De Mainstream Pers 13
In De Groene Amsterdammer nummer 29 van dit jaar stelde H.J.A. Hofland de volgende vraag met betrekking tot de Arabische wereld:
In hoeverre hebben die eindeloze godiensttwisten, de stammenstrijd, de burgeroorlogen invloed op de verhoudingen in het Westen?
Wel, Henk Hofland, net zo veel invloed als de 'eindeloze godiensttwisten, de stammenstrijd, de burgeroorlogen,' die millennialang Europa in hun greep hielden en die in 1940 eindigden in de verwoesting van ondermeer het centrum van jouw geboortestad Rotterdam en de uitroeiing van een groot deel van de joodse Europeanen, hadden op de Arabische wereld. Henk, je suggereert onder andere met je kwalificatie 'het vredestichtende Westen' dat het geweld in het Midden Oosten volledig losstaat van de Westerse politiek. Ik adviseer je daarom jezelf te verdiepen in dit onderwerp. Je zult ontdekken dat het Westen de situatie in het Midden Oosten ingrijpend heeft bepaald, en nog steeds bepaalt, van de verdeling door de toenmalige Europese grootmachten van het Arabische grondgebied en het verraad door de Britten die in ruil voor de Arabische steun tegen het Ottomaanse rijk de Arabieren onafhankelijkheid hadden beloofd en die belofte nog tijdens de Eerste Wereldoorlog schonden door in het geheim af te spreken welke deel Franrijk zou krijgen en welk deel de Britten. De inzet waren de oliebronnen, en de meest vitale grondstof voor het kapitalistische Westen is nog steeds de oorzaak van de vele gewelddadige ingrepen onder leiding van de Amerikaanse beleidsmakers, onder wie de ideologen van het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken die in 1945 de oliereserves beschreven als 'a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history.'
Van Iran in 1953 tot Irak in 2003 en Libie in 2011 hebben wij chaos geschapen in de olierijke landen in de Maghreb en het Midden Oosten. Vanochtend berichtte de International Herald Tribune na weer eens een ontploffing van een krachtige autobom in Benghazi, 'exactly one year after an attack there killed the U.S. ambassador and theree other Americans,' dat sinds het vermoorden van Kadafi ‘the country is effectively being held hostage by unruly militia forces that were initially formed to fight Qaddafi,' en die door de NAVO militair en logistiek werden gesteund. Maar nu vernemen we in het Westen geen oproepen om humanitair in te grijpen. Wij hebben in dat deel van de wereld dictators in het zadel gehouden en de oppositie laten martelen. Afghanistan en Irak hebben wij in totale chaos gedompeld, een situatie waarvoor de bevolking in deze landen generatieslang de prijs moeten betalen. Kennelijk is dit alles jouw volledig ontgaan. Daarom adviseer ik je, voordat je weer een tendieus stukje inDe Groene Amsterdammer schrijft, enkele boeken over dit onderwerp te lezen van Amerikaanse collega's van ons. Begin met Tim Weiner’s boek Een Spoor van Vernieling. De geschiedenis van de CIA dat vijf jaar geleden in een Nederlandse vertaling is verschenen en 720 pagina’s lang ‘de logica van de macht’ analyseert. De met de Pulitzer Prize onderscheiden Weiner van de New York Times schreef volgens de recensent van The Washington Times:
Een vernietigend rapport van een inlichtingendienst die meestal faalde bij het voorspellen van belangrijke politieke gebeurtenissen op de wereld, mensenrechten schond, Amerikanen bespioneerde, moordaanslagen op buitenlandse regeringsleiders beraamde en geld stak in klungelige doofpotacties dat hij niet toekwam aan zijn eigenlijke werk, het verzamelen en analyseren van informatie.
