THE MEDIA ISSUE: VOLUME 17, ISSUE 33
FUNTIONALLY, DYSFUNTIONAL
by Malik Isasis
The news over the past Fourth of July (America’s Independence Day) weekend was wall-to-wall coverage of the recently freed American hostages. It was beyond surreal to watch the news coverage of hostages Marc Gonsalves, Keith Stansell and Thomas Howes in what was a live press conference. The live press conference was 90% propaganda, 10% stage craft, and 100% bullshit
All the news channels like CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, so-called Fox News, and ABC love spreading flowery folklore of bravery, heroism, and American innocence. This press conference again, revealed an immature jingoism and destructive self-indulgence. The military clearly orchestrated this national circle-jerk, revealing deft skills that kept the conference focused on family members and on the freed-hostages’ teary thank yous to their rescuers. The blighted television press cooed like a baby getting his shitty diaper changed. Nothing of substance was gathered from why these gentlemen were kidnapped. Nor did the press ask why? Many outlets referred to them as American contractors, a euphemism I’m sure ushered onto the media by savvy military handlers. Some were as bold to name the defense contractors these men worked for Northrop Grumman one of the largest and most profitable defense contractors in the world. Northup Grumman was also penalized for bid rigging, fraud, delivery of faulty military parts and environmental damage. Northup Grumman was also awarded a $48 million dollar contract to train the Iraqi Army in 2003 Since the army has fallen apart, I’m wondering if we can have a refund for a half-assed services rendered? Corp Watch has done a fantastic job at tracking this conglomerate and its relationship with the Bush administration. (read more on Northup Grumman)
The American Hostages
Marc Gonsalves, Keith Stansell and Thomas Howes were mercenaries hired to fight the drug trafficking industry in Columbia. New York Times in a story written by Juan Forero on February 14th, 2004 reported this:
Bogota, Colombia - After their tiny plane crashed deep in the jungles of southern Colombia, three American civilians on a mission to search for cocaine labs, drug planes and, occasionally, guerrilla units were taken hostage by Marxist rebels.
A year later, the men's families say the captives have been all but forgotten. Some say that is the way American officials and the men's employers want it to be.
The three Americans -- Marc Gonsalves, Keith Stansell and Thomas Howes -- worked cloaked in secrecy for two subsidiaries of Northrop Grumman , the huge military contractor, in an arrangement used increasingly by the United States government in conflict zones from Colombia to Afghanistan.
The men's families and critics of American policy here say the case sheds light on a shadowy world of secret operations that employ private contractors in deals that make it easy to skirt public scrutiny and for all to wash their hands if something goes wrong.
"My complaint about use of private contractors is their ability to fly under the radar and avoid any accountability," Representative Jan Schakowsky, an Illinois Democrat, said. "Now we're finding out that because of their low profile, and so little scrutiny, they are able to avoid liability or responsibility for these individuals."
In Iraq and Afghanistan, more than 70 American companies and private individuals have won up to $8 billion in contracts in the last two years, according to the Center for Public Integrity in Washington. Much of their work is shielded from the public, critics say, noting that their deaths are not even added to the American body count.
American officials, here and elsewhere, say using contractors saves money, provides essential services and specialists and frees military forces that are already stretched thin. They also say the three men taken captive were working within the legal limits set by the Congress.
But critics say that for American policy makers, the political risks surrounding Washington's deepening involvement in Colombia's conflict made using contractors preferable to placing American forces or intelligence officers in similar jeopardy.
The mission of the three men whose plane went down last Feb. 13 was to fly their single-engine Cessna, its underbelly loaded with sophisticated photographic equipment, over vast jungle tracts to search for illegal drug activities and, sometimes, guerrilla movements.
The intelligence was then shared with the Colombian armed forces in Washington's two-pronged fight against drug trafficking and a 40-year Marxist insurgency.
After the crash, in Caqueta Province, the rebels killed two other survivors: an American pilot, Tom Janis, and a Colombian intelligence officer. Weeks later, on March 25, a plane on a mission to track the captives hit a tree. Three more Americans were killed: Tommy Schmidt, Ralph Ponticelli and James Oliver.
Here is some of the corporate coverage:
Responsibility
Every time Americans get caught with their hands down their pants they scream terrorist, consistently blaming others for the chaos that they’ve created. I don’t know much about the guerilla group known as FARC, and I surely don’t support violence against people; The story is always more complicated than what we are getting. America has been interfering in Latin America politics for decades, flipping governments like pancakes, assassinating political leaders, supporting corrupt governments that oppress the population. So when American mercenaries and military personnel are kidnapped, the corporate media wants to give no context as to why, rather they focus on the emotional. How Hollywood.
