Thoughts On Our War Against Terrorism
By Rep. Cynthia A. McKinney
April 13, 2002
Authorities tell us that the world changed on September 11. As a
result, university professors must watch what they say in class or
be turned in to the "speech" police. Elected officials must censor
themselves or be censured by the media. Citizens now report
behavior of suspicious-looking people to the police. Laws now
exist that erode our civil liberties. Americans now accept these
infringements as necessary to win America's New War.
America, the world's only superpower, is stifled in its ability to
defend human rights and democracy abroad because it has failed the
fundamental test at home. Our combination of money and military
might, and our willingness to use them, did not make us a
superpower. We are the most powerful nation on the face of the
planet because we have combined raw power with American ideals
such as dignity, freedom, justice, and peace. These ideas and
ideals are admired around the world and are more important, in my
view, to our position of global strength than our ability to shoot
a missile down a chimney. We might be feared because of our
military, but we are loved because of our ideals.
Sadly, we have put American goodwill at risk around the world
because of an imbalance in our foreign policy that is palpable to
even the most disinterested observer. In 1994, after an act of
terrorism killed two sitting presidents, the Clinton
Administration purposely failed to prevent the genocide of one
million Rwandans in order to install favorable regimes in the
region. In 1999 Madeleine Albright OK'd a Sierra Leone peace plan
that positioned Foday Sankoh as Chairman of the Commission for the
Management of Strategic Resources, a position that placed him
answerable only to the President despite the fact that his
terrorist organization raped little girls and chopped off their
hands as it financed its way to power with illegal diamond sales.
Jonas Savimbi, recently killed on the battlefield, helped the US
protect the minority rule of racists in South Africa and his
organization continues to rampage across southern Africa in
Angola, Namibia, parts of Congo-Kinshasha, and Rwanda without
restriction, financed by illegal diamond sales. The continued
plunder of Africa's rich resources without penalty and sadly with
the knowledge and support of powerful people in the US, serves as
the foundation of the particular terrorism that victimizes
Africans.
And now, as Africans grapple with the fundamental right to control
their own resources and despite United Nations reports making no
such links, Bush Administration experts seem prepared to link
African diamonds with anti-US terrorism, thus "necessitating"
tightened US control over Africa's resources.
And so, with no concern at all for the effects on others of
US-supported terrorism, the US, with its bombs and military,
embarks on a worldwide crusade against terrorism that Bush says
likely will last as many as twenty years. The list of target
countries is long with Afghanistan, Somalia, Tanzania, Kenya,
Sudan, the Philippines, and Iraq offering the starters. But what
of the fact that Henry Kissinger and the current new US Ambassador
to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, both once lobbied Washington, DC
on behalf of a US oil company, Unocal, and a softer policy toward
the Taliban?
Whose war is this really?
In November 2000, Republicans stole from America our most precious
right of all: the right to free and fair elections. In an
organized manner, Florida Governor Jeb Bush and his Secretary of
State Katherine Harris created a list of convicted felons--57, 700
to be exact--to "scrub" from the state's voter rolls. The names
were created from Florida records and from lists provided by 11
other states, the largest list coming from Texas. We now know that
most of the people on that list were innocent of crimes. The list
was a phony. And worse, the majority of these rightful voters were
people of color and likely Democratic voters. Of the thousands who
ultimately lost their vote through this scrub of voters, 80% are
African-American. Had they voted, the course of history would have
changed: Harris declared Bush the victor by only 537 votes.
President Carter has said that the Carter Center would not certify
the US 2000 Presidential elections had they had been asked to do
so.
Consequently, an Administration of questionable legitimacy has
been given unprecedented power to fight America's new war against
terrorism.
Before September 11, two million Americans found themselves behind
bars: 80% of them people of color. Millions of Americans are
sleeping on the streets of American cities. All over America,
unarmed black men are targeted by rogue police officers, who shoot
first and ask questions later. While 52% of all black men feel
they have been victims of racial profiling, the Supreme Court
declines to hear an important case on racial profiling. The Bush
Administration totally "disses" the World Conference Against
Racism and the people around the world who care about eliminating
racism. In February 2001, The United States Commission on National
Security, including Newt Gingrich, recommended that the National
Homeland Security Agency be established with a hefty price tag.