Vooral via terreur wist de VS ‘de agenda van de wereldpolitiek te bepalen,’ en wie de macht van Washington negeert, betaalt daarvoor een hoge prijs, van Guatemala tot Syrie, van Kongo tot Chili, om slechts enkele voorbeelden te geven. Washington heeft niet alleen democratisch gekozen politici verdreven zoals president Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán, premier Mossadeq, premier Patrice Lumumba en president Allende, maar ook het terrorisme gevoed, zoals de Amerikaanse onderzoeksjournalist en auteur Robert Dreyfuss gedocumenteerd aantoont in zijn klassieke studie Devil’s Game. How The United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam, waarin hij ondermeer schrijft:
there is an unwriten chapter in the history of the Cold War and the New World Order that followed. It is the story of how the United States -- sometimes overtly, sometimes covertly -- funded and encouraged right-wing Islamist activism.Devil's Game attempts to fill in that vital missing link... There is no question that the U.S. support for the mujahideen, most of which went to the hard-core Islamists, was a catastrophic miscalculation. It devastated Afghanistan itself, led to the collapse of its government, and gave rise to a landscape dominated by warlords, both Islamists and otherwise. It created a worldwide network of highly trained Islamist fighters from a score of countgries, linked together and roughly affiliated to Osama bin Laden's soon-to-be established Al Qaeda organization.
Precies hetzelfde doet Washington nu in Syrie door fundamentalistische ‘rebellen’ te steunen. Lees daarom de informatie van vooraanstaande journalisten die door onderzoek wel weten waarover ze schrijven. Hier zijn wat namen.
*Blowback. The Costs and Consequences of American Empire. Chalmers Johnson.
*Overthrow. America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq. Stephen Kinzer.
*Devil's Game. How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam. Robert Dreyfuss.
*Imperial Overstretch. Roger Burbach & Jim Tarbell.
*Imperial Hubris. Why the West Is Losing The War on Terror. Michael Scheuer.
*Killing Hope. William Blum.
*Failed States. The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy. Noam Chomsky.
*Iran. A People Interrupted. Hamid Dabashi.
*Treachurous Alliance. The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the U.S. Trita Parsi.
Al deze gezaghebbende Amerikaanse intellectuelen hebben gedocumenteerd aangetoond hoe contraproductief het westerse geweld in het Midden-Oosten is geweest en nog steeds is, met als gevolg dat de Verenigde Staten zowel in Irak als in Afghanistan verloor, en zichzelf niet alleen moreel maar ook financieel en politiek failliet heeft gemaakt. Bovendien is 'het moslim-terrorisme' alleen maar toegenomen, Als je die boeken allemaal gelezen hebt, zul je begrijpen dat jouw vraag ‘In hoeverre hebben die eindeloze godiensttwisten, de stammenstrijd, de burgeroorlogen invloed op de verhoudingen in het Westen’ alleen maar getuigt van gevaarlijke onwetendheid en onnozelheid.
Met collegiale groet,
Stan van Houcke
Een lang interview die ik met de Amerikaanse geleerde, wijlen Chalmers Johnson, had kunt u hier beluisteren: http://www.stanvanhoucke.net/audioblog/pivot/entry.php?id=16#body
Michael Scheuer Former chief of the CIA’s Osama bin Laden unit; author of Imperial Hubris
the reality is Americans are fed up with the power that the Israeli lobby has over our foreign policy which is costing us lives and treasure in the middle east and until recently has been taboo to even discuss...
Michael Scheuer who is a critic of Israeli influence over our foreign policy... "I think that of course American foreign policy is eventually up to the American people. One of the big things we have not been able to discuss for the past 30 years is our policy towards the Israelis. Whether we want to be involved in fighting Israel's wars in the future is something that Americans should be able to talk about. They may vote yes. They may want to see their kids killed in Iraq or Yemen or somewhere else to protect Israel. But the question is: we need to talk about it. Ultimately, Israel is a country that is of no particular worth to the United States."
The host asked Scheuer "strategically?" and he responded, "Strategically. They have no resources we need. Their manpower is minimal. Their association with us is a negative for the United States. Now that's a fact. What you want to do about that fact is entirely different. But for anyone to stand up in the United States and say that our support for Israel doesn't hurt us in the Muslim world, or our support for Hosni Mubarak's dictatorship doesn't hurt us, is to just defy reality."
