[Peace-discuss] Even DN! nods...

[C. G. Estabrook]

[News from Neptune's Incompleteness Theorem holds that "Nobody Can Be 
Wrong All the Time," but it seems that the contrary (or is it the 
contra-positive?) is also true, as demonstrated by Democracy Now! 
recently.  It's still far and away the best news program on the air, but 
it's had two sad gaffes recently -- one on Darfur and another noted 
below.  The guy in question (a boyhood friend of mine) represents a 
liberal imperialism at least as dangerous as the neocon kind, with which 
he differs only tactically. --CGE]

    Democracy Now Gave Plan Colombia Architect A Free Pass
    By Sean Donahue,
    Posted on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 12:11:17 PM EST
    DEMOCRACY NOW! GAVE PLAN COLOMBIA ARCHITECT A FREE PASS

An Open Letter To Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez

How could two of the U.S.'s leading progressive journalists conduct a 
lengthy interview with Rand Beers without asking him a single question 
about his role in designing and implementing Plan Colombia?

Dear Amy and Juan,

You have a well deserved reputation for conducting tough interviews and 
holding people in power accountable for their actions.

So I was appalled yesterday when you conducted an extended interview 
with former U.S. State Department official Rand Beers without asking a 
single question about his role as one of the key architects of the 
United States' brutal and failed policies in Colombia.

As head of the Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics 
and Law Enforcement, Beers oversaw the disastrous aerial crop fumigation 
program the U.S. introduced in southern Colombia. The State Department 
hired DynCorp, a private military contractor, to fly crop dusters at 
high altitudes over the rainforests of southern Colombia, spraying a 
chemical cocktail that includes a stronger version of Monsanto's popular 
and controversial herbicide, Round-Up, over suspected coca fields. Beers 
was the public face of the fumigation program, defending and advocating 
for it in Congressional hearings and in the media.

Touted as a way of stopping cocaine from entering the U.S., the 
fumigation program targets the poorest people with the least involvement 
in international drug trafficking--the coca growers--while leaving the 
cocaine processors and exporters, who make the real profits in the drug 
trade, completely untouched. In a good year, a farmer planting 5 acres 
of coca can bring in $4,000. Once that coca is processed into cocaine 
and brought to the U.S. it has a street value of close to $800,000. 
Fumigation also devastates the fragile rainforest eco-system and kills 
food crops -- including those planted through government-funded 
alternative development programs designed to help campesinos stop 
growing coca.

When confronted by ABC's John Stossel about the impact of Plan Colombia 
on some of Colombia's poorest people, Beers said --

     "An illegal activity is an illegal activity. And one doesn't get a 
special pass for being poor. They have to recognize that every effort to 
grow coca will be challenged by the government. Every work effort, every 
dollar, every pound of sweat that goes in to growing that coca may be 
lost."

Beers was so eager to defend the fumigation program that he actually 
lied in a sworn affadavit in an effort to quash a [suit brought against 
Dyncorp by the International Labor Rights Fund] on behalf of people just 
across the border in Ecuador who were hurt by the fumigations. Beers 
claimed that there were international terrorists operating in Ecuador, 
and that FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) had received 
training at Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan -- statements he later 
retracted to avoid possible perjury charges.

Al Giordano covered this story extensively for Narco News, and the story 
got considerable exposure when John Kerry brought Rand Beers on as one 
as a top policy advisor in his presidential campaign. A UPI story on the 
incident quoted an incredulous intelligence official commenting at 
length on Beers' bizarre claims.

     "'There doesn't seem to be any evidence of FARC going to 
Afghanistan to train,' a U.S. intelligence official said. 'We have never 
briefed anyone on that and frankly, I doubt anyone has ever alleged that 
in a briefing to the State Department or anyone else.' [...] 'That 
statement is totally from left field,' said a top federal law 
enforcement official, who reviewed the proffer. 'I don't know where 
(Beers) is getting that. We have never had any indication that FARC guys 
have ever gone to Afghanistan.' [...] 'My first reaction was that Rand 
must have misspoke,' said a veteran congressional staffer with extensive 
experience in the Colombian drug war. 'But when I saw it was a proffer 
signed under oath, I couldn't believe he would do that. I have no idea 
why he would say that.'"

I'm extremely disappointed that you didn't raise this issue which goes 
to the core of the question of Beers' credibility.

The enemy of our enemy is not necessarily our friend -- I've grown 
increasingly uncomfortable with the tendency of many liberals and peace 
activists in the U.S. to embrace military and intelligence officials who 
oppose the war in Iraq out of fear that its mismanagement is interfering 
with U.S. efforts to maintain control in other parts of the world.  I 
find it especially distressing when people on the left embrace these 
officials' argument that the war in Iraq is interfering with the war on 
terror.  If Rand Beers had been heeded the most likely result would have 
been an earlier and stronger U.S. attack on Afghanistan -- something I 
reject just as strongly as I reject the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

For the most part Democracy Now! has done a good job of avoiding this 
trap.  I urge you to bring Rand Beers back on for a tougher interview -- 
and if he refuses, to bring on some of the journalists and human rights 
workers who have followed his career.

Sincerely,
Sean Donahue