both Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama, and our patronizing mass media.   Where are any headlines that the only reason that we can't afford to build 100 new $20 million schools across the U.S. is that we blew that much money in Afghanistan this week. We also blew that much money last week and the week before.  And we do it week after week without even one photo of the violence or deaths making it onto any of the newspapers of America.  Week after week after week, for ten years and counting. PoliticusUSA sums up Jon Stewart's points nicely:

Later The Daily Show host said that more pictures of all of the elements of these wars need to be released so people can see what is really going on, “The best reason in my mind for releasing the pictures is that we have been fighting this war for nearly ten years, thousands of US deaths, tens of thousands of Iraqis and Afghanis have died, and we’ve seen nearly zero photographic evidence of it. Remember how long the media had to fight to show military coffins returning from overseas? You probably don’t remember, because you saw pictures of it the day they won the case and not since.”

Jon Stewart concluded, “Maybe we should always show pictures, Bin Laden, pictures of our wounded service people, pictures of maimed innocent civilians. We can only make decisions about war, if we see what war actually is and not as a video game where bodies quickly disappear leaving behind a shiny gold coin, which from what I understand is going up. By the way, the White House announced today that they have officially decided not to release the Bin Laden photo. Instead to keep it a secret they are going to airdrop it into an affluent Pakistani suburb, so it won’t be found for years.”

I am not surprised that many of the stories on this have discussed Stewart’s argument for releasing the photos, but have omitted the media criticism. The media has been complicit in keeping the American people in the dark on these two wars. Don’t buy for a minute that they don’t show the American people what is going on in Iraq and Afghanistan because it is an issue of access. The footage is shown every day in the Middle East, but the US corporate controlled media has decided that we don’t need to see that here.

Everyone who writes a story about Jon Stewart and the Bin Laden pictures who doesn’t discuss the media blackout on these wars is complicit in the cover up. Jon Stewart’s logic for releasing the Bin Laden photos applies to all war coverage.

Continue ReadingPhotographs will end these wars

On the death (again) of Osama bin Laden

Those who are uncomfortable with cognitive dissonance or so-called conspiracy theories might be better off skipping this post. Those who seek to understand the machinations of our government however, are encouraged to read on. Firstly, let me clearly state that I disapprove of the manner of this killing. Extrajudicial assassinations are an anathema to a society that claims to live by the rule of law. Numerous voices are loudly praising this decision to kill bin Laden rather than capture him, supposedly to save the fragile American public from the rigors of a trial. They claim that a trial would have been "too controversial", as if that had anything to do with the law or its application. Either we believe that laws matter or we don't. Either we believe that there is justice available under our system of laws, or we do not. In this case, it's clear that we do not trust our own system of justice to arrive at the "right" conclusion. Implicitly, this suggests that we are hoping for a kangaroo court, already convinced of the guilt of the accused based upon the mere say-so of our government. When the president can order someone to be killed, with no oversight or evidence presented, we no longer a democratic system of checks and balances. We have an emperor, a tyrant, relatively benign though he may appear to be. I argued much the same in the case of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed last year. [More . . . ]

Continue ReadingOn the death (again) of Osama bin Laden