Most people chuckled at the suggestion.
After September 11, we have OK'd the targeting and profiling of
certain groups of people in America while not arresting in any way
the racial profiling and discrimination that existed prior to
September 11. Mass arrests, detention without charge, military
tribunals, and infringements on due process rights are now
realities in America. Even more alarming are the calls in some
circles to allow the use of torture and other brutal methods in
pursuit of "justice." Sadly, US administration of justice will be
conducted by an Administration incapable of it. Interestingly,
prominent officials explain to us that September 11 happened
because we are free. And "they" hate us because we are free.
Moreover, persons close to this Administration are poised to make
huge profits off America's new war. Former President Bush sits on
the board of the Carlyle Group. The Los Angeles Times reports that
on a single day last month, Carlyle earned $237 million selling
shares in United Defense Industries, the Army's fifth-largest
contractor. The stock offering was well timed: Carlyle officials
say they decided to take the company public only after the Sept.
11 attacks. The stock sale cashed in on increased congressional
support for hefty defense spending, including one of United
Defense's cornerstone weapon programs.
Now is the time for our elected officials to be held accountable.
Now is the time for the media to be held accountable. Why aren't
the hard questions being asked. We know there were numerous
warnings of the events to come on September 11. Vladimir Putin,
President of Russia, delivered one such warning. Those engaged in
unusual stock trades immediately before September 11 knew enough
to make millions of dollars from United and American airlines,
certain insurance and brokerage firms' stocks. What did this
Administration know, and when did it know it about the events of
September 11? Who else knew and why did they not warn the innocent
people of New York who were needlessly murdered?
September 11 erased the line between "over there" and "over here."
The American people can longer afford to be detached from the
world, as our actions abroad will have a direct impact on our
lives at home. In Washington, DC, decisions affecting home and
abroad are made and too many of us leave the responsibility of
protecting our freedoms to other people whose interests are not
our own. From Durban to Kabul to Atlanta to Washington, what our
government does in our name is important. It is now also clear
that our future, our security, and our rights depend on our
vigilance.
Cynthia McKinney represents the fifth congressional congressional
district of Georgia. She can be reached at: cymck@mail.house.gov
------------------------------------------------------------------
Cynthia McKinney on Flashpoints, 25 Mar 2002
Georgia Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney reads her essay/commentary
on the "war against terrorism" in an interview with Dennis
Bernstein broadcast on Flashpoints on 3/25/02 --
www.flashpoints.net [audio at:]
http://www.flashpoints.net/realaudio/fp20020325.ram [go to minute
30:00].
DB: Congresswoman Cynthia Mckinney, it is great to have you with
us on Flashpoints. I wanted to follow up on that very powerful
commentary with just a few questions that come off speeches you
have made from the House floor on related information. First of
all, why do you oppose the Rumsfeld 48.1 billion dollar increase
in the military budget? What is most troubling about this for you?
CM: It was incredible sitting in the room on the day that
secretary Rumsfeld gave his presentation to members of the Armed
Services Committee. Of course I serve on the House Armed Services
Committee, and every year the Secretary of Defense comes before
that Committee with a statement on the budget.
Now, the 48.1 billion dollar increase that Secretary Rumsfeld
requested was interesting because basically what he said was we
can afford it. Notwithstanding the fact that the Pentagon has lost
2.3 trillion dollars that we very well cannot afford to have lost
--
DB: Lost it? Where did they lose it?
CM: That's a darn good question. You would think that Arthur
Anderson is their accountant over there. They have lost 2.3
trillion dollars, and they don't know where to find that money.
And of course the Secretary acknowledged the fact 2.3 trillion
dollars remain unaccounted for, but in his testimony to the House
Armed Services Committee, the Secretary said that the United
States can afford it.
He also said that we have a responsibility in this brave new post
September 11 world, to make sure that we can adequately defend
ourselves. And what he used as a justification for this
unprecedented hike -- the biggest hike in a generation -- was the
fact of the events around September 11. But as you know, and I
know, it wasn't the military that failed. It was a failure of
people who had information to act.
