[Peace-discuss] WSWS: Trots Attack Other Trots on Drone Strikes

Fri Feb 15 19:16:41 UTC 2013

Speaking of which Stuart, do you or anyone else know anything about the 
large demonstration planned on April 13th ( I believe ) outside the 
WhiteHouse in D.C., by the ANSWER Coalition ?

David Johnson

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stuart Levy" <stuartnlevy at gmail.com>
To: "David Johnson" <dlj725 at hughes.net>; "Peace Discuss" 
<peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
Cc: "Stuart Levy" <stuartnlevy at gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 10:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] WSWS: Trots Attack Other Trots on Drone Strikes

> Yes yes yes.
>
> Especially *today*, on the tenth anniversary of the great anti-war 
> demonstrations around the world, including here.   And now we're reduced 
> to watching arguments about who's sufficiently anti-imperialist?
>
> On 2/15/13 9:59 AM, David Johnson wrote:
>> Here Here Carl,
>>
>> We need a United Front against corporate power, not take delight in 
>> divisions that the ruling classes love.
>>
>> David J.
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl G. Estabrook" 
>> <galliher at illinois.edu>
>> To: "Robert Naiman" <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
>> Cc: "Peace-discuss List" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 9:20 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] WSWS: Trots Attack Other Trots on Drone 
>> Strikes
>>
>>
>> Your Schadenfreude is misplaced. Disarray among those who should be 
>> opposing the child-killer is nothing to celebrate.
>>
>> Even those of us who do not follow any species of vanguardism can see 
>> that Walsh is correct.
>>
>> --CGE
>>
>>
>> On Feb 15, 2013, at 2:54 AM, Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I *love* it when Trots attack other Trots! Where's the popcorn? Why 
>>> don't the Trots do this more often? I would pay for it. Think of all the 
>>> young people who would be spared wasting their lives in the various Trot 
>>> cults. When Trots attack other Trots, that's when Trots most show that 
>>> the people who wrote Monty Python's Life of Brian had experience with 
>>> Trots.
>>> [....]
>>>
>>> The pseudo-left International Socialist Organization (ISO), as is the 
>>> group’s custom when it comes to taking a position on principled 
>>> questions, held off writing on the assassination memo as long as 
>>> politically feasible. In his February 12 piece, “Execution by Drone,” 
>>> the ISO’s Eric Ruder remarks, “The need for a probing assessment of the 
>>> use of drones couldn’t be more urgent.” So urgent that 
>>> Socialistworker.org couldn’t get to it for more than a week.
>>>
>>> The ISO essentially follows the Nation ’s lead, acting as an adjunct of 
>>> the Democrats. Like Mitchell, Ruder refers favorably to both the New 
>>> York Times’ editorial comments on the Justice Department memo (which 
>>> include an endorsement of Brennan for CIA director) and Sen. Wyden’s 
>>> intervention.
>>>
>>> Socialistworker.org concludes that “we need real debate, not 
>>> infomercials, about the use of drones—and why we need to challenge the 
>>> Obama administration’s aggressive assertion of practically unlimited 
>>> executive powers to assassinate anyone, anywhere in the world.”
>>> Nothing about the danger of dictatorship, no call for an end to the 
>>> program, no exposure of the role of the Democrats at the Senate 
>>> whitewash of Brennan. Instead, this left appendage of American 
>>> liberalism—and American imperialism—contents itself with references to 
>>> the “administration’s contorted legal justifications,” the need for a 
>>> “real debate,” and a “challenge” to the White House.
>>>
>>> From the Nation and the ISO, complacent to the core and corrupted by the 
>>> selfish class interests of a privileged, well-off social layer, Obama, 
>>> Brennan and the rest of the conspirators against democratic rights have 
>>> nothing to fear.
>>>
>>> http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/02/13/nati-f13.html
>>>
>>> The Nation magazine and Obama’s assassination program
>>>
>>> By David Walsh
>>> 13 February 2013
>>>
>>> A secret US Justice Department memo came to light February 4 that 
>>> asserted the right of the president to order the assassination of 
>>> perceived enemies, including American citizens, anywhere on the globe, 
>>> without due process or the need to provide any evidence against the 
>>> intended victims.
>>>
>>> On top of that, Barack Obama’s nominee for Central Intelligence Agency 
>>> director, John Brennan, refused at a Senate confirmation hearing last 
>>> week to rule out such extra-judicial killings on American soil.
>>>
>>> These developments represent an ominous warning to the American people 
>>> that elementary democratic rights are in grave danger.
>>>
>>> The overwhelming response of the liberal establishment and its 
>>> left-liberal and pseudo-socialist flank has been to downplay the 
>>> significance of the memo, lull the population to sleep in regard to its 
>>> dangers and, above all, express continued confidence in the Obama 
>>> administration and the Democratic Party.
>>>
>>> In general, the American media, liberal and otherwise, responded 
>>> indifferently or even sympathetically to the content of the Justice 
>>> Department memo. Illegal invasion, torture, assassination by drone 
>>> missile—this is now business as usual for these well-heeled defenders of 
>>> the existing order.
>>>
>>> The left-liberal Nation magazine has followed in the wake of the New 
>>> York Times and various Democratic Party figures, who have called for 
>>> greater “transparency” along with the creation of a secret court to 
>>> rubber-stamp the executions. The only perceptible difference between 
>>> these circles and the Nation is a sight increase in the nervousness of 
>>> the latter’s tone.
>>>
>>> On February 6, the Nation’s Greg Mitchell (“Outrage Mounts in Media Over 
>>> Obama Drone ‘Kill Rules’”) informed his readers that since the leaking 
>>> of the memo, “the chorus of criticism—mainly from progressives and media 
>>> outlets long accused by conservatives of being ‘in the tank’ for 
>>> Obama—has grown to a deafening level.”
>>>
>>> Mitchell must have highly sensitive hearing. Given the nature of the 
>>> revelation, that the president of the United States has arrogated to 
>>> himself powers historically associated with fascist or military 
>>> dictators, the response has been remarkably muted.
>>>
>>> The approach of Mitchell and the Nation ’s other commentators is to 
>>> offer limited criticism of the Justice Department memo’s contents, and 
>>> then express satisfaction that a “debate” has now opened up as to 
>>> whether the US government has the right to murder American citizens and 
>>> anyone else without charging them of any crime.
>>>
>>> Thus Mitchell writes: “And although the memo only covered the 
>>> assassination/murder of Americans… it has sparked a long-overdue 
>>> reappraisal of the entire drone war, which has taken the lives of 
>>> thousands, including many non-combatants and children.”
>>>
>>> To gloss over the glaring internal contradiction of his 
>>> position—criticism of the assassination program, on the one hand, and 
>>> support for the administration that is carrying out that program, on the 
>>> other—the Nation columnist proceeds dishonestly, and demagogically. 
>>> Mitchell assures us that an “appraisal” of this illegal policy is 
>>> coming—by whom, and with what potential consequences?
>>>
>>> He continues, “This [the debate over the program] promises to get even 
>>> hotter tomorrow with the start of the congressional confirmation 
>>> hearings for drone champion (and keeper of the kill list) John Brennan 
>>> as the new CIA director.”
>>>
>>> There will, of course, be no official appraisal. Nor did things get 
>>> “hotter” during the Brennan hearing. Mitchell simply counts on his 
>>> readers not remembering from one day to the next what he has written.
>>>
>>> So, on February 8, Mitchell was compelled to admit (“As Brennan 
>>> ‘Escapes,’ Criticism of Media ‘Self-Censorship’ on Drone Program Grows”) 
>>> that Brennan had “escaped” the Senate hearing unscathed and that the 
>>> aforementioned “outraged” media, with the New York Times and Washington 
>>> Post in the forefront, had been guilty of “self-censorship,” having 
>>> suppressed for months “the existence of a US drone base in Saudi 
>>>  Arabia.”
>>>
>>> In his live blogging at the Brennan hearing, the Nation’s chief foreign 
>>> correspondent, Robert Dreyfuss, already on record as supporting the 
>>> would-be CIA director, made his position clear. After dismissing 
>>> anti-Brennan protests as “foolish and counterproductive,” Dreyfuss 
>>> observed that Obama’s nominee for the intelligence post “unlike General 
>>> [David] Petraeus, is a civilian, and that in itself is a step forward, 
>>> because the militarization of the CIA over several decades has unsettled 
>>> many analysts and intelligence professionals.”
>>>
>>> Dreyfuss unashamedly presents himself as an advisor to the White House 
>>> on what’s best for the CIA and a spokesman for disgruntled “analysts and 
>>> intelligence professionals,” and probably no one could improve on that 
>>> self-portrait.
>>>
>>> He concludes his blog by noting appreciatively, “Brennan says that he’d 
>>> always bring the truth to the White House, not tell the White House what 
>>> it wants to hear. (Unlike George W. Bush’s CIA directors, who shaped 
>>> intelligence according to the desires of the White House. Thus, Iraq.)”
>>>
>>> As usual, the most obtuse and brazen apologetics for Obama and the 
>>> Democrats in the Nation have been provided by leading columnist John 
>>> Nichols, who didn’t write about the issue until February 10, almost a 
>>> week after the memo became public (“Democrats Have a Unique 
>>> Constitutional Duty to Check, Balance the President”).
