Narconews takes DemNow! to task on Rand Beers

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Narconews takes DemNow! to task on Rand Beers

Postby Gouda » Mon Oct 09, 2006 8:26 am

<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Democracy Now Gave Plan Colombia Architect A Free Pass</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2006/10/5/121117/874">narcosphere.narconews.com...121117/874</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>By Sean Donahue,<br>Posted on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 12:11:17 PM EST<br><br>An Open Letter To Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez<br><br>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?<br><br>Dear Amy and Juan,<br><br>You have a well deserved reputation for conducting tough interviews and holding people in power accountable for their actions.<br><br>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.<br><br>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.<br><br>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.<br><br>When confronted by ABC's John Stossel about the impact of Plan Colombia on some of Colombia's poorest people, Beers said --<br><br> "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." <br><br>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.<br><br>Al Giordano covered this story extensively for Narco News, and the story got considerable exposure when <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>John Kerry brought Rand Beers on as one as a top policy advisor in his presidential campaign.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> A UPI story on the incident quoted an incredulous intelligence official commenting at length on Beers' bizzare claims.<br><br> "'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.'" <br><br>I'm extremely disappointed that you didn't raise this issue which goes to the core of the question of Beers' credibility.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>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 interefering 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' arguement 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.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>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.<br><br>Sincerely,<br>Sean Donahue<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=gouda@rigorousintuition>Gouda</A> at: 10/9/06 6:29 am<br></i>
User avatar
Gouda
 
Posts: 3009
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 1:53 am
Location: a circular mould
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Narconews takes DemNow! to task on Rand Beers

Postby Dreams End » Mon Oct 09, 2006 9:06 am

Gouda! You bought me a present! Thanks you! Enough exclamation points!<br><br>I will post this on my blog and I may reprint it and use the last bolded paragraph as wallpaper in my house...or get it tattooed on my chest.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: Narconews takes DemNow! to task on Rand Beers

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Mon Oct 09, 2006 2:21 pm

Amy Goodman and Democracy Now! do so much great work, I really hate to see them mess up and feed the campaign to discredit journalists like them.<br><br>Still, we even want our friends to do better these days.<br><br>Someone who messes up worse is William Rivers Pitt over at Truthout.org who gives lots of column inches to Ray McGovern and Larry Johnson.<br><br>As Glinda asked Dorothy when she landed in Oz, "Are you a good fascist or a bad fascist?"<br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 10/9/06 12:29 pm<br></i>
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Narconews takes DemNow! to task on Rand Beers

Postby 1 tal » Mon Oct 09, 2006 7:12 pm

<br><br><br> A year ago, I had Thanksgiving dinner with a Columbian expat. He expressed bewilderment at what had happened to his country while sharing stories of how drug lords would appear at various homes/farms, expressing interest in purchasing and NOT taking NO for an answer, while officials looked the other way. What mystified him the most (and shocked me because I’d never considered it before) was that virtually ALL the coca-processing chemicals and equipment have to be imported from Germany (since they aren’t available locally) but nothing is ever done about these importations which would be infinitely easier to interdict… <p></p><i></i>
1 tal
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 9:14 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Narconews takes DemNow! to task on Rand Beers

Postby Dreams End » Tue Oct 10, 2006 2:54 am

I wholeheartedly support anyone trying to show the lunacy of progressives trotting out militarists and intel types. His worry was more about how they pick people who support the war on terror and decry Bush policy as being ineffective in fighting terrorism. I agree...but obviously I'd go further in questioning the use of these types AT ALL.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: Narconews takes DemNow! to task on Rand Beers

Postby robertdreed » Tue Oct 10, 2006 7:31 am

An extensive section of Simon Strong's book on the cocaine wars, <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Whitewash</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->, is devoted to the cocaine precursor importation into Colombia. U.S. companies have been heavily involved in the past, too. Strong writes of the involvement of one ofPresident Uribe's chief advisors in the trade. <p></p><i></i>
robertdreed
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:14 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Narconews takes DemNow! to task on Rand Beers

Postby robertdreed » Tue Oct 10, 2006 7:36 am

"I wholeheartedly support anyone trying to show the lunacy of progressives trotting out militarists and intel types. His worry was more about how they pick people who support the war on terror and decry Bush policy as being ineffective in fighting terrorism. I agree...but obviously I'd go further in questioning the use of these types AT ALL."<br><br>Well, Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez are journalists. That should mean that they aren't <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>using</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> anyone to make political points. <br><br>And I still don't like the notion of pre-emptively shunning anyone who claims to oppose the Bush agenda simply on account of a resume of service with the CIA or the military. Among other things, even from the viewpoint of suspicion, you don't learn anything by shutting people down. It's lousy counterintelligence. At worst, it's cliqueish political stereotyping- simply more of the sort of purity tests for which the fundamentalist Left is reknowned. <br><br>But as someone who has also heard Goodman and Gonzalez interview Ray McGovern on several occasions, I'm now of a mind that it's time for them to ask tougher and more pointed questions of former military and intelligence people- questions for which they're unlikely to have a pre-scripted answer that they can readily supply with any degree of believability. <br><br>I wonder what Peter Dale Scott thinks about McGovern and some of these other CIA folks in the mix- as well as about Bearden, Scheuer, and some of the other CIA people who have written books. <br><br>THe Wilson-Plame affair appears increasingly to me to have been misdirections to grab headlines from more productive trails of investigation, and to divert commentators into debates over matters like the journalistic ethics of exposing government operatives and operations. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 10/10/06 5:53 am<br></i>
robertdreed
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:14 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Narconews takes DemNow! to task on Rand Beers