In response to another called who asked "Why is it that the United States does not want to talk about Israel?," Scheuer said, "why don't we talk about that? Because AIPAC and other influential American Jewish groups are extraordinarily involved in the funding of American political campaigns and have the ability to reach out and make sure that people lose their jobs, or are otherwise hurt, if they dare to criticize Israel."
Scheuer has personal experience with this since he lost a job with the Jamestown Foundation think tank for comments about presidential Obama pandering to the Israeli lobby saying he was "doing the Tel-Aviv Two Step". He claims that the foundations pro-Israel donors ordered his termination. He said that "you know, you always talk about the Israel Lobby and its power, but to see it up close and personal aimed right at me was very educational. In fact, it was worth the experience of losing a job."
Scheuer says that "Israel has every right to do what it needs to do" to defend itself, including the development of nuclear weapons, Scheuer said that the U.S. has no real interest in either Israel or the Palestinian Authority. "That is a religious war in which we have no stake,"
LA Nonpartisan Examiner
*********************************************************************
NSA Shares Raw Intelligence Data On US Citizens With Israel – OpEd
THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY AT FORT MEADE, MD. NSA PHOTO
|
September 12, 2013
Glenn Greenwald drops another bombshell today, revealing that the NSA shares vast amounts of unfiltered data with Israeli intelligence. The data is raw, meaning the U.S. doesn’t review it to ensure no information from or about U.S. citizens, or even government officials, is included. That is, this report flies in the face of solemn statements from the president on down that the NSA not only doesn’t collect such data on citizens, but that it surely doesn’t share them with foreign intelligence services.
By now, everyone knows that Obama, Clapper, Alexander, et al. are lying through their teeth every time they make a statement about the Snowden documents. So they’re lied about this as well.
The level of intelligence sharing, as well as the blitheness with which we trust Israel to use the information judiciously, is shocking. Here are some of the undertakings included in the memo of understanding that governs the intelligence sharing:
US government handed over intercepted communications [to Israel] likely to contain phone calls and emails of American citizens. The agreement places no legally binding limits on the use of the data by the Israelis.The disclosure that the NSA agreed to provide raw intelligence data to a foreign country contrasts with assurances from the Obama administration that there are rigorous safeguards to protect the privacy of US citizens caught in the dragnet. The intelligence community calls this process “minimization”, but the memorandum makes clear that the information shared with the Israelis would be in its pre-minimized state.…[A] five-page memorandum, termed an agreement between the US and Israeli intelligence agencies “pertaining to the protection of US persons”, repeatedly stresses the constitutional rights of Americans to privacy and the need for Israeli intelligence staff to respect these rights.But this is undermined by the disclosure that Israel is allowed to receive “raw Sigint” – signal intelligence.…Although the memorandum is explicit in saying the material had to be handled in accordance with US law, and that the Israelis agreed not to deliberately target Americans identified in the data, these rules are not backed up by legal obligations.
Further astonishing news concerns the transmission to Israel of information about U.S. citizens, that is, information the NSA is not supposed to have or collect:
The memorandum of understanding, which the Guardian is publishing in full, allows Israel to retain “any files containing the identities of US persons” for up to a year.
Instead of directing the Israelis to destroy such files immediately since they violate NSA guidelines, the Israelis can take their own sweet time and do with them what they wish. And there isn’t even any punishment specified for the Israelis violating provisions of the memorandum, so they can essentially ignore these provisions.
Since much of the shared intelligence is unfiltered, it’s entirely possible the NSA is giving Israel communications between U.S. officials. Can you imagine what a gold mine this is? Israel, which is the third most active intelligence operation in the U.S., doesn’t have to work so hard with the NSA handing the data to it on a silver platter. I just love the gentleman’s agreement that requests that Israel return any official documents that are transmitted to it (of course they would!):
The Israelis were required to “destroy upon recognition” any communication “that is either to or from an official of the US government”. Such communications included those of “officials of the executive branch (including the White House, cabinet departments, and independent agencies), the US House of Representatives and Senate (member and staff) and the US federal court system (including, but not limited to, the supreme court)”.It is not clear whether any communications involving members of US Congress or the federal courts have been included in the raw data provided by the NSA, nor is it clear how or why the NSA would be in possession of such communications.
All the Israelis have to say is that while they may’ve had such documents they didn’t recognize them as such. They’re home-free under these lax guidelines.
Another beaut in the memorandum is that Israel is directed to restrict access to a limited number of its government officials on a “need to know” basis. I understand something the NSA apparently doesn’t: that as far as such information gleaned from foreign sources there’s no such thing as the artificial bifurcations elaborated on here. Israel will share the information in whatever way it deems useful and give no consideration for any agreement it signed with the U.S. government. We were fools to entrust this material to Israel under the terms specified.
Greenwald says specifically that Israel is not a member of FIVE EYES, the inner circle of English-speaking nations who share intelligence on an unrestricted basis. But the sheer volume of data spoken of here indicates that my Israeli source, who claims Israel has become an “unofficial, undeclared” member, may not be far off the mark. I should note that a number of journalists and analysts who specialize in U.S. intelligence matters have expressed doubt about the accuracy of my source’s claim regarding FIVE EYES. If revelations like this continue, they may want to reassess their judgment.
The Intelligence/Legal Disconnect
I spoke with John Pike of Global Security Project today and it occurred to me that the U.S. faces a huge disconnect between its legal system and operational intelligence. Our judicial system was meant to accommodate a more constrained intelligence apparatus of the past. In the past, the NSA confined itself to overseas intelligence and FBI handled domestic intelligence. Theoretically, there were penalties for violations of the rules. Theoretically, both agencies attempted to adhere to them. Those were the days.
Nowadays, intelligence has superseded the old divisions. The information dragnet is like massive ocean trawling nets that vacuum up every sea creature in its wake. There are no longer separations between foreign and domestic.
The law is stuck in the intelligence Middle Ages. We’ve devised a judicial fig leaf called the FISA court, a top secret court that determines what’s permissible and not. But this is not protection from wrongdoing. This is not protection of constitutional rights. This is rather a means of pretending that the law is overseeing the intelligence system, while allowing it to do essentially whatever it wishes.
This disconnect between intelligence reality and the law is why everyone from the president on down must prevaricate every time he speaks about the NSA. Pres. Obama’s intelligence officials have even lied in Congressional testimony, which is a federal crime. Of course, no one really believes Congress will haul them before a legal tribunal for perjury. There is a gentlemen’s agreement that the executive branch officials may lie because there’s simply nothing else they can do. Can they admit the NSA violates federal guidelines every minute of the day? Can they tell the American people there is no longer such a concept of privacy, let alone a right to privacy? Can they tell us that these are antiquated notions of the past?
What’s standing in the way is the fact that the American people like their privacy. It’s something that is in the American DNA. That makes the NSA a profoundly un-American institution. So the question becomes, who will win? Will the NSA get its way and trample on all-American values with the connivance of Congress. Or will Congress answer to the vox populi, do its job, and protect America from the excesses of the national security state run rampant? My money is on the inside game. These players and forces are too powerful for the American people. With the added connivance of judges and the Supreme Court, who are willing or unwilling collaborators, the spooks have the upper-hand.
That’s why whistle-blowers like Snowden and Manning are so critical. We know we can no longer expect truth from our leaders. Their job is to conceal the truth. To prevent us from knowing the forbidden secrets. But once in a while a courageous individual comes along who’s willing to tear the veil away and suffer the personal sacrifice that inevitably follows.
So I’d say to Barack Obama: I’m with you as long as you rein in the intelligence apparatus. I’m prepared to keep secrets and support the spooks as long as I know that what the NSA is doing is transparent and that it’s truly accountable to the political echelon. And I’m not talking about the charades that pass for civilian oversight now. I’m talking about an agency that draws back from the myriad excesses of the past ten years. That adheres to the rules. That punishes wrongdoers. If the rules are out of date, let’s update them. As long as we don’t lose the bedrock principles on which the republic was founded. The very principles the NSA has been shredding for years.
This article appeared at Tikun Olam
Een interview met professor Hamid Dabashi kunt u hier horen: http://www.stanvanhoucke.net/audioblog/pivot/entry.php?id=39#body
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten