The Alternative to NYT’s Subservience: Actual Journalism
The Guardian has its version of the Arthur Brisbane article approving of NYT’s decision to withhold all mention of Raymond Davis’ identity. One of the two main reasons why the Guardian chose to publish even as CIA and MI5 were warning that that might endanger Davis is the one I keep pointing out: all the people who might harm Davis already knew he was some kind of spook.
But the deciding factor was that Davis’s CIA link wasn’t actually a very big secret in Pakistan. For days newspapers had been describing him as a spy; by Sunday morning, 20 February, the headline in one of Pakistan’s national newspapers, The Nation, was “Raymond Davis linked to CIA”.
“Those who might wish to harm Davis – inside the prison, or outside – had already made up their minds about who he was or what he represented. They don’t need our story to motivate them,” our correspondent said.
The Guardian, it seems, actually thought through the logic behind the claim that revealing Davis’ identity would endanger him and, like me, found it dubious.
But the other reason is even more interesting, given the NYT’s claimed helplessness in the face of the government request that it sit on the story: the Guardian did additional reporting to check the claims of the government agencies.
The Guardian’s correspondent in Islamabad, an experienced journalist, investigated and wrote the story. He said:
“We took the CIA’s suggestion that Davis would be at risk if we ran the story very seriously. I interviewed the Punjab law minister, Rana Sanaullah, who described the conditions of Davis’s incarceration. He said there were teams of dedicated guards and Punjab rangers deployed outside the prison, and visits from embassy personnel. I also interviewed a senior intelligence official who said ‘all possible measures’ were being taken to ensure his safety, including moving 25 jihadi prisoners to other facilities.”
Our correspondent also spoke to human rights groups about the conditions in the prison and what was happening in there.
In other words, having been told something by people in authority, the Guardian’s reporter actually checked the truth of the matter, and assessed the government’s claims against that truth.
Last I checked, that’s what newspapers are supposed to do. The NYT, by contrast, describes only having assessed whether the State Department’s warnings were “credible” or not.
As profoundly unpalatable as it is, I think the Times did the only thing it could do.
[snip]
In military affairs, there is a calculus that balances the loss of life against the gain of an objective. In journalism, though, there is no equivalent. Editors don’t have the standing to make a judgment that a story — any story — is worth a life. I find it hard to second-guess the editors’ assessment that the State Department’s warning was credible and that Mr. Davis’s life was at risk in a country seething with anti-American feeling.
And, having been told Davis’ life is at risk (an assessment I agree with), the NYT didn’t think further to weigh whether his life would be at increased risk if NYT’s American readers knew what Pakistanis already knew, that he is a spook.
Such critical thinking, apparently–along with the extra work to check official government sources that the Guardian did–appears to no longer be the job of the NYT.
I still can’t figure out why the USG was trying to prevent the story from being published. What did they gain? They made a real effort. What was the reward? Unless they just like to push around the NYT, they only thing I can come up with is that there is some deeper problem with Davis’ role in Pakistan.
“Unless they just like to push around the NYTimes.”
In this age of government by bullshit and koolaid, boy, do they evermore like to push around the Times…along with the rest of the media.
One suspects it’s because there are lots more – hundreds, more likely thousands – of “Raymond Davises” out there for whom the USG is demanding like treatment in the future.
It’s also a reflexive action by the security state – “Nice newspaper you have here; it’d be a shame if anything happened to it. Youse knows how flammable ink and newspaper are, dontcha?”
Pity that the NYT’s response is so predictable and reflexive, which means that threats of retaliation – so explicit in Karl Rove’s day – no longer need even be mentioned.
That supposed quote is dated. I suppose something more modern would sound like this: “Funny how sloppy your reporters, sources, owners and wealthiest supporters and their friends are about their phones and e-mail security. Some of the stuff they do is beyond embarrassing.”
There is no logic—it’s policy that USG is trying to force upon American newspapers. Strangely, American newspapers believe that it is better to not tell their readers what is happening if USG asks them not to. There is no critical thinking involved. In fact, there is a lot of the opposite type of “thinking” going on. The newspapers, alas, are contributing to the isolation of the US public from how and why the USG’s functions and how USG policy makes American diplomacy more difficult throughout the world.
My thoughts on this are probably way off the pier for some, but here goes:
I’m thinking Davis was talking to Al Quaida members and using them in a way to keep war going and expand it officially into Pakistan.
