Thursday, March 22, 2012
Mass murder, lynching and people who defend them bothRichard Nixon's commuting of mass murderer Lt. William Calley made defending war criminals and mass murderers respectable among a large segment of the conservative-minded population. In the segregation world where defending lynch-murder had been passed down from generation to generation, admiring deliberate murder when done for racial reasons was already respectable. And carpet-bombing of cities beginning in the Second World War had also legitimized the killing of civilian noncombatants in many people's minds.
But it took Nixon with William Calley to elevate it to its current level of respectability among good Christian Republican white folks.
The old Southern defense of lynch-murder, when speaking in public where some hidden librul or fedrul revenoorer might hear you, went basically like this: "I think it's terrible that those nigras were killed. I don't know what they may have done to provoke it, but that's not the right way to go about punishing them. But what really, really, really makes me mad is them damnyankees using something like this to smear all Southerners!!
Lynch-murder of the old-fashioned kind is still popular among many conservatives, of course. As The Young Turks highlight in this news segment on the Treyvon Martin murder case, Trayvon Martin Smear Attempt By Glenn Beck's 'The Blaze' 03/21/2012:
The good Rev. Wade Burleson, reacting to my criticism of his advocating for war crimes prior to the Kandahar massacre, in an update to his post adapted the lynch formula to the Kandahar massacre, with those pointing out the serious of the massacre being the ones who are really, really, really objectionable.
Respectable New York Times columnist David "Bobo" Brooks wouldn't be so crude. He just wants us to sympathize with the accused shooter because he's just a regular guy.
Paul Rieckhoff, who founded Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, looks at the media treatment of Staff Sgt. Robert Bales as a sympathetic figure and how that in itself smears veterans in How to Stereotype Our Military as Drunken Beggars: A Case Study in #MediaFail by Dr. Drew Huffington Post 03/21/2012:
On Monday night, Dr. Drew did us all a big favor. He covered the Kandahar shooting incident on his HLN cable show in such a sensationalized way, that it should serve as a powerful example for how the media should NOT cover an issue -- particularly one as devastating as this.The interest of the Bales defense and the PR interest of the Pentagon converge on portraying him as a sympathetic figure, up to a point. It's just that the Pentagon doesn't want him too closely identified with the rest of the Army. David Goldstein and Matthew Schofield report for McClatchy Newspapers on how After Bales' arrest, military tried to delete him from Web 03/21/2012:
Besides waiting nearly a week before identifying the Army staff sergeant who's accused of killing 16 Afghan villagers, the U.S. military scrubbed its websites of references to his combat service.The Pentagon claims they did it out of consideration for Bales' family. But it's a reasonable speculation that they also saw benefits in trying to conceal reports on Pentagon websites that may have presented him in a positive or heroic light.
Schofield also reports in Murder case against U.S. soldier presents challenges for prosecutors McClatchy Newspapers 03/20/2012 how the military's removal of Bales from Afghanistan for his future trial and its handling of the crime scene could complicate the prosecution:
Military law experts say that the case will be littered with potential traps for the prosecution, including the fact that both Afghan and U.S. investigators have collected evidence from the crime scene.Their excuse for not securing the crime scene immediately is telling:
A U.S. military official, who wasn't authorized to be identified because of the sensitivity of the investigation, acknowledged: "In Chicago, or Los Angeles, investigators just head to the scene of the crime. They don't have to arrive by helicopter for security reasons, and they don't take enemy fire while they're collecting evidence."I wonder how the Army treats individual soldiers if they say, gee, Sarge, we might take enemy fire when we go out on this mission so I think I'll just stay here at base. When you think about the excuse a bit more, it's painfully thin. If a single soldier could go in alone at night and murder 16 people without apparently meeting armed resistance, how serious can the risk really be? And the Army going in to secure the crime scene, especially if done in conjuction with Afghan forces, could have the effect of showing the locals that the US values the lives of the victims.
But what signal does the treatment they're giving this send?
While the investigation presents roadblocks, the standard by which a military case is judged is no different than in a civilian trial: A suspect to be convicted must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.So we see how this prosecution is shaping up: pin all responsibility on a single guy; gin up sympathy for him by portraying him in a relatively sympathetic light; divert attention completely from the 16 murder victims and the wounded; delay the trial until three or four years from now; present a relatively weak case and wind up with a conviction with a relatively light sentence.
Qais Azimy provides the names of the dead and wounded in the massacre in No one asked their names by Aljazeera English 03/19/2012. One of the dead was named Nazar Mohamed.
Tags: afghanistan war, kandahar massacre, treyvon martin
| +Save/Share | |
Links to this post:
No subject for immortal verse
That we who lived by honest dreams
Defend the bad against the worse."
-- Cecil Day-Lewis from Where Are The War Poets?
[Tip: Point cursor to any comment to see title of post being discussed.]
SEARCH THIS SITE
News & Media Links