<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1 =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18943"><o:SmartTagType
name="PlaceType"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><o:SmartTagType
name="PlaceName"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><o:SmartTagType
name="State"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><o:SmartTagType
name="City"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><o:SmartTagType
name="country-region"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><o:SmartTagType
name="place"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><!--[if !mso]>
<STYLE>st1\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#ieooui)
}
</STYLE>
<![endif]-->
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: Comic Sans MS;
}
@page Section1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; }
P.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
LI.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
H2 {
FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; FONT-SIZE: 18pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
H5 {
FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:visited {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
P {
FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
SPAN.EmailStyle17 {
FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: "Comic Sans MS"; COLOR: black; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; TEXT-DECORATION: none; mso-style-type: personal-compose
}
DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1
}
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US link=blue vLink=purple>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=046075120-28092010><FONT color=#0000ff
size=2 face=Arial>in response...</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=046075120-28092010></SPAN><FONT
face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=046075120-28092010><FONT color=#0000ff
size=2 face=Arial>wasn't it Stan Merriman who had the show"Jewish
Voices" on Kpft <STRONG><FONT color=#000000 size=3
face="Times New Roman">2002-04-17 Attack On Bob Buzzanco? see <A
href="http://acksisofevil.org/cointelpro/list.html">http://acksisofevil.org/cointelpro/list.html</A> <A
name=top><FONT size=6><B>The COINTELPRO-Type Operation Against <BR>Pacifica and
KPFT Progressive/Leftist Broadcasters
</B></FONT></A></FONT></STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=046075120-28092010><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial><STRONG><FONT color=#000000 size=3
face="Times New Roman"></FONT></STRONG></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=046075120-28092010><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial><STRONG><FONT color=#000000 size=3 face="Times New Roman">I guess Mr
Bradley thought it was a good time to bring the NeoCon Merriman back on the
air.</FONT></STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=046075120-28092010><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial><STRONG><FONT color=#000000 size=3
face="Times New Roman"></FONT></STRONG></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=046075120-28092010><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial><STRONG><FONT color=#000000 size=3 face="Times New Roman">I listen to
the show as well and got a similar feeling that the hosts were attempting to
frame the conflict (war) as a necessary evil to protect women's
rights.</FONT></STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=046075120-28092010><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial><STRONG><FONT color=#000000 size=3
face="Times New Roman"></FONT></STRONG></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=046075120-28092010><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial><STRONG><FONT color=#000000 size=3 face="Times New Roman">I will try
to call in tomorrow with a 911 question</FONT></STRONG></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=046075120-28092010><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial><STRONG><FONT color=#000000 size=3
face="Times New Roman"></FONT></STRONG></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=046075120-28092010><FONT color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial><STRONG><FONT color=#000000 size=3
face="Times New Roman">robert</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><BR></DIV></FONT></SPAN><BR>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT size=2 face=Tahoma><B>From:</B> discuss-bounces@paa-tx.org
[mailto:discuss-bounces@paa-tx.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Ron and Kris
Graham<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, September 28, 2010 3:40 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
discuss@paa-tx.org; Deb Shafto <BR><B>Cc:</B> 'Madeleine Crozat-Williams';
'STANLEY MERRIMAN'<BR><B>Subject:</B> [PAA-Discuss] Article and Commentary on
VFP's Radio Show<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT color=black size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Comic Sans MS'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">I
thought it appropriate to post this article from December 2009 because the
<st1:City w:st="on">Houston</st1:City> chapter of Veterans for Peace is
currently having a radio show entitled <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>: Out Now. Stan Merriman
produced it. Anyway, he had Robert Greenwald as his guest on Monday and Jodie
Evans, co-founder of Code Pink was the guest today. Supposedly, Tom Hayden will
be tomorrow’s guest. Read the article below. Jodie Evans and Tom Hayden
supported Barack Obama for president 100% and believed all his rhetoric.