Okay, you can call me names. Don’t care. I just see how the US has twisted all this war for corporate gain all over the world and now am jaded to every move they make.
As far as the Press goes, look at how even Russia is showing our protests here at home but our own local and MSM refuses to mention it. It tells me that FDL, EmptyWheel and other Progressive blogs and sites are the real journalists. We have been under a Goebels type propaganda plague for decades in the US.
I agree with you, except Davis was talking to TTP (the bad Taliban, to Pakistan) and not AQ.
The US has consistently used divide-and-conquer to advance its imperialistic foreign policy. The invasion of Iraq led to the Sunnis and Shia turning against each other in direct conflict. The Samarra mosque bombing occurred five years ago when it looked like the US could withdraw. The charges were set in concrete pillars by uniformed people, an all-night task accomplished in a city under full US military curfew. The destruction of the Askariya Mosque, a symbol of Shia-Sunni brotherhood. sparked a civil religious war which has kept US troops in Iraq.
SEC. GATES: “Well, what I’m saying to you is, though, you had one strategy under way until attack on the Samarra mosque. After that and the development of the sectarian violence that was being stoked by extremists — this wasn’t spontaneous — there was a shift in strategy, and instead of sending troops home, the troops that were supposed to be sent home were kept — or the troop level was kept.”
It can be argued that just as the United States won the Cold War by exploiting the Sino-Soviet split and allying with Mao Zedong, so too the path to defeating the jihadists is not a main attack, but a spoiling attack that turns Sunnis and Shia against each other.
We see the same thing in the Middle East, the US maintaining the instability of Israel/Palestine, and also making Iran a demon so that billions of dollars of weapons can be sold to the Arab fiefdoms, principally Saudi Arabia.
In South Asia the US is stoking the Pakistan – India enmity, and there will be hell to pay for it.
“In South Asia the US is stoking the Pakistan – India enmity, and there will be hell to pay for it.”
You’re right, with loss of life and treasury.
40% of my job is being a research scientist. But the Guardian way of doing empirical science – i.e., derive the predictions from the hypothesis and test these against actual data – takes too long and is often boring – i.e., it is work. So, as of today, I am adopting the NYT approach. I will generate the predictions and then assume that they are true.
Unfortunately, the peer-review process in psychology is a bit more rigorous than that for American journalism, so I predict the my publication rate will drop.
Fortunately, I have tenure.
Well phrased. A psychology professor (I presume?), how do you feel about the weaponization of our fair, scientific, art of healing with words, into PSYOP? What if we look at NYT in terms a bit more exalted than seventh-grade innuendo, ie as psychological operations, instead of “subservience,” “handjobs,” etc?
Y’all are aware that the US Army, under CinC Barack Obama, has been attacking We, the People, in Congress assembled, right? It’d be news if the armed forces of any other freakin’ country in the world attacked their Congress, the body politic of the People (that’d be us).
Oh, but that was “only” PSYOP, so it doesn’t really count as the Army attacking Congress, right? You’ll have to ask Bradley Manning about the “reality” of PSYOP.
The PsyOps charges are bogus. It was a case of poor personnel management by General Caldwell’s senior staff to issue a General Officer reprimand to Lt. Colonel Michael Holmes, a Texas National Guardsmen who was never trained in psyops. Holmes then retaliated.
from WaPo:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/26/AR2011022603776.html?hpid=moreheadlines
Yep. I’d believe anything a reliable source like WaPo has to say when it’s making apologies for the military, just as I’d believe anything the pope has to say about marriage and raising a family.
Do you dispute the facts as presented on the psyops case or do you simply blame the messenger?
So, in political terms, you’re part of the government.
All the stuff about protecting Davis is, of course, arrant horseshit; it is, or WAS, about trying to hide that fact that he was working for the Central Intelligence Agency.
Good on the Guardian, for scraping off the shit-veneer.
JT: :o) :o) :o)
Glenzilla had a good posts on how the NYT refuses to do journalism anymore & slams & slurs anyone who does. Related to both Davis and Assange, and most recently to Hastings in RS who got McCrystal fired and revealed Caldwell’s psy-ops.
CIA, Assange, assassination, . . .
“On Russia Today, former Reagan administration official Paul Craig Roberts said there is “a concerted effort to nail him–to shut Assange up… If the legal attempt fails, he’ll simply be assassinated by a CIA assassination team. It’s common practice for the CIA to do that.”’
LINK.
BTW, I doubt that Davis’s life is at risk. Now that he’s become a cause celebre for our government, the Pakis can’t afford to see him done in. Too much “aid” riding on that.
He’s now a bargaining chip. Why would Pakistan want to lose him and piss off Obama and the rest of the warbots?
I suspect Mr. “Davis'” life is very much at risk, owing both to the routine application of the criminal law as well as the possibility that he’ll be at the receiving end of Texas or Alabama justice if the crowds grow mean. Plus, Pakistani government, as is true here, is not a monolith. To name a few: there are fissures between its state and national governments; among feuding government departments (both unknown here, of course); and with its judiciary, worried about its independence and, indeed, its survival.
Actually, the Pakistani guards have mentioned several times their fear that the CIA may try to have him killed, so that in the face of real prosecution he doesn’t try to cut deals and get too sharing.
I hope he stays safe. I also hope young guys on motorcycles trying to earn a living in Pakistan remain safe from being plowed down by armed cars running amok in the streets.
Well, the CIA was reportedly fuming that Francis Gary Powers didn’t swallow his “optional” cyanide tablet. Fortunately for him, he was too well-protected to be gotten at before his trial and he lived a few decades more. I once worked with a troubled fellow who had spent time in Vietnam blindly following peers on missions; his mission, if they were about to be caught, was to administer the cyanide via a 7.62 to the head.
Francis Gary Powers was in good company. Neither Gen. Wild Bill Donovan, head of the OSS, nor his aide Col. David Bruce remembered to take along his poison pill to D-Day. Douglas Waller’s “Wild Bill Donovan,” on the OSS spymaster:
I had recalled that it was reported that requests were made that the surveillance cameras be removed from Davis barracks. Odd.
Here’s an excerpt from a few days ago.BTW, in the unexcerpted portion of the original piece, Davis’ marksmanship is mentioned,which I don’t recall having read elsewhere. Perhaps others have,although:
Fearing that the high profile prisoner may be killed, extraordinary security measures have been undertaken. These measures include limiting physical contact of Davis with even US officials and diplomats.
According to official sources, a directive has been issued to strictly check the food provided to the American killer. “A food committee has been constituted, which would ensure that he is not provided poisoned food in the jail,” a source said.The source disclosed that the jail authorities had also been directed not to allow Davis any food from outside, including one sent by the US Consulate. “Even chocolates, brought by the US officials, would not be provided to Davis,” the source said, adding that surveillance cameras had also been installed zeroing in on Davis in the Kot Lakhpat Jail.
“We were asked to remove the surveillance cameras, installed to constantly monitor Davis, but we declined to do so because it is critical for his security,” the source said, explaining, “We can’t take any risk, we can’t rule out any possibility, we can’t afford to be lenient in any manner.”
Additionally, it has also been decided to avoid physical contact between Davis and US officials, who visit him as part of consular access facility allowed to him. His visitors would now be allowed to interact with him from across a glass wall, as it happens in the West and the US.
Punjab Govt fears Raymond Davis may be killed — even by CIA
ISLAMABAD: Apprehensions about a possible attempt on the life of Raymond Davis, including even by Americans themselves, have compelled the authorities in Lahore to boost his security and keep him at some distance from the US officials as well.
http://www.pinditube.com/2011/02/pun…4-even-by-cia/
Dear Earl, Davis is in custody. Period.
If he dies in that situation, it will be seen, with reason, as being a result of the Pakistani government’s complicity in his death.
If you think they want that, or will permit it to happen, then I don’t knowl what to say to you, except to repeat that, live, Davis is a bargaining chip for them; dead while in custody, he’s a reason for the warbots in the Pentagon and the White House to lean on Pakistan to do even more of our bidding than they’ve been doing already.
If Mr. Davis dies while in custody, it could be the result of many things, Pakistani complicity among them. They have a greater interest in keeping him alive, so long as he can be used as a pawn in negotiations with the US about its overall involvement in Pakistan, which seems to have burgeoned into a full-scale, war-like presence. It’s no small irony that Mr. Davis is an “advisor” to State and/or the CIA or Blackwater/Xe.
Other actors, from his enemies to his employer(s), would be found among the usual suspects.
I hope he returns home safely; he might also be found guilty under applicable law of grave crimes. The bigger actor in all that is the USG that put him place, gave him his orders, and supervised his conduct.
The only thing I read the NYT for are the dance and restaurant reviews.