Todd Cretien wrote this on July 4, 2008:
Recently, the FARC has come under intense pressure to negotiate an end to the civil war and is listed as a "terrorist" organization by the U.S. government--a label most American media sources, not to mention mainstream Democrats like presidential candidate Barack Obama, repeat without comment.
However, the FARC's reluctance to disarm is certainly understandable. In the mid-1980s, many of the group's members agreed to lay down their weapons and take part in elections in a leftist coalition called the Patriot Union. In exchange for their participation in the "democratic process," up to 5,000 of them were systematically exterminated by the military and its death squads, including 1990 presidential candidate, Bernardo Jaramillo Ossa.
Despite this bloody history, President Bill Clinton initiated "Plan Colombia" during his second term in office. Between 1996 and 2000, Clinton increased aid to the Colombian military by nearly 14 times, from $54 million to $765 million. George Bush has sent between $400 million and $650 million in military aid to Colombia every year of his presidency.
This avalanche of arms has made the Colombian military one of the mightiest in the region, far more powerful than the Venezuelan military, for instance. And it has also turned the tide in the civil war, driving FARC guerrillas deeper and deeper into the mountains and reducing their fighting force from more than 15,000 10 years ago to an estimated 6,000 to 8,000 today.
Whether or not Uribe pre-empted the French-brokered release of Betancourt, it is clear that the FARC is in trouble, and the Colombian government believes that, if it cannot military win the war in the next few years, it can certainly continue to press its advantage.
Furthermore, the Colombian military's incursion into Ecuador earlier this spring "in pursuit" of FARC rebels sets a dangerous precedent.
As Latin America turns left, U.S. imperialism is searching for the means to regain the strategic advantage in "its backyard." Boosting Colombia's military capacity is not just about defeating the FARC or fighting the "war on drugs." It is also about sending a bipartisan message to Colombia's unruly neighbors that the U.S. aims to play an increasingly intrusive role in the region's future.
For Every Action, There is a Reaction
The corporate media will never tell us that American policy creates blowback, terrorists groups, terrorist acts but that by no means make people who fight American imperialism, terrorists. The term is overused, and over simplified. Those in the media need to grow up, or go back to journalism school. The misinformation put out by the media is far more damaging to us than terrorists.
FUNTIONALLY, DYSFUNTIONAL
by Malik Isasis
The news over the past Fourth of July (America’s Independence Day) weekend was wall-to-wall coverage of the recently freed American hostages. It was beyond surreal to watch the news coverage of hostages Marc Gonsalves, Keith Stansell and Thomas Howes in what was a live press conference. The live press conference was 90% propaganda, 10% stage craft, and 100% bullshit
All the news channels like CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, so-called Fox News, and ABC love spreading flowery folklore of bravery, heroism, and American innocence. This press conference again, revealed an immature jingoism and destructive self-indulgence. The military clearly orchestrated this national circle-jerk, revealing deft skills that kept the conference focused on family members and on the freed-hostages’ teary thank yous to their rescuers. The blighted television press cooed like a baby getting his shitty diaper changed. Nothing of substance was gathered from why these gentlemen were kidnapped. Nor did the press ask why? Many outlets referred to them as American contractors, a euphemism I’m sure ushered onto the media by savvy military handlers. Some were as bold to name the defense contractors these men worked for Northrop Grumman one of the largest and most profitable defense contractors in the world. Northup Grumman was also penalized for bid rigging, fraud, delivery of faulty military parts and environmental damage. Northup Grumman was also awarded a $48 million dollar contract to train the Iraqi Army in 2003 Since the army has fallen apart, I’m wondering if we can have a refund for a half-assed services rendered? Corp Watch has done a fantastic job at tracking this conglomerate and its relationship with the Bush administration. (read more on Northup Grumman)
The American Hostages
Marc Gonsalves, Keith Stansell and Thomas Howes were mercenaries hired to fight the drug trafficking industry in Columbia. New York Times in a story written by Juan Forero on February 14th, 2004 reported this:
Bogota, Colombia - After their tiny plane crashed deep in the jungles of southern Colombia, three American civilians on a mission to search for cocaine labs, drug planes and, occasionally, guerrilla units were taken hostage by Marxist rebels.
A year later, the men's families say the captives have been all but forgotten. Some say that is the way American officials and the men's employers want it to be.
The three Americans -- Marc Gonsalves, Keith Stansell and Thomas Howes -- worked cloaked in secrecy for two subsidiaries of Northrop Grumman , the huge military contractor, in an arrangement used increasingly by the United States government in conflict zones from Colombia to Afghanistan.