>>>
>>> Nichols is no opponent of drone warfare and assassination. In his 
>>> article, he identifies himself with Congressman John Conyers and (at the 
>>> time) Congressman Dennis Kucinich, who wrote a letter to the White House 
>>> last year opposing the expansion of the drone program, but who “were not 
>>> suggesting that the United States ought not defend itself.” They were 
>>> merely “demanding transparency, accountability and respect for the rule 
>>> of law.”
>>>
>>> This is the Nation’ s advice to Obama, the Pentagon and the CIA: kill 
>>> whomever you like, but put in place some legal fig leaf that will 
>>> legitimize the program and our own support for it.
>>> Nichols gives “high marks” to Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat from Oregon 
>>> “for making the same demands for transparency from Democrat Barack Obama 
>>> that he would make of a Republican president. ‘Every American has the 
>>> right to know when their government believes it’s allowed to kill them.’” 
>>> This, as the WSWS has written, is a rather “truncated vision” of 
>>> constitutional rights.
>>>
>>> Like Mitchell, only more crudely, Nichols attempts to construct the case 
>>> for opposition to unlimited assassinations and ongoing support for 
>>> Obama. He writes, “There needs to be much broader recognition within the 
>>> president’s party that it is possible to respect Obama while at the same 
>>> time respecting the demands of a system where powers are appropriately 
>>> separated.” To underscore the point, he declares that congressional 
>>> critics of Obama “are not disrespecting the president. They are 
>>> respecting the Constitution.”
>>>
>>> There are two possible conclusions to draw. Either Nichols thinks it is 
>>> not especially noteworthy that the US president claims the power to 
>>> order the execution of anyone he pleases, and therefore the Nation 
>>> columnist doesn’t find it difficult to carry on backing him. Or Nichols 
>>> recognizes how grave an attack this is and is consciously lining up with 
>>> the systematic destruction of constitutional rights. Either scenario 
>>> makes him a scoundrel.
>>>
>>> Nowhere in any of the Nation’s commentary on the administration’s drone 
>>> and assassination program is there a call for a halt to the murderous 
>>> and illegal operation, or for the bringing of charges against Brennan 
>>> and other CIA and Pentagon officials. Nor is there any suggestion that 
>>> Barack Obama should be impeached for crimes that far surpass any 
>>> committed by Richard Nixon.
>>>
>>> In other words, talk here is terribly cheap, and the Nation, for all its 
>>> protestations, is glued to the Democratic Party and on board with US 
>>> imperialist policy. The magazine’s editors and columnists are not happy, 
>>> however, about the public exposure of the administration’s global 
>>> operations, as they energetically backed Obama’s reelection on the 
>>> grounds that it was the only possible choice for “progressives.”
>>>
>>> The pseudo-left International Socialist Organization (ISO), as is the 
>>> group’s custom when it comes to taking a position on principled 
>>> questions, held off writing on the assassination memo as long as 
>>> politically feasible. In his February 12 piece, “Execution by Drone,” 
>>> the ISO’s Eric Ruder remarks, “The need for a probing assessment of the 
>>> use of drones couldn’t be more urgent.” So urgent that 
>>> Socialistworker.org couldn’t get to it for more than a week.
>>>
>>> The ISO essentially follows the Nation ’s lead, acting as an adjunct of 
>>> the Democrats. Like Mitchell, Ruder refers favorably to both the New 
>>> York Times’ editorial comments on the Justice Department memo (which 
>>> include an endorsement of Brennan for CIA director) and Sen. Wyden’s 
>>> intervention.
>>>
>>> Socialistworker.org concludes that “we need real debate, not 
>>> infomercials, about the use of drones—and why we need to challenge the 
>>> Obama administration’s aggressive assertion of practically unlimited 
>>> executive powers to assassinate anyone, anywhere in the world.”
>>> Nothing about the danger of dictatorship, no call for an end to the 
>>> program, no exposure of the role of the Democrats at the Senate 
>>> whitewash of Brennan. Instead, this left appendage of American 
>>> liberalism—and American imperialism—contents itself with references to 
>>> the “administration’s contorted legal justifications,” the need for a 
>>> “real debate,” and a “challenge” to the White House.
>>>
>>> From the Nation and the ISO, complacent to the core and corrupted by the 
>>> selfish class interests of a privileged, well-off social layer, Obama, 
>>> Brennan and the rest of the conspirators against democratic rights have 
>>> nothing to fear.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Robert Naiman
>>> Policy Director
>>> Just Foreign Policy
>>> www.justforeignpolicy.org
>>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
> 