They probably mean Davis’s legal exposure, as opposed to any risk of some extra-judicial punishment.
The US theory in this matter is that Davis has diplomatic immunity. Now, he was granted that immunity because the US submitted his name in a letter to the govt of Pakistan as someone whose employment at our embassy would fit the criteria for a person granted diplomatic immunity. If the US characterization of Davis’s employment status is admitted to have been made in bad faith, that increases the likelihood that a court in Pakistan will not find that he actually has diplomatic immunity.
However, what the press says, any press in any country, does not carry the weight of the representations of the govts involved. The courts in Pakistan still have the out, if they choose to avail themselves of it, of accepting the official US position that Davis’s employment was not misrepresented. Even if all the press in all countries had agreed to pretend that Davis was a gardener, or whatever, those same courts would have been free to accept their own govt’s representation that he was actually a spy whose grant of diplomatic immunity is invalid because it was obtained under false pretences.
Presumably the courts in Pakistan will settle this question based on submissions of evidence by both the defense and prosecution. Press reports won’t be in either package of evidence.
What is said in the press is pretty solidly irrelevant to legal outcomes, and therefore not an excuse for the press helping out govt cover-ups.
Actually that doesn’t appear to be the problem here.
The problems with our claims to immunity are twofold. 1) We only ever claimed he was a consular employee, not an embassy one. The immnuity for consular employees is more limited than for embassy employees, and doesn’t extend to murder. We didn’t make the embassy claim until after the fact. 2) Even wrt the first kind of immunity, it appears Davis was not on our official list that went out on January 25.
In other words, the dispute has nothing to do w/actual claimed employment. It has to do with us trying to retroactively claim a status that the paperwork doesn’t support.
Your post is baloney. If your passport entering a country has diplomatic status then you have diplomatic status. Pakistan should return Davis to the U.S. right away.
Keep thinking that way and travel a lot; you’ll soon see how erroneous your assumptions are. If, on the other hand, you report to Mr. Obama or someone who does, you may have the juice to circumvent the obvious legal peril into which you will have needlessly put yourself and your government.
In other words, a Pakistani court would only uphold the claim of diplomatic immunity if it followed Club Law. The US has the biggest club, so it gets what it wants.
The teams of dedicated guards and Punjab rangers deployed outside the prison are there to protect Davis from ordinary Pakistanis who, polls show, predominantly hate the US.
Raymond Davis’s life is at risk from ordinary Pakistanis who resent the reduced national security which comes from being pawns in the bogus US GWOT, from US spooks running loose around their country and targeting Pakistanis for rocket attacks, for the US treating their allies the Taliban as insurgents in their own country (Afghanistan) and replacing the Taliban with Pakistan’s enemies, the Northern Alliance — India bloc.
I got really ‘flamed’ on the old PBS discussion site for linking to an article at scoop.co.nz connecting Obama’s family to CIA front organizations. I then felt it was as important as the family history on the Bush side of things.
Now, after reading David Lindorff’s coverage of the Pakistani incident, and hearing Obama’s defense of Davis as an ’embassy employee’,I am willing to assert once again that Obama’s own upbringing, which he explains in positive terms as occurring during the struggle for Indonesia’s independence, might be worth further scrutiny.
“I really got flamed…”
Welcome to the burnt-to-a-cinder club…of people who won’t drink the new and improved, “Centrist” koolaid.
It’s just oodles tastier than what bushCo was peddling…some bloggers keep saying…
Investigative journalist and author Dave Lindorff reports (http://tinyurl.com/4npete7) that Indian and Pakistani newspapers are reporting that Davis’ real job was to foment terrorist activities among Al Quaeda in Pakistan “in order to give credence to the American notion that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are not safe”. Sounds about right for what our government would do: gin up fear about nuclear capabilities in selected countries in order to garner public support for endless war mongering and war spending.
That seems entirely plausible.
Indeed. Despite the claims of State Department spokesperson PJ Crowley about how the NYT might shape opinion in Pakistan, I suspect the paper’s treatment of Davis has far more to do with domestic opinion in the US.
Although, what might it say to Pakistanis that the NYT is attempting to protect someone many of them think is a spy, provocateur and murderer?
[Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan] Report: U.S. Has Wasted Tens Of Billions Of Dollars On Contractors In Iraq And Afghanistan
The Commission is holding hearings today, including witnesses from contractors.
LINK.
By the way, another US spook has been arrested in Pakistan and the NYTimes identified him. News reports follow:
The clampdown on American contractors by the Pakistani authorities appeared to be under way Friday with the arrest of an American citizen, Aaron Mark DeHaven, in the northwestern city of Peshawar.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/world/asia/26pakistan.html
PESHAWAR, Pakistan — A court in northwest Pakistan Monday rejected the bail application of an American said to have been working for a private security company who is accused of overstaying his visa. “The bail application of Aaron Mark DeHaven has been rejected because he had no legal documents,” public prosecutor Javed Ali told AFP in the northwestern city of Peshawar.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j932m6fucRE-hfpp0QcoHe_IrUjg?docId=CNG.dd0e48cc352c6c7fab407dabd31d7f82.111
DeHaven runs a company named Catalyst Services which, according to its website, is staffed by retired military and defence department personnel. DeHaven’s business partner is listed on company documents as Hunter Obrikat with an address in Charlotte, North Carolina. The Guardian was unable to contact either men at listed numbers in Pakistan, Afghanistan, the US and Dubai.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/25/pakistan-arrests-security-contractor-cia
The Guardian, it seems, actually thought through the logic behind the claim that revealing Davis’ identity would endanger him and, like me, found it dubious.
Grammatical quibble. Let me suggest that the bold portion ought to read “…and, as I (did), found it dubious.” You, like The Guardian, are the finder, not something found dubious.
David Dayen has a fresh cross-post already in progress: Capitol Police Blocking Access to Building in Madison
Does anyone imagine, for even an instant, that someone, even, apparently anyone, at the NYT might read EW’s words and understand any single one of them?
Are they incompetent, stupid, or complicit?
So many “groups” to apply those questions to, the White House, the Congress, and the Courts …
Thank you, again, EW, for the truth … and the courage, the simple courage, to say it.
DW
I vote for the simplicity of complicity,Dee Dub. To wit:
….it is “utopian in 1974 to think of the multinational corporations as potentially among our most effective mechanisms for husbanding the earth’s resources and optimizing their use for human benefit — the current popular image of the corporation tends to be more that of the spoiler and the exploiter.”
Here David Rockefeller admits media collusion with his one world plans:
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the light of publicity during those years. But now the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supra-national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”
Rockefeller writes on page 405 of his memoirs: “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (Activists Go Face to Face With Evil As Rockefeller Confronted)
Will the planned recession and fall of the American dollar be the …Feb 17, 2011 … Here David Rockefeller admits media collusion with his one world plans: “We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, …
currencytradingexchangeguide.com/…/will-the-planned-recession-and-fall-of -the-american-dollar-be-the-excuse-for-a-north-american-union-bail… – Cached
The universal complicity of arrogance … the small, timid little beings whose fears, deceits and disregard of life have dominated the “history” of this species, though such beings are few in number … for thousands of years … succeeds only with the complacency or the fear of the many.
One hopes the consciousness of the species has perhaps, at long last, begun to grasp the truth of its “predicament”.
As that understanding, at the individual level, is the beginning of all that may truly set us free.
Great to “see” you, Gitcheegumee.
DW
WHERE oh ,WHERE is that 100th monkey ??And I thought technology would help us evolve…not de-volve!!
Dee Dub, I have been worried about you.Great to see you posting again,too. Way too long “no see”.
(Imagine what our dear Sara would have to say about all this.)
The NYT, in neglecting to think or do the work required of this issue, has demonstrated that it is not engaged in journalism but is instead in the propaganda business. Most of its coverage over at least the last decade provides significant evidence of this. The NYT is Pravda.
You are making what I believe is the unfounded assertion that critical thinking and adversarial verification of government sources ever was the job of the NYT.
What’s changing here isn’t the behavior of the NYT.
What’s changing is people are finally realizing what the NYT has always done.
The NYT, and the MSM in general, are simply the marketing department for the larger business-media-government entity.
Well, but you see, critical thinking must be balanced by obsequious boot-licking and ass-kissing, which is necessary to protect our access to all the best cocktail parties!
/s
Bob in AZ
Does anybody recall the “job” they helped do on ACORN?
Brad Blog did a lengthy series on attempts for Times to clarify their reporting on O’Keefe’s escapades and allegations.
The BRAD BLOG : Good Riddance, Clark HoytJun 13, 2010 … New York Times’ woeful Public Editor/apologist Clark Hoyt ends his three-year term at the “paper of record” today with a column in which he …
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7892 – Cached►
The BRAD BLOG : Exclusive: NYTimes Public Editor Declines to …Feb 23, 2010 … Despite repeated confirmation that the ‘paper of record’ was wrong, Clark Hoyt declines to recommend retractions …
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7715 – Cached
The BRAD BLOG : NYT PUBLIC EDITOR FINALLY ADMITS ACORN ‘PIMP’ HOAX …Mar 20, 2010 … Clark Hoyt says in Sunday column ‘editors considering correction’ ….. But here’s the beauty of the thing: Because Clark Hoyt so carefully …
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7755 – Cached
Speaking of the Guardian – Craig Murray has a really good piece up on immunity.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/feb/28/cia-agent-diplomat-pakistan-raymond-davis
Being much more well versed, he goes deeper in fewer words than I did into the situation (reinforcing the point that a diplomatic passport is not the issue and does not confer immunity. He gets into something I did not – what the situation would be even if you accepted that Davis were on staff with the mission, but only on technical and administrative staff. He explains that to qualify for full immunity, you have to be not just on staff with the embassy, but on “diplomatic staff” which is further defined in the Vienna Conventions to mean that you hold a diplomatic rank
So even if he was “on staff” prior to the shooting, which seems questionable, technical and administrative staff with no diplomatic rank don’t enjoy full immunity. They only enjoy immunity while performing their diplomatic staffing duties.
Murray also confirms that he has been told what Pakistani press has repeated from the Foreign Office – that no diplomatic note was given for Davis and he points to the obvious, i.e.,that if it had existed it would likely have been produced by now.
He probably didn’t have the NYT specifically in mind when he said:
but if the shoe fits.
That the USG is sticking to its weak “immunity” claims seems part of the fig leaf it’s using at the bargaining table. It’s an attempt not to admit what everyone at the table already knows, that this is a pure power play; like much else Mr. Obama does, let the law be damned.
The over-the-top government reaction — like that over WikiLeaks — suggests this is a big deal, and that there’s stuff about this case that they’re still not telling us.
Maybe “Davis” knows something about what really happened on 9/11, and what role Pakistani ISI may have had in it?
By the way, can we be sure that “Davis” really quit working for Blackwater/Xe and went to work directly for the CIA, or is that just another government lie?
Interesting article on the “Davis” case by a retired Pakistani air commodore: Pak-US in equation!:
Also turns out, according to the article, that the U.S. was willing to exchange Aafiya Siddiqi for “Davis”, but Siddiqi’s family turned the deal down.
As I said last week, I believe the reason Davis is such a big deal isn’t that he’s simply a “CIA agent.”
Davis is a big deal because he is intimately involved in the U.S. efforts to destabilize the government of Pakistan.
And what’s he’s likely to give up under interrogation is the entire U.S. network of collaborators outside and inside the Pakistani government.
This would be unacceptably costly to the U.S.
It’s right that Davis should fear for his life.
But the real threat to him isn’t from the Pakistanis.
“Davis is a big deal because he’s intimately involved in the U.S. efforts to destablilize the government of Pakistan.”
And this is supposed to different from being a CIA agent?
Very.
Pakistan is ostensibly an ally of the U.S. While they are under no illusions that CIA aren’t everywhere in their country (CIA? Ha. The U.S. is bombing their country, for God’s sake), the general notion of alliances is one’s allies aren’t supposed to be actively working to overthrow the government of one’s country.
Those people are more accurately known as enemies and invaders.
The U.S. is having a difficult enough time in it’s quest to dominate the energy resources of that region. Losing the ability to work as freely as they have within Pakistan – and having Pakistan ally itself more closely with non-U.S. interests, e.g. China, as one of the possible consequences – would be for the U.S. an enormous setback.
Dear Vigilance, the idea that the CIA would scruple to try to gin up an overthrow of a government that was threatening U.S. interests is giggle material. Davis is, excuse me, WAS (he’s gone from being an “asset” to a liability, now…) there to do things that would ensure the continuation of Pakistani support for teaching the Afghan ~~~Edited by Moderator. No need to perpetute those types of ethnic slurs~~~ who’s boss, among other things. If that project fails, a lot of American males will go through a psychological and emotional penis-shortening, and corporate amurka, along with them.
Langley is not into that Russian-style outcome, and will do anything they have to, to prevent it. Separating Davis from the greater task of implementing U.S. policy in Pakistan, no matter the cost, makes no sense.