Evidently, they had peanut butter in their ears when he said he is against
“dumb” wars and <st1:country-region w:st="on">Iraq</st1:country-region> was the
dumb war and <st1:country-region w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:country-region> is
the “right” war which anyone would take to mean that he had no intention of
getting the <st1:country-region w:st="on">United States</st1:country-region> OUT
of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>. Now, it would seem some
people are rethinking our little foray into <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>. I
called and made a comment on today’s Open Journal and asked Jodie Evans if she
agreed with my comment and she did. I strongly got the impression that Stan’s
co-host, Madeleine Crozat-Williams wants <st1:country-region
w:st="on">U.S.</st1:country-region> soldiers to REMAIN in <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region> in
order to protect the women there. Evidently, she read the book, <U>Three Cups of
Tea</U> and it made some sort of impression on her. I obviously cannot speak for
Madeleine, but her comments and questions to Jodie made me think Madeleine wants
the soldiers to remain in that hell hole ostensibly to protect women from the
Taliban. I am cc’ing Stan and Madeleine with this e-mail so they can tell us how
they feel about <st1:country-region w:st="on">U.S.</st1:country-region> soldiers
remaining in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:country-region> and
how their president is continuing the bloodshed in the <st1:place
w:st="on">Middle East</st1:place>.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT color=black size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Comic Sans MS'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT color=black size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Comic Sans MS'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">According
to the article below, Tom Hayden STILL plans on voting for Obama if he runs in
2012!! I don’t know why Stan Merriman is having Tom Hayden on a radio show
regarding <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region> and pulling all the
soldiers out when Tom Hayden evidently still supports the individual who is
continuing the bloodshed. This makes no sense to me at all. In fact, I don’t
even know why VFP Chapter 12 is having a radio show! Any human being with an
ounce of brains and compassion realizes that our presence in the <st1:place
w:st="on">Middle East</st1:place> was and is illegal and immoral. Must people be
spoon fed all the time?! Must we reduce everything to the economic consequences
for Americans of our staying in the <st1:place w:st="on">Middle East</st1:place>
as Robert Greenwald did on Monday?! Is ANYTHING AT ALL about what is humane and
morally right as opposed to what is economically viable for the
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United
States</st1:place></st1:country-region>?!<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT color=black size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Comic Sans MS'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT color=black size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Comic Sans MS'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Is
anyone on this list listening to VFP’s <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>: Out Now radio show on
KPFT? If so does anyone have any comments on this? If you missed the last two
shows they are archived at the website.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT color=black size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Comic Sans MS'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT color=black size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Comic Sans MS'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Kris<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT color=black size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Comic Sans MS'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT color=black size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Comic Sans MS'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold"><A
href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/dec2009/nati-d04.shtml">http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/dec2009/nati-d04.shtml</A><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT color=black size=4 face="Comic Sans MS"><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Comic Sans MS'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P>
<H2><B><FONT size=4 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt">The
pro-war <EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM> and Obama’s
Afghan escalation<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></H2>
<H5><B><FONT size=2 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">By
David Walsh <BR>4 December 2009<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></H5>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The
<EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM> magazine, the
American liberal-left publication, has responded to President Barack Obama’s
speech Tuesday night announcing the dispatch of an additional 30,000 US troops
to <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region> with a flurry of
articles. The commentary is both an effort at damage control and a new attempt
to mislead the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region> population and keep it within the
bounds of the present political setup.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Obama’s
speech represents a turning point for the American intervention in the region
and for the Obama administration itself. The government elected on the slogan of
“change,” with the assistance of “left” forces such as the <EM><I><FONT
face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM>, has now fully revealed its
warmongering character. The Afghan escalation will lead to massive destruction
and death, new atrocities, new war crimes—all in pursuit of the <st1:place
w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">US</st1:country-region></st1:place>
ruling elite’s economic and political interests.<FONT color=red><SPAN
style="COLOR: red"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT color=red size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN
style="COLOR: red; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The<EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">
Nation</FONT></I></EM> strongly endorsed Obama in the summer and fall of 2008.
In July 2008, the magazine authored an open letter to the Democratic
presidential candidate (“Change <STRONG><B><FONT
face="Times New Roman">We</FONT></B></STRONG> Can Believe In”), eventually
signed by a good many of America’s liberal luminaries (including Phil Donahue,
Barbara Ehrenreich, Jodie Evans of CodePink, Eric Foner, Eli Pariser of
MoveOn.org, Norman Solomon, Studs Terkel, Gore Vidal, Howard Zinn and
others).</SPAN></FONT> The letter declared:<o:p></o:p></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">“Your
candidacy has inspired a wave of political enthusiasm like nothing seen in this
country for decades. In your speeches, you have sketched out a vision of a
better future—in which the United States sheds its warlike stance around the
globe and focuses on diplomacy abroad and greater equality and freedom for its
citizens at home—that has thrilled voters across the political
spectrum.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Last
October, on the eve of the election, an editorial in the <EM><I><FONT
face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM> asserted that “American democracy
finds itself at another crossroads, facing a new democratic vista. The choice
between Barack Obama and John McCain could hardly be
clearer.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Obama’s
December 1 speech and the openly militaristic and aggressive character of his
policy, as well as its obvious continuity with Bush’s policies, embarrass the
<EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM> and place it in a
discomfited political position. It has been exposed as an enabler of imperialist
war and reaction.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">In an even
more troubling problem for the magazine’s editors, ten months of an
administration that has handed over billions to the banks while doing nothing
for the jobless, and will now proceed with a major intensification of the
neocolonial war in <st1:place w:st="on">Central Asia</st1:place>, have produced
disillusionment and disappointment within wide layers of the population.
Inevitably, that mood will turn to open opposition.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">It is above
all the danger of a popular break with Obama and the Democrats that propels the
<EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM>’s editors and writers
into print.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT color=red size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN
style="COLOR: red; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">It would be wrong to characterize the
<EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM> as antiwar in any
serious sense, or as an opponent of American imperialism. The magazine’s leading
articles on Tuesday’s speech, by Katrina vanden Heuvel, Tom Hayden, John
Nichols, Robert Dreyfuss and Robert Scheer, make no attempt to dissect Obama’s
lies and contradictions. They include no demand for an immediate withdrawal of
American forces from the region. There is no mention of colonialism or American
geopolitical interests. “Oil” and “energy” never appear among the more than
5,000 words in the articles.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The
<EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM> writers express
virtually no concern for the decades of suffering of the Afghan people as a
result of US intervention. (Hayden makes the only reference to the human
devastation, the perfunctory comment that “Civilian casualties are
under-reported according to the UN mission in <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>.”)
Kunduz, the scene of a recent massacre, and Bagram, the <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region> base where
torture and murder have been carried out, receive no mention. Remarkably, the
only use of the word “torture” in the various pieces (in Nichols’s article) is
in the context of <EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Obama’s
</FONT></I></EM>supposed inner anguish in attempting to placate proponents and
opponents of sending additional troops.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The
<EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM> treats the Afghan
intervention much as the rest of the American mainstream media does, as either
an appropriate or a misguided effort to defend US interests or make
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region> and the region “secure”
and “stable.” It is a thoroughly establishment
organ.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Nichols (in
“Obama Has Spoken—Now, Let’s Have a Debate”) calls Obama’s speech a
“carefully-constructed and nuanced call…for the extension of the
<st1:country-region w:st="on">US</st1:country-region> occupation of
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>.” He expresses his
respectful disagreement with the decision to escalate and urges a debate in
Congress.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">In his
comment (“Exit: 2011?”), Robert Dreyfuss, fresh from his service on behalf of US
destabilization efforts in Iran, writes: “Having had lengthy discussions with
many, perhaps most, of Obama’s advisers on Afghanistan and Pakistan over the
past two years, it’s clear to me that those advisers believe passionately that
vital US interests are at stake in that conflict.” He too, however, begs to
differ.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">This
extraordinary confession of closeness to top officials in the American state
appears in an ostensibly “left-wing” publication.<STRONG><B><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> </FONT></B></STRONG>Dreyfuss unequivocally vouches for
Obama: “He, and his team, aren’t supporters of global, military hegemony by the
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United
States</st1:place></st1:country-region>.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Vanden
Heuvel, the <EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM>’s editor
and publisher, who could barely control her rapture over Obama’s victory last
November, terms the Obama speech “a tragic moment—both for the nation and his
presidency” (but not, apparently, for the people of <st1:place w:st="on">Central
Asia</st1:place>, who will by far suffer the most). By “tragic,” she
means—although she does not care to spell it out—that the escalation politically
unmasks Obama.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Liberal
filmmaker Michael Moore, in his open letter to Obama issued on the eve of the
West Point speech, speaks somewhat more candidly, asserting that an escalation
“will do the worst possible thing you could do—destroy the hopes and dreams so
many millions have placed in you.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">In her
<EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM> piece, vanden Heuvel
writes of “a President we had high expectations for,” who is “escalating a war
that may well deplete this country of the resources needed to rebuild its
promise, while doing little to nothing to make us or the region more secure or
stable.” But why did she and her editorial board have such “expectations,” why,
in short, did they understand and foresee nothing?<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT color=red size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN
style="COLOR: red; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Tom Hayden and Robert Scheer, veterans of
the 1960s protest movements, play at more leftish stances. Hayden, a former
Democratic state legislator in <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">California</st1:place></st1:State>, dramatically declares (in “Obama
Announces Afghanistan Escalation”), “It’s time to strip the Obama sticker off my
car,” before hastily reassuring his readers that he will support Obama in the
2012 election!<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Scheer
(“Afghanistan: Here We Go Again”) provides a history of US intervention in
Afghanistan, including the role played by President Jimmy Carter, the latter’s
national security adviser and current adviser to Obama, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and
Richard Holbrooke, “now Obama’s civilian point man on Afghanistan,” in fomenting
and financing Islamic fundamentalism.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">However,
Scheer, the former editor of <EM><I><FONT
