[THS] Glenn Greenwald: Helen Thomas Deviates From the Terrorism Script

[Peter Webster]

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24362.htm

Helen Thomas Deviates From the Terrorism Script

By Glenn Greenwald

January 10, 2010 "Salon" -- Following up on Thursday's post concerning our
collective refusal to discuss how American actions and policies fuel Terrorism:  at a
White House press conference yesterday with Janet Napolitano and John Brennan,
Helen Thomas shows -- yet again -- that she's one of the very few White House
reporters willing to deviate from approved orthodoxy scripts.  She asks the prohibited
question about the motives of Terrorists, and keeps asking as she receives complete
non-responses, until they all just decide to ignore her:
[video at url above]

Brennan's answer -- they do this because they're Evil and murderous -- is on the
same condescending cartoon level as the "They-Hate-us-For-Our-Freedom" tripe we
endured for the last eight years.  Apparently, if Brennan is to be believed, Islamic
radicals, in their motive-free quest to slaughter, write down the names of all the
countries in the world and put them in a hat and then stick their hand in and select
the one they will attack, and the U.S. just keeps getting unlucky and having its name
randomly chosen.  Countries like China, Brazil, Japan, Chile, Greece, South Africa,
France and a whole slew of others must have really good luck.  That Al Qaeda is evil
and murderous and perverts Islam is a judgment about what they do, not an answer
as to what motivates them.

The evidence of what motivates Terrorism when directed at the U.S. is so
overwhelming and undeniable that it takes an extreme propagandist to pretend it
doesn't exist.  What is Brennan so afraid of?  It's true that religious fanaticism is a
part of their collective motivation, but why can't he just say what's so obviously true:
"they claim that the U.S. is interfering in, occupying and bringing violence to their
part of the world, they cite things like civilian deaths and our support for Israel and
Guantanamo and torture, and claim that their terrorism is in retaliation"?  Indeed,
Brennan's boss, the President, has often claimed that things like Guantanamo and
Abu Ghraib help Al Qaeda recruitment (and it seems clear it was part of
Abdulmutallab's hatred for the U.S.), so clearly U.S. actions are part of the
motivation.  Yet Brennan is afraid to acknowledge that not just past actions, but
current ones, fuel the desire to target the U.S. for attacks.  Speaking of fear of
acknowledging reality, note how Charles Krauthammer in yesterday's column -- when
mocking Obama's (obviously correct) view that Guantanamo helps fuel Al Qaeda
recruitment -- describes the first two grievances cited in Osama bin Laden's 1998
fatwa against the U.S. (troops in Saudi Arabia and death to extremely high numbers
of Iraqi children through sanctions) while completely omitting the third (U.S. support
for Israel).

As I said on Thursday, to acknowledge motive is not remotely to imply legitimacy or
justification.  In fact, the opposite is true:  pretending motive doesn't exist legitimizes
it more than acknowledging (and refuting) it would, since that fantasyland behavior
creates the impression that one is afraid of its being aired and heard.  That's certainly
the impression that one gets watching John Brennan feed cartoon idiocy to the public
in response to Helen Thomas' questions and then having everyone just move on
when she tries to get an answer.  It's just amazing, given how much endless chatter
there is over Terrorism, how rare it is for this question to be raised.



UPDATE:  As I did on Thursday, Juan Cole examines all of the evidence regarding
what motivated Humam al-Balawi, the Jordanian physician who killed 7 CIA agents in
Afghanistan last week, to convert from a CIA asset into an Al Qaeda suicide weapon,
and he notes the "way al-Balawi's grievances tie together the Iraq War, the ongoing
Gaza atrocity, and the Western military presence in the Pushtun regions."  Cole notes
that his suicide video specifically decreed the attack to be in retaliation for a U.S.
airstrike that killed the leader of the Pakistani Taliban, and Cole explains why it's so
vital to address these issues forthrightly:

    Morally speaking, al-Qaeda is twisted and evil, and has committed mass murder. .
. . But from a social science, explanatory point of view, what we have to remember is
that there can be a handful of al-Balawis, or there can be thousands or hundreds of
thousands. It depends on how many Abu Ghraibs, Fallujahs, Lebanons and Gazas
the United States initiates or supports to the hilt. Unjust wars and occupations
radicalize people. The American Right wing secretly knows this, but likes the vicious
circle it produces. Wars make profits for the military-industrial complex, and the
resulting terrorism terrifies the clueless US public and helps hawks win elections,
allowing them to pursue further wars. And so it goes, until the Republic is
bankrupted and in ruins and its unemployed have to live in tent cities.

At least theoretically, "The American Right wing" is not in charge of any parts of the
government, so to the extent these policies continue, they're not a legitimate
scapegoat.  Whatever else is true, having discussions about how our policies motivate
and fuel Terrorism is crucial to having any sort of minimally rational public debate
about what we should be doing.  But as long as the patronizing, propaganda
cartoons that we heard from John Brennan prevail, it's simply impossible for any of
these considerations to be examined.  That, to me, seems to be the whole point of
why those comic book narratives predominate and why the taboo persists:  to
preclude any awareness of the true costs of our actions and therefore to preclude
any meaningful public questioning of them.

 Glenn Greenwald was previously a constitutional law and civil rights litigator in New
York. He is the author of the New York Times Bestselling book "How Would a Patriot
Act?," a critique of the Bush administration's use of executive power, released in May
2006. His second book, "A Tragic Legacy", examines the Bush legacy.