Photo credit: @julesdwit.
A not-for-profit media organization supported by people like you.
Chief Washington correspondent for The New York Times, David Sanger, and Director of the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School, Karen Greenberg, discuss the foiled assassination plot to kill the Saudi ambassador.
you guys sound excartly like FOX NEWS
Glenn Greenwald at Salon has been excellent on this -- better than anyone at the Times, and better than Sanger is capable of being:
It's not just the record of the Bush administration. It's now the record of Obama, Holder, and an admin that is more hostile to truth and constitutional liberties than Bush was.
Sanger is lying outright when he says that Obama tried to address Bush practices. Obama expressly exempted Bush & Co. from prosecution or even investigation. Many people -- moderates and liberals _and_ conservatives -- have described Obama as _more_ conservative than Bush on civil liberties and foreign policy.
The US has aggressively sought to assassinate people abroad, including American nationals in clear violation of the Constitution. Thousands of civilians have been killed in the course of these violations of international law.
As for calls to military action -- Is Sanger ignorant of Biden's comments just the other day?
Here's the best arguments that it was a real plot, from former US attorney Andrew McCarthy:
Saudi ambassador Al-Jubeir said "as I understand from media reports ..." He has no first hand knowledge regarding the case.
The funny part is that this show interviews .... the media. "Wag the Dog" all over again...
Since the Times has utterly failed to analyse the pattern of FBI entrapment in so-called "terrorist plots" over the past 5 to 10 years, we have no reason at all to expect that Sanger will do so here.
The fact is that this fits well into a pattern of FBI entrapment cases. That really can't rationally be disputed.
Whether there is a really problem for which entrapment is a good policing technique is another question.
Karen Greenberg clearly understands this. There is precious little evidence that anybody at the Times either understands this or cares about justice for Arabs or Muslims (the clear victims of systematic racial profiling locally, with the NYPD, and nationally).
And how comical for a Times reporter to bleat about Wikileaks after the tirades against Wikileaks from Keller, Burns, etc.
Shia Iran and Sunni Saudia have been in a very intense and increasing power struggle for the leadership of Islam for some time now. America's interest of course is cheap or at least moderate oil prices. But the Iranian Mullah regime is intent on driving the US out of the region, getting control of Mecca someday, and gaining control over the life blood of the West, that is oil prices.To bring the West down, of course.
This reminds me a bit of Graham Green's "Our Man In Havana".
According to debka.com, the US realized that Islamists are the winners of Arab Spring and decided to get closer to Muslim Brotherhood (and its offshoot Hamas). Hamas office will be moved from Damascus to Cairo, captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit is freed, etc.
Additionally, the US is trying to stop the growing influence of Iran in the Arab world. The half-baked assassination plot appears as one of the steps in this game.
I believe the decision to play with Islamists and the methods used by the administration will eventually backfire.
Do we have any evidence to support to administration's claims?
If not, then by default we should assume that the administration is lying.
I have a question. Does anyone think Obama has learned that his naive attempts to engage with Iran as if it were a legitimate state was foolish from the gitgo?
Iran considers Obama a naif and a fool for forsaking our allies----especially israel----and providing concessions to them. Concessions like doing nothing about the coup in Lebanon, or their nuclear development program.
What plot? Once again, we have only the hearsay of an Obama administration which has proven itself to be more hostile than Bush to basic constitutional guarantees.
The pattern here is now well-established: The FBI coaxes, encourages, enables some dimwit, lays a trap, traps him, then acts astonished. In several of the cases we've already seen, the FBI approached actual coercion to get the subject to act according to the pre-determined FBI script.
The racist component is glaring. The FBI isn't doing this to Christian or Jewish fanatics -- just Muslims. The atmosphere is a variation on the witch-hunt hysteria of 17th century New England or 1950s America.
Email addresses are required but never displayed.
Brian Lehrer leads the conversation about what matters most now in local and national politics, our own communities and our lives.
Subscribe on iTunes
WNYC 93.9 FM and AM 820 are New York's flagship public radio
stations, broadcasting the finest programs from NPR and PRI, as well as a wide range of award-winning local
programming. WNYC is a division of
New York Public Radio.