The men's families and critics of American policy here say the case sheds light on a shadowy world of secret operations that employ private contractors in deals that make it easy to skirt public scrutiny and for all to wash their hands if something goes wrong.
"My complaint about use of private contractors is their ability to fly under the radar and avoid any accountability," Representative Jan Schakowsky, an Illinois Democrat, said. "Now we're finding out that because of their low profile, and so little scrutiny, they are able to avoid liability or responsibility for these individuals."
In Iraq and Afghanistan, more than 70 American companies and private individuals have won up to $8 billion in contracts in the last two years, according to the Center for Public Integrity in Washington. Much of their work is shielded from the public, critics say, noting that their deaths are not even added to the American body count.
American officials, here and elsewhere, say using contractors saves money, provides essential services and specialists and frees military forces that are already stretched thin. They also say the three men taken captive were working within the legal limits set by the Congress.
But critics say that for American policy makers, the political risks surrounding Washington's deepening involvement in Colombia's conflict made using contractors preferable to placing American forces or intelligence officers in similar jeopardy.
The mission of the three men whose plane went down last Feb. 13 was to fly their single-engine Cessna, its underbelly loaded with sophisticated photographic equipment, over vast jungle tracts to search for illegal drug activities and, sometimes, guerrilla movements.
The intelligence was then shared with the Colombian armed forces in Washington's two-pronged fight against drug trafficking and a 40-year Marxist insurgency.
After the crash, in Caqueta Province, the rebels killed two other survivors: an American pilot, Tom Janis, and a Colombian intelligence officer. Weeks later, on March 25, a plane on a mission to track the captives hit a tree. Three more Americans were killed: Tommy Schmidt, Ralph Ponticelli and James Oliver.
Here is some of the corporate coverage:
Responsibility
Every time Americans get caught with their hands down their pants they scream terrorist, consistently blaming others for the chaos that they’ve created. I don’t know much about the guerilla group known as FARC, and I surely don’t support violence against people; The story is always more complicated than what we are getting. America has been interfering in Latin America politics for decades, flipping governments like pancakes, assassinating political leaders, supporting corrupt governments that oppress the population. So when American mercenaries and military personnel are kidnapped, the corporate media wants to give no context as to why, rather they focus on the emotional. How Hollywood.
Todd Cretien wrote this on July 4, 2008:
Recently, the FARC has come under intense pressure to negotiate an end to the civil war and is listed as a "terrorist" organization by the U.S. government--a label most American media sources, not to mention mainstream Democrats like presidential candidate Barack Obama, repeat without comment.
However, the FARC's reluctance to disarm is certainly understandable. In the mid-1980s, many of the group's members agreed to lay down their weapons and take part in elections in a leftist coalition called the Patriot Union. In exchange for their participation in the "democratic process," up to 5,000 of them were systematically exterminated by the military and its death squads, including 1990 presidential candidate, Bernardo Jaramillo Ossa.
Despite this bloody history, President Bill Clinton initiated "Plan Colombia" during his second term in office. Between 1996 and 2000, Clinton increased aid to the Colombian military by nearly 14 times, from $54 million to $765 million. George Bush has sent between $400 million and $650 million in military aid to Colombia every year of his presidency.
This avalanche of arms has made the Colombian military one of the mightiest in the region, far more powerful than the Venezuelan military, for instance. And it has also turned the tide in the civil war, driving FARC guerrillas deeper and deeper into the mountains and reducing their fighting force from more than 15,000 10 years ago to an estimated 6,000 to 8,000 today.
Whether or not Uribe pre-empted the French-brokered release of Betancourt, it is clear that the FARC is in trouble, and the Colombian government believes that, if it cannot military win the war in the next few years, it can certainly continue to press its advantage.
Furthermore, the Colombian military's incursion into Ecuador earlier this spring "in pursuit" of FARC rebels sets a dangerous precedent.
As Latin America turns left, U.S. imperialism is searching for the means to regain the strategic advantage in "its backyard." Boosting Colombia's military capacity is not just about defeating the FARC or fighting the "war on drugs." It is also about sending a bipartisan message to Colombia's unruly neighbors that the U.S. aims to play an increasingly intrusive role in the region's future.
For Every Action, There is a Reaction
The corporate media will never tell us that American policy creates blowback, terrorists groups, terrorist acts but that by no means make people who fight American imperialism, terrorists. The term is overused, and over simplified. Those in the media need to grow up, or go back to journalism school. The misinformation put out by the media is far more damaging to us than terrorists.
posted by Malik Isasis at
11:26 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home