[Peace-discuss] Pro-war left

Fri Dec 4 12:33:12 CST 2009

The subject line is misleading.  The point of this article is,
these people are not part of the left -- they're only using
the 'progressive' label in hopes of distracting the real anti-war left.
Fortunately unsuccessfully in this case.  But maybe they'll be
smarter on other occasions.

On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 12:26:44PM -0600, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
> From <http://space4peace.blogspot.com/>
>
> 	DECEPTIVE PROGRESSIVES CALL FOR SUPPORT OF OBAMA'S WAR
>
> This morning I got an email from a friend who tipped me off to a conference 
> call for "progressives" to discuss Obama's Afghanistan speech last night.
>
> The call announcement included this: "The narrative so far is that the left 
> is against sending more troops and the right is for it,” said Jim 
> Arkedis, Director of the National Security Project at the Progressive 
> Policy Institute. “But that’s not the reality of the situation. There 
> are reasons for progressives to take heart from much of the President’s 
> new strategy, as well as reasons to tread carefully. We want to make sure 
> all those voices are heard.”
>
> This made me quite interested so I dialed in. The call began with everyone 
> in the audience on mute as the following people made opening statements.
>
> * Rachel Kleinfeld, CEO, Truman National Security Project
> * Jim Arkedis, Director of the National Security Project, Progressive 
> Policy
> Institute
> * Gen. Paul Eaton (Ret.), Senior Adviser, National Security Network
> * Andy Johnson, Director, Third Way National Security Program
> * Lorelei Kelly, Director, New Strategic Security Initiative
> * Brian Katulis, Center for American Progress
> * Frankie Sturm, Communications Director, Truman National Security Project 
> (Moderator)
>
> Frankly I had never heard of any of these people before and I've been 
> working in the "progressive movement" for the past 30 years. A couple of 
> the organizations they work for I had heard a bit about - they are DC-based 
> "think tanks" that usually are heavily funded by corporations to project 
> their message.
>
> Here is a bit of what some of them said in the opening:
>
> Rachel Kleinfeld: "Thrilled by last night's speech....it's a realistic goal 
> we have been given...dismayed that progressives don't see that this will 
> reduce the violence of this war."
>
> Jim Arkedis: Described himself as a former counter-terrorism analyst at the 
> Pentagon....."Think of the US like an NFL defense....by adopting this 
> counter-insurgency strategy it essentially takes the other sides offense 
> off the field.....this is about peace and stability." He slammed Rep. 
> Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) who was on the news this morning criticizing the 
> plan as being from the "far left."
>
> Lorelei Kelly: "Progressives need to abandon the old talking points from 
> Iraq and Vietnam....progressives need to get inside this debate, President 
> Obama is trying to create a new way....these policies need support....The 
> American military is probably the most progressive agency we have today."
>
> One of them brought up CodePink's recent visit to Afghanistan and 
> subsequent statements made by Media Benjamin to say that some peace groups 
> understand that we need to stay there and stabilize the country. Another 
> called Obama's plan the "full spectrum approach" that progressives must 
> support - we "need the military" to get to a positive conclusion.
>
> Finally they unmuted the listeners and then opened it up for "questions". I 
> didn't ask a question but instead read a quote from the Robert Scheer 
> article (just below this post) which came from former Marine captain 
> Matthew Hoh where he said, “In the course of my five months of service in 
> Afghanistan … I have lost understanding and confidence in the strategic 
> purpose of the United States’ presence in Afghanistan. … I have 
> observed that the bulk of the insurgency fights not for the white banner of 
> the Taliban, but rather against the presence of foreign soldiers and taxes 
> imposed by an unrepresentative government in Kabul.”
>
> A woman listener from West Virginia (CodePink) said she had family killed 
> in these wars and they need to stop. A woman from Georgia said we need to 
> end the wars. A man from upstate New York said they were organizing 
> protests and that Obama had betrayed us.
>
> Next they put us on mute again and told us that we could only ask questions 
> and that we'd better be good. When they unmuted I accused them of trying to 
> silence the voices of the people as it was clear that they only wanted us 
> on the call to listen to the talking points put out by the White House.
>
> I know this is true because last spring I did a couple blogs about the 
> Obama administration daily sending out talking points to groups like these 
> that today hosted this "conference call". You can see one such story about 
> this by Jermey Scahill here
>
> One of the groups mentioned by Scahill in his article is the Center for 
> American Progress which was represented on the call today as one of the 
> "expert" speakers.
>
> While on the call I quickly did an Internet search on the Truman National 
> Security Project just to see what I could learn about them. Their advisory 
> board stands out like a sore thumb:
>
> Advisory Board
> Madeleine K. Albright
> Principal, The Albright Group LLC
>
> Leslie H. Gelb
> President Emeritus, Council on Foreign Relations
>
> William Marshall
> President, Progressive Policy Institute
>
> William J. Perry (former Clinton Secretary of Defense)
> Senior Fellow, Hoover Institute
>
> John D. Podesta (former Clinton operative)
> President and CEO, Center for American Progress
>
> Wendy R. Sherman
> Principal, The Albright Group LLC
>
> First chance I got I read the list off and commented that it was now 
> abundantly clear to me that this call was intended to deliver Obama team 
> talking points to us and that they were not in the least interested in what 
> we had to say.....these folks organizing this call came from the right-wing 
> of the Democratic Party I said...... earlier I had strongly challenged one 
> of them who stated that the peace movement should stop protesting and 
> support Obama's plan!
>
> They couldn't wait to finish the call and I am happy to say that it did not 
> go as well as they had hoped. I thank Mark Roman for tipping me off and I 
> want to warn everyone to be on the lookout for these "pseudo progressives" 
> who will now be coming out of the woodwork to tell the public and the media 
> that only the far-left is against Obama's war in Afghanistan. Good 
> "progressives" they will say are going to support Obama's war surge.
>
> In the old days they used to call these folks "Scoop Jackson Democrats" 
> after the senator from Washington state who was a pro-war leader. They have 
> wised up and now call themselves progressives and will steal the rug out 
> from under our feet if we are not watching closely.
>
>
> 	###
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss