Chomsky

[bhead51]

(cont\'d)

4. Conclusion: the few words about the matter in the telephone interview published by Salon were quite appropriate in that format, as easily determined.

5. There has been much controversy over a matter that I did not discuss in "9-11," or anywhere: namely, whether al-Shifa also produced chemical weapons. However one evaluates that charge, the crucial fact is that that its production of pharmaceutical supplies and veterinary medicines was known, hence also the likely toll of the bombing, as discussed at once by HRW, and later estimated by others. Accordingly, the opening comment in "9-11" about this topic is perhaps also relevant. To quote:

Though it is merely a footnote, the Sudan case is nonetheless highly instructive. One interesting aspect is the reaction when someone dares to mention it. I have in the past, and did so again in response to queries from journalists shortly after the 9-11 atrocities. I mentioned that the toll of the "horrendous crime" of 9/11, committed with "wickedness and awesome cruelty" (quoting Robert Fisk), may be comparable to the consequences of Clinton\'s bombing of the Al-Shifa plant in August 1998. That plausible conclusion elicited an extraordinary reaction, filling many web sites and journals with feverish and fanciful condemnations, which I\'ll ignore. The only important aspect is that that single sentence -- which, on a closer look, appears to be an understatement -- was regarded by some commentators as utterly scandalous. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that at some deep level, however they may deny it to themselves, they regard our crimes against the weak to be as normal as the air we breathe. Our crimes, for which we are responsible: as taxpayers, for failing to provide massive reparations, for granting refuge and immunity to the perpetrators, and for allowing the terrible facts to be sunk deep in the memory hole. All of this is of great significance, as it has been in the past.

So it is.

On a separate matter, an editor\'s note interpolated in the Salon telephone interview states:

[Note: After the attacks, NATO allies invoked Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty which states, "An armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all."]

Putting aside questions of editorial practice, the interpolation is correct, and its evident irrelevance underscores the accuracy of the statement of mine in the phone interview to which it is appended: that no one claimed that after Sept. 11 the US was under ongoing armed attack in the sense of Article 51 of the UN Charter.

The US could, doubtless, have obtained clear and unambiguous Security Council authorization for its retaliatory attacks; none of those with veto power would have exercised it. But Washington deliberately chose not to receive authorization, just as it deliberately chose not to request extradition of the suspects, and just as at the very same time, it once again rejected a request for extradition of a condemned Haitian mass murderer (not the only case). One can speculate about the motives, but the facts are clear enough, as is the consistent pattern they illustrate.

Noam Chomsky

[gkg]

just as we are reminded today that hundreds sit in Guantanamo with no recourse or redress and SC Justice Wm Renquist claims not to know who is in charge of law for the base.  handy selective amnesia - the US has always maintained that on a base the US is the law - what\'s different now?  what\'s different is they\'re getting away with denying these people any rights what so ever by feining confusion and displaying indifference.  

we as a nation have a short attention span for stuff like this - and its a damn shame.

[Megan]

there are many good photogs but only a few who can really capture and evoke in the way that Lynsey Addario can.  it almost feels like a painting.

yeah it\'s creepy isn\'t it- such horror and destruction and fear and disruption made into something so beautiful. the missles held by a classic heaven.  the soldiers on the roof so clean and calm calling in the kill.

I saw a slide show of Addario\'s work on NYTimes with an audio commentary by her. she was imbedded into a Marine front unit around Fallujah. she rebutes claims that the Marines always shoot first but all observation is anecdotal. she sounded breathy scared and those Marines are keeping her alive and I sure wouldn\'t want to be in Fallujah right now-  

that\'s the thing about the beauty of those pictures, they are so elegant and composed that the chaos and dust and flame is forgotten. beauty is a drug that helps us forget. opium eaters enabled

but it is the new york times after all-

here are some other photos coming out of Iraq
I Warn You
they have a strange and horrible beauty :\'( :
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2604.htm

Megan

[gkg]

sometimes the beauty of horror can resonate so deeply that it haunts people into action - you are likely too young to remember first hand but i\'m sure you\'ve seen the image of the burning girl running naked down the dirt road in viet nam.  that image moved a lot of souls and still makes my eyes water to think of.

i have some issues with embedding journalists, but i am certainly glad someone or something is keeping Addario alive.  she is gifted.

[oldfolkie]

Oh gkg, you just hit the nail on the head for me. I\'ve been thinking Viet Nam ever since this whole thing started. Still remember the US draft dodgers who came north & were in university when I was. Hope those evil days don\'t return for you folks in the lower 48.

Good journalistic photographers are hard to come by. Just like good journalists. There\'s all too much fiction in the "news" these days.

[gkg]

it seems a natural comparison, sadly.

i think the evil is already among us.