The real question is, of course:
just what is Barack Obama going to do, when the plates slow down enough to start crashing?
“~~~Edited by Moderator~~~,” eh?
Davis is an employee of XE, supposedly under contract with CIA. While this case may not be unique, it’s most likely be the first ever out in public. How is Pakistan supposed treat him is not really clear to me. Is he a CIA, or private citizen, or mercenary? If Pakistan thinks that he has subverted Pakistan’s national security, how and as whom can he be charged and tried.
I think this is the likely reason why NYT doesn’t report it. This maybe the one that blows the cover of US private security contracting running amok.
It’s not clear that he works for Blackwater/Xe and only it. Unsurprisingly, there are a score of contradictory characterizations about who employs, pays for and directs “Davis'” work. All of which supports the conclusion he’s a spy, and everybody that could impact his health and well-being knows it, even if there’s dispute about where his paycheck comes from.
I wonder if this will have any impact on the TAPI pipeline deal?
You and the U.S. would very much be wondering the same thing.
Though I believe it’s important to see the political consequences as even greater than control of the energy resources of the Caspian.
If Davis is found, as an agent of the American government, to have been working to destabilize if not outright overthrow the government of Pakistan, that could easily be seen as an act of war.
Even if the response isn’t quite that extreme, the U.S. uses unrest in the area and Pakistan’s adversarial relationship with other Asian nuclear powers to play them off against each other. Were the Asian powers to reconsider their strategic relationship it could be catastrophic for the U.S. empire, not just in Asia but everywhere.
Consider, just as possibilities, Pakistan becoming allied with Afghanistan against the U.S. That leaves the U.S. having dumped what will eventually be trillions into the graveyard. When the U.S. finally is forced to declare victory and leave, then the TAPI pipeline gets built – but with Russia or China as the controlling superpower.
Or think of Pakistan as the eastern terminus of the reformation that’s sweeping the Middle East. Instead of a series of balkanized gas stations with national flags, the entire energy-producing ME from Libya to Pakistan (as the terminus of TAPI) becomes unified, and unified against the U.S. – leaving the U.S. without energy, and more importantly, without economic blackmail to use against its ever-less-willing Asian creditors.
I’m sure there are other even more disturbing scenarios keeping Langley awake at night.
“Consider, just as possibilities, Pakistan becoming allied with Afghanistan against the U.S. That leaves the U.S. having dumped what will eventually be trillions into the graveyard. When the U.S. finally is forced to declare victory and leave, then the TAPI pipeline gets built – but with Russia or China as the controlling superpower.
Or think of Pakistan as the eastern terminus of the reformation that’s sweeping the Middle East. Instead of a series of balkanized gas stations with national flags, the entire energy-producing ME from Libya to Pakistan (as the terminus of TAPI) becomes unified, and unified against the U.S. – leaving the U.S. without energy, and more importantly, without economic blackmail to use against its ever-less-willing Asian creditors.
I’m sure there are other even more disturbing scenarios keeping Langley awake at night.”
I honestly don’t find either of those scenarios disturbing at all.
Anything short of nukes blowing off that spurs the US into making its inevitable decision to leave Afghanistan and Iraq sooner rather than later is in the best interests of the US.
As for oil pipelines, the US needs to sever itself from imported oil. Full stop. Again, the sooner it is forced to face that reality the sooner it can take the steps to energy self sufficiency- and such a goal is technically feasible- and all the benefits that will accrue from so doing. The first large nation that does so will enjoy a massive advantage over its economic rivals. Let China play our current geopolitical hand and become dependent on imported oil, it is a losing one. An economy reliant on imported energy with all its attendant geopolitical, military and strategic complications is a throwback to the 20th century- there is no long term future there.
Imagine an energy independent US with no need for a multi-trillion dollar military’s crippling parasitic drag on its economy. Imagine a US foreign policy morally and politically uncompromised by dependent relationships with despotic and unreliable partners abroad.
It’s only a nightmare scenario if you are multinational oil company making billions in profits on the status quo or dependent on those multinationals’ money.
I only meant Langley would find them disturbing, not that anyone else should. ;-)
But when manifesting change I think it’s important we remember not all paths have equal consequences.
For example, I might decide to get healthier and lose weight. But while getting cancer or losing a leg or eating better and going to the gym all lead to weight loss, they have very, very different short and long term consequences.
I share the goals to which you refer, I believe. But I also think it’s crucial, and compassionate, we understand that geopolitics always has real effects on real people.
…
P.S. Thanks for reading and responding to my comment.
Last year, I posted here about the Nabucco and South Stream pipelines.Over the weekend, on one of the Asian newsites,I saw where the Nabucco is being delayed due to financial backers concerns over political unrest.
Now, those are not the same pipeline as the Tapi, but Russia and China figure prominently as playersin the overall chess game.One of the concerns regarding TAPI is that the pipleine would run across Pakistan tribal areas…and the situation is terminally tenuous-certainly not in need of further political agitation by foreign powers…
I will post a couple of links I found particularly informative.(Pepe Escobar and his series for Asia Times entitled Pipelanistan is extremely informative,btw.)
New TAPI gas pipeline could boost Afghanistan, regional stability …Dec 10, 2010 … Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India are set to sign a gas pipeline deal tomorrow. But the planned route goes through two fierce …
http://www.csmonitor.com/…/New-TAPI-gas-pipeline-could-boost-Afghanistan regional-stability – Cached
Afghanistan, the TAPI Pipeline, and Energy GeopoliticsMar 23, 2010 … The TAPI pipeline (Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India) pipeline is discussed in detail with specific reference to the multiple security …
http://www.ensec.org/index.php?option…tapi-pipeline... – Cached
NOTE: The second link is especially good,imho.
Yo links are money, G. *throws indecipherable gang sign* ;-)
Thanks for the links! (The actual links look like they got munged in the editing, maybe a mod could fix them).
I agree the second article is excellent. Though perhaps it just states the obvious in a clear and unambiguous way – which compared to the U.S. media’s fairy tale that the U.S. war in Afghanistan is to find bin Laden and bring liberation to the oppressed (liberation from natural resources and incarnation, apparently) merely seems excellent. :-)
Thanks again for the links, and thanks especially for seeing some of the deeper story here.
You are very,very welcome.
Here’s piece I couldn’t find earlier,but it’s exceptional-here’s an excerpt :
Pipeline project a new Silk Road
By M K Bhadrakumar
An American diplomatic cable that puts Washington to shame originated from the United States Embassy in Ashgabat last December, portraying Turkmen President Gurbanguli Berdymukhamedov as “vain, suspicious, guarded, strict, very conservative, a practiced liar”, a good actor who can be vindictive but isn’t a “very bright guy” and is wary of his intellectual superiors.
The WikiLeaks revelation is not likely to please Berdymukhamedov. Yet the irony is that it is this allegedly insecure, mediocre, mercurial politician with a racy private life who is set to make the critical difference between the success and failure of the US strategy in Afghanistan.
The significance of the signing of the inter-governmental agreement over the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India(TAPI) gas-pipeline project on Saturday in Ashgabat cannot be underestimated. It is a unique Silk Road project that holds the key to resolving many complicated issues in the region.
The project is ostensibly about the transportation of the huge Caspian energy reserves to the world market, but it is also about the stabilization of Afghanistan, fostering of Pakistan-India amity, bonding of Central Asia and South Asia and the overall consolidation of US political, military and economic influence in the strategic high plateau that overlooks Russia, Iran and China.
Pipeline project a new Silk Road – Asia Times OnlineDec 16, 2010 … Pipeline project a new Silk Road By M K Bhadrakumar An American diplomatic cable that puts Washington to shame originated from the United …
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LL16Df01.html – Cached
Ah, you miss the point. As with the “secret war” in Cambodia, it doesn’t matter what the “natives” know and can act on, the real enemy is the American people and they have to be protected from the inconvenient and unpalatable truth.
It would be different if we were getting anything that even remotely resembled the truth from official government sources. Everything is classified and the press is just sitting there in the government’s lap, licking the faces of people they should be reporting on. When somebody actually leaks some real information to the press, the source is thrown in jail and the publisher is threatened with physical harm and legal action as well as chastised by their peers. The whole (dis)information system has become Orwellian!
Clearly, federal officials were hoping to create “plausible deniability.” The concept has been used successfully to avoid accountability in this country, and they assume that it will work as well elsewhere. Of course, it doesn’t because in other countries propaganda exists to shield their governments, not ours.
Wasn’t the way to make use of plausible deniability to cut “Davis” loose once he had f***ed up? What’s the point of having plausible deniability if you don’t use it when you have to?