Is it me, or does the mainstream media seem even more ridiculously susceptible to political distraction than ever? I have to admit to being a bit gob-smacked by their laser-like focus on Nancy Pelosi and the question of whether or not she has prevaricated over C.I.A. briefings about the use of torture in interrogations. They seem to be taking their lead not only from Republicans in Congress, but from retired G.O.P. leadership, like Newt Gingrich (a.k.a. the embodiment of all that is good and right). What the fuck, friends – this is like speculating over who listened in on the police scanner the night some arsonist burned an apartment house to the ground. Sure, even Pelosi’s explanation makes her seem hypocritical, but that’s a pretty minor matter next to the implementation of a broad policy of torture and prisoner abuse, in service to even more serious crimes.

Here’s what astonishes me about this. While the entire nation is obsessing over what Nancy Pelosi knew and when, very little attention is being paid to the still-emerging narrative of how extreme interrogations fit into the Bush team’s push for war in Iraq. Sure, there’s discussion on MSNBC and other outlets about the use of waterboarding and its illegality. But last I looked, invading a country for no justifiable reason is also a violation of international law. And the more information that comes out about the interrogation program, the more it looks as though it was being applied as a means of extracting confessions – false ones – about a connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. If that seems like old news to anyone, it bears reminding that crimes of this magnitude should by rights remain news until the perpetrators are held to account. That’s the general standard to which we hold our official enemies, and the one the Nuremberg principles call on us to observe with regard to our own behavior.

Doesn’t it seem like just yesterday that Bush/Cheney and friends (of both parties) were railroading us into a completely unnecessary war? Actually…. it WAS just yesterday that the object known as Dick Cheney was heard making the same fraudulent claims before the American Enterprise Institute. At least he’s keeping this heinous piece of history fresh in our minds… though why we should need any kind of mnemonic device is a bit beyond me. The war they started is, after all, still going on, still killing scores at a time. That is why waging an unprovoked war of aggression is considered the most egregious of crimes – because so many evils are contained within it. Cheney and his administration, the broad swath of congressional supporters, and ultimately every citizen of our nation bears responsibility for everything that proceeded from that fateful decision back in March of 2003. We are not a dictatorship; we are a democracy, and that is part of the price of democracy – taking ownership of your nation’s misdeeds.

And whatever Cheney tells his fans, waterboarding someone 180 times does not indicate a determination to learn the truth in a very short time. It’s a means of extracting false information that can be used to help drive a nation to war. If that isn’t criminal, I don’t know what is.

luv u,

jp

When Obama was elected last fall, I found myself wallowing in a kind of hopeful feeling – one that was floated on a number of kind of shaky (though no less comforting) assumptions. One was that Obama might somehow prove to be an exception to the usual political rule, inasmuch as he was an insurgent pitted against a strong establishment candidate, and was not expected to win the nomination. He is also a compelling speaker, a likeable media personality, and so on. So for that two months between Election Day and Inauguration Day, it was possible to suspend disbelief and enjoy a brief vacation from that somewhat oppressive national political reality we’ve lived with all of our lives. That, of course, is over, and I suppose it’s all to the good. Hey, it was the holiday season, right? What better time to feel all festive and delusionary. Now the work begins.

This isn’t the first time I’ve tried to disabuse myself of the notion that there is, in fact, a kind of permanent government that transcends party affiliation or even membership in the general political class. It’s proven to be a pretty persistent principle, supported through Democratic and Republican presidencies alike. George W. Bush’s administration provided a particularly dramatic example of this. As someone at least nominally on the far left, I always saw their policies as being way out in right field, aside from being positively dangerous. But what was truly amazing about the Bush team is that they evoked a very similar reaction from the nation’s core establishment – those individuals and institutions that, in essence, own and run the country. The invasion of Iraq is what did it for Bush. The aftermath of that decision shook these enduring institutional interests to their very foundations – so much so that, after a particularly disastrous year of war (and an electoral rout), Dubya was given a minder in the form of Robert Gates, and Rumsfeld was given his walking papers. Gates is considered a reliable instrument of the American Empire (more so, certainly, than the recklessly self-aggrandizing Rumsfeld), and it seemed as though he was placed there to mind the store through the final two years of Bush’s reign.

And the current administration? Well… look who’s running Defense. They’re still cleaning house, as this week’s changing of the guard in Afghanistan illustrates. Over at Treasury we’ve got Larry Summers and Tim Geithner. I would term these two as “minders,” as well. After Dubya crashed the economy (with help from friends in both parties), reform is politically inevitable, and these two are well-placed to keep said reform from taking on too populist a character. Just this week, Obama’s proposal for the regulation of derivatives has the mark of Summers/Geithner on it, in the form of a loophole you could sail a supertanker full of public money through. While it establishes a central clearing house for derivatives and seeks to standardize them, it does not restrict the creation of more customized (non-standardized) financial instruments, nor does it appear to regulate them. So it offers a kind of voluntary regulation…. easy to evade. On the other side of the street, Obama appears to have his mind changed for him on releasing detainee abuse photos. Again – doing so does not advance the interests of the empire, any more than would democratizing the financial system.

The point is, we ignore the forces of political gravity at our own peril. Best to know not only what we’re fighting for, but whom we’re fighting.

luv u,

jp