face="Times New Roman">Ramparts</FONT></I></EM> magazine, draws no conclusions
from the history, except to observe cynically, “So here we go again, selling
firewater to the natives and calling it salvation.” What is the
<st1:country-region w:st="on">US</st1:country-region> doing in
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>? He has no idea: “Thanks
to the political opportunism of the current Commander-in-Chief the
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region> war is still without end
or logical purpose.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">What do the
<EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM>’s writers propose as
a response to the Afghan escalation?<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Vanden
Heuvel bemoans the continuing grip of the “<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">National</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">Security</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType
w:st="on">State</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>” and the lack of “countervailing
voices or centers of power and authority to challenge the liberal hawks and
interventionists.” She advocates, in all apparent seriousness, the establishment
of a new think tank on “national security issues,” as well as the building of “a
broad-based movement for change” of an unspecified
character.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The favored
solution of the various writers, in keeping with the <EM><I><FONT
face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM>’s central task of reinforcing or
resurrecting illusions in the Democratic Party, is the application of pressure
on “progressive” Democratic members of Congress, with the aim of slowing down or
blocking funding for the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>
war.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Typically,
Hayden places hope in “Representative Jim McGovern’s resolution favoring an exit
strategy [that] has 100 co-sponsors and Rep. Barbara Lee’s tougher bill to
prevent funding for escalation,” which now has 23
sponsors.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">He
continues: “Key political questions in the immediate future are whether
Representative David Obey, chair of the House Appropriations Committee, will
oppose <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region> funding without a surtax
[sic] is only bluffing, and whether Senator Russ Feingold will step up with
legislation for a withdrawal timetable.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Nichols too
depends on the “substantial Democratic discomfort with Obama’s plan to surge
tens of thousands of additional troops” to <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>,
also mentioning Reps. McGovern and Obey, Senator Feingold and Vermont
Independent Bernie Sanders. Nichols goes farther, however, holding out hope that
far-right Republicans will bloc with the “antiwar” Democrats. He cites
approvingly the positions of North Carolina Republican Walter Jones Jr., a
self-described “Pat Buchanan American.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">There is
hardly a more fantastical, futile policy than reliance on the Democrats (and
Republicans) in Congress to end the wars in <st1:country-region
w:st="on">Iraq</st1:country-region> and <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>. As Obama’s decision to
accelerate the latter conflict demonstrates once again, the Democratic Party is
an imperialist party, devoted to the interests of the American
corporate-financial oligarchy.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The
<EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM> editorial board,
composed of liberals, ex-leftists and opportunists of various stripes, expresses
the interests of a section of the American upper-middle class. Their collective
superficiality, self-delusion and impressionism have a social basis. The
<EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM> writers speak for a
highly privileged, complacent section of the population, largely insulated from
the consequences, military and economic, of the Obama administration’s
policies.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The
American “left” to a prominent man or woman endorsed Obama in 2008, or greeted
the victory of an African-American candidate with enthusiasm as a “historic”
moment. Individuals with the reputation for opposition to the status quo, such
as Moore, professors Zinn and Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein and many others, lined
up behind the Democratic candidate, misleading the American
population.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Words and
political endorsements have consequences. The <EM><I><FONT
face="Times New Roman">Nation</FONT></I></EM> has thousands of readers, the
individuals just referred to have a large audience. This “left” shares
responsibility for Obama’s policies, including the bloody results of his
decision to send 30,000 more troops to <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region>.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The
escalation in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Afghanistan</st1:place></st1:country-region> vindicates the
perspective of the <EM><I><FONT face="Times New Roman">World Socialist Web
Site</FONT></I></EM> and the Socialist Equality Party: uncompromising opposition
to the Obama administration and the Democratic Party. We base ourselves on a
class analysis of this administration and the
Democrats.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The old
“antiwar” movement has collapsed, as serious protest against the wars in the
Middle East and <st1:place w:st="on">Central Asia</st1:place> cuts across its
support for Obama. Resistance to Obama’s wars can be based only on socialist
opposition to imperialism as a global system and a turn to the working class,
the only social force that can do away with the source of imperialist war and
oppression.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT color=black size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Comic Sans MS'; COLOR: black; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></B></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>