Postby Dreams End » Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:41 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Well, Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez are journalists. That should mean that they aren't using anyone to make political points. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>They wouldn't interview the head of RJR/Nabisco about how Phillip Morris is making unhealthy products....<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: Robert Reed's comments

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Tue Oct 10, 2006 12:14 pm

I agree with all you wrote here, RR.<br><br>Especially-<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> Among other things, even from the viewpoint of suspicion, you don't learn anything by shutting people down. It's lousy counterintelligence.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>The Wilson-Plame affair was turned into a 'white girl story' of Little Red Riding Hood vs the Big Bad Wolves.<br><br>One of the reasons I point to a high level of CIA involvement with the media is to qualify how media portrayals of internecine tussles between White House-NSC, Pentagon-DIA, and CIA-CFR are viewed 'down here.'<br><br>We are left watching the equivalent of a wrestling match between King Kong, Godzilla, and Frankenstein while their own PR people snow us to keep us rooting them on.<br><br>I'm trying to research the evolution of the balance between those three branches of the secret government.<br><br>My goal is to better understand what were the efforts by those other two branches to counterbalance against the Dulles-thru-Colby era CIA which was so autonomous up until the post-Vietnam reconstruction period.<br><br>The near-collapse of American domestic stability from 1969-1972 led to a reigning in of the CIA-only domestic perception management and I think naval intelligence officer Bob Woodward is evidence of the Pentagon stepping in to put more pressure on the steering wheel through the Washington Post.<br><br>Interesting, isn't it, that now the Council on Foreign Relations has come out of the woodwork and is routinely being the interviewed expert on NPR. They are taking their spoils. And still the 'left' doesn't look at the CFR, just Republicans.<br><br>Woodward's latest book, 'State of Denial,' is the centerpiece for Mockingbird chatter now. Like a passed around box of chocolates, tasty nuggets are being oohed-aahed over and relished one at a time to shape perceptions of the Albert Speer class of America.<br><br>His role as mouthpiece for the secret government branches that are not the White House-NSC is quite clear. He is outing some journalists as being in on Iraq strategy meetings as if to neutralize those outed and their potential WH-NSC shilling effect for (s)election 2006. This also acts as a shot across the bow of other shillers to let them know they'll have to keep their heads down if they want to get through the season.<br><br>And this game is for the purpose of changing a few polls here, a few House seats there, and steer the ship of state through the shoals of fascist policies while sustaining the myth of democracy for the passengers.<br><br>Cross-posting thread about Woodward outing other journalists-<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=6476.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...6476.topic</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/09/business/media/09zakaria.html?ex=1318046400&en=ab43603ab31201e7&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">www.nytimes.com/2006/10/0...nd&emc=rss</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Secret Iraq Meeting Included Journalists<br><br>October 9, 2006<br><br>By JULIE BOSMAN<br><br>It was the kind of shadowy, secret Washington meeting that Bob Woodward is fond of describing in detail. In his new book, “State of Denial,” he writes that on Nov. 29, 2001, a dozen policy makers, Middle East experts and members of influential policy research organizations gathered in Virginia at the request of Paul D. Wolfowitz, then the deputy secretary of defense. Their objective was to produce a report for President Bush and his cabinet outlining a strategy for dealing with Afghanistan and the Middle East in the aftermath of 9/11.<br><br>What was more unusual, Mr. Woodward reveals, was the presence of journalists at the meeting. Fareed Zakaria, the editor of Newsweek International and a Newsweek columnist, and Robert D. Kaplan, now a national correspondent for The Atlantic Monthly, attended the meeting and, according to Mr. Kaplan, signed confidentiality agreements not to discuss what happened.<br><br>While members of policy research groups often dispense advice to administration officials, journalists do not typically attend secret meetings or help compile government reports. Indeed, many Washington journalists complain that the current administration keeps them at an unhealthy distance.<br><br>Mr. Zakaria takes issue with Mr. Woodward’s account, saying that while he attended the meeting for several hours, he does not recall being told that a report would be produced.<br><br>“I thought it was a brainstorming session,” he said. “I was never told that there was going to be a document summarizing our views and I have never seen such a document.” (Mr. Woodward wrote that the report, which supported the invasion of Iraq, caused Mr. Bush to focus on the “malignancy” of the Middle East situation.)<br><br>Mr. Kaplan said much of the meeting was spent drafting and reworking the document, which in the end carried the names of all 12 participants and was “a forceful summary of some of the best pro-war arguments at the time.” Could any of the participants have been unaware there was a document in the making? “No, that’s not possible,” he said.<br><br>Mr. Kaplan, who was then a freelancer at The Atlantic Monthly, said he spoke to his editor before attending, and was given approval to attend because “everybody was in a patriotic fervor.”<br><br>Mr. Zakaria said he felt participating was appropriate because his views, as a columnist for Newsweek, were public, although he has never divulged his involvement to his readers.<br><br>“My column is an analytical column,” he said, adding that he gives advice to policy makers and elected officials: “If a senator calls me up and asks me what should we do in Iraq, I’m happy to talk to him.”<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=hughmanateewins>Hugh Manatee Wins</A> at: 10/10/06 10:33 am<br></i>
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to Media and Information Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests