Friday, February 13, 2015
Who’s the “Low Life Scum:” Kissinger, CODEPINK, Harold Pinter or Hitler?
It's been two weeks now since John McCain refereed to CODEPINK; most of the stories except for those from the traditional news media, which isn't even trying to do a good job, are strongly against his response, with good reason. However there are still some like John Hinderaker who say "John McCain Speaks For Me On CodePink." He goes on to say, "This persecution of Kissinger has been going on for decades. It has something to do with Vietnam, apparently. .... How long can these leftists continue to hate? Forever, seemingly."
His comment "It has something to do with Vietnam, apparently" clearly indicates that he doesn't know much about Henry Kissinger's history and presumably doesn't want to. He appears to be a regular commentator and if he wanted to know more about history he almost certainly could and would; although he wouldn't if he relied on the traditional media or the highest profile pundits for his information. His comment "How long can these leftists continue to hate? Forever, seemingly," is equally ironic since right wingers also demonstrate an enormous amount of hatred, although a review of history that involves fact checking sources might raise major doubts about whether they're justified in many cases and they would also indicate that there is an enormous amount of justification for the calls to prosecute Kissinger.
And the same establishment that continues to ignore Kissinger's history, also continues to support more war crimes and selling of weapons that inevitably lead to more atrocities by both allies and the so-called terrorists that they claim to oppose.
Susan Milligan claims "McCain Had a Point About Code Pink" but she misses a major part of the problem. She says, 'The Congressional Record is filled with flowery references to “my good friend from Iowa,” or “the distinguished gentlelady from New Hampshire.” Such verbiage is used even when the parties in question are bitterly fighting with each other. That’s not dishonest; it’s just what civilized people do. When you abandon even the show-language of polite discourse, the relationships deteriorate further.'
What she fails to mention is that those who report on an enormous amount of problems with U.S. foreign policy rarely ever get much media attention which is why some people like John Hinderaker and his followers might not realize how many problems with many of the wars and the lies that they're based on cause so much destruction and will continue to do so unless major changes are made which the polite people on Capital Hill aren't willing to do.
There is something wrong when it is considered polite to support a policy that leads to a large number of atrocities and rude when people actually point out the truth.
I'm sure it is also extremely impolite to compare Adolf Hitler to Kissinger or other political leaders in the U.S.; but this is often a tactic that is used to arbitrarily either shock people or put certain comparisons off limits so that they can't be discussed. Some times people really should be shocked; and the true definition that should be used more often for the word compare is "to analyze the similarities and differences." Which means that I'm not saying that they're exactly the same but current censorship is far more subtle than what Hitler did. As the saying goes "History is written by the victor;" and if Hitler had won it would be impolite to criticize him or worse. Both Medea Benjamin and Harold Pinter have done a far better job addressing these issues but most people aren't aware of them.
If it seems like Susan Milligan is right about CODEPINK doing nothing but heckle people and interrupt others right to free speech it is only because they don't have much if any opportunity to present their case to the vast majority of the public. The only thing the traditional media covers is their heckling while completely ignoring an enormous amount of history. This can be found at other more reliable sources that get much less coverage including Medea Benjamin's column, where she points out some of the history that both Susan Milligan, John Hinderaker and many other higher profile pundits ignore:
Kissinger is also famous for opposing democracy in other countries like Chile when he said in a meeting on June 27, 1970, "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves." Henry A. Kissinger Quotes This was intended to be disclosed for the first time in the first addition of "The CIA and The Cult of Intelligence" by Victor Marchetti and John D. Marks published in 1974; however this was censored and it wasn't made public until later. The official explanation for the censorship, like many other claims, is that it might threaten national security; however after this disclosure and many others have been made it has become clear that it is far more threatening to the integrity of government officials that claim to be defending democracy but routinely do the opposite.
Marchetti and Mark's book is one of many that has disclosed a lot of the atrocities that have been committed by the U.S. Government over the decades but they rarely get much publicity and the mass media routinely pretends they don't exist instead of addressing the details. This is part of a very effective propaganda tactic that enables many people to believe that the U.S. has been fighting one war after another to "defend democracy against communism" or "terrorism." It also enables them to portray people like Chris Kyle who killed at least 160 people, in a war that was based on lies, as heroes, even though the war had nothing to do with protecting U.S. citizens and did far more to antagonize people around the world and make some of them resent the U.S.even more and strike out like the Boston Bombings.
Harold Pinter did an exceptionally good job describing how the United States has avoided full discussion of their activities in his 2005 Nobel Prize speech; however this also received virtually no media attention so only those that are accustomed to relying on alternative media outlets are aware of it; and many of them may have forgotten it, since it is so rarely mention.
If more people were aware of the history that is rarely ever mentioned by the traditional media but covered much better by people like Medea Benjamin, Harold Pinter, Naomi Klein author of "Shock Doctrine" or many authors from The American Empire Project among other more reliable sources then it would be hard tom imagine that most people would think that it is more impolite to point out atrocities than to cover them up.
The atrocities committed by representatives of the U.S. government and their allies in third world countries aren't as blatant as Hitler's but they're far more insidious; which could mean that, unless more people rely on alternative media outlets and hold our leaders accountable then they could present a much greater threat than the terrorists they condemn.
Actually by conducting so many activities around the world they're almost certainly indirectly inciting these terrorists they claim to oppose maintaining a permanent state of war which isn't necessary.