We know that there were several warnings that were given prior to
the events of September 11. From people in Germany to people in
the Cayman Islands to people even, now we learn about the owners
of the pilot school. People were calling in to the CIA and FBI CIA
and they were giving information that was critical.
Even prior to these warnings we had the trial itself from the 1993
World Trade Center bombing. And we had the trial from the American
embassy bombing. So we know that the World Trade Center bombing
trial gave us a lead on the fact that U.S. embassies were being
targetted. And now the US government is being sued by survivors of
the embassy bombings, because it is clear that America had
warnings and did nothing. Did nothing to protect the lives of the
people who serve in our foreign service and who serve us in other
ways in our embassies around the world. Now the US government is
being sued, and we're going to have to pay for that, as those
families are now paying every day with the loss of their loved
ones.
There was adequate warning. There were people who failed to act on
the warning. And that's what ought to be investigated. But instead
of requesting that Congress investigate what went wrong and why,
we had President Bush (painful for me to say that, but), we had
President Bush placing a call to Majority Leader Senator Tom
Daschle asking him not to investigate the events of September 11,
And then, hot on the heels of the president's phone call was
another phone call from the vice president asking that Tom Daschle
also not investigate the events that lead to September 11.
My question is: What do they have to hide? And why is it that the
American people are being asked to make tremendous sacrifices now
in our civil liberties? And the fact that we got this request for
an unprecedented hike [in military spending] -- the hike alone of
48.1 billion dollars is more than any one of our allies spend
total on their defense.
Then the other issue that saddens me is the fact that the former
President, president Bush's daddy, sits on the board of the
Carlyle Group. And so we get this presidency, of questionable
legitimacy, requesting a nearly unprecedented amount of money to
go into a defense budget for defense spending that will directly
benefit his father.
Where are the brakes on transparency and corruption that I see
happening as a result of the fact that the president's father
stands to make money off of the very requests that the president
has made, on what I would call a specious argument saying that we
need to increase defense spending because of Sept 11, when we now
know that there was enough warning that we didn't have to even
experience September 11 at all. At least that is now the way it is
beginning to appear.
DB: How would the father make money on the son's budget?
CM: The father sits on the board of an organization called the
Carlyle Group. Now when we had Frank Carlucci come to testify at
the House International Relations Committee (shortly after George
W was sworn in)
DB: former Defense Secretary
CM: former Defense Secretary -- we have a requirement that
organizations that come before our committee, the House
International Relations Committee, have to disclose Federal
contracts. And so I requested of our chairman, Chairman Hyde,
whether or not the Carlyle Group would be subjected to that
requirement, since everyone else has to do it. And of course the
Carlyle Group was not required to make any disclosure as to the
Federal contracts that it had. That in itself means that they are
skirting the rules of the House.
Notwithstanding that, the fact that the father sits on the board
of the Carlyle Group, which is one of the highest level defense
contractors in the country -- I think they're number 11 or 12 in
defense contracts -- and they have at least one program, the
Crusader, which doesn't work, it's a weapons system that doesn't
work -- it has tremendous cost overruns, and yet it continues to
be funded. And we can only think that it's the heavy hand of very
well-placed lobbyists that make sure that weapons systems that
have a connection with the Carlyle Group get funded.
And even building contracts: bases abroad, all of the bases that
we are now looking at -- new bases going into Uzbekistan, the
positioning of troops in former Soviet Georgia -- those troops are
going to have to be housed, fed, and the weapons systems are going
to have to be contained, and all of that is money. And sadly, the
Carlyle Group will benefit from this increase in funding that has
been requested by the president.
Interestingly also, and probably the scariest of all, was the new
mission, as identified by the Secretary, for our Armed Services.
And that is that a major role now for the US military will be to
occupy an opponent's capitol and displace its regime.
Now, if that's the mission -- and we've been told that there are
as many as 60 countries around the world that host terror cells
that we need to go in and flush out -- then basically what we're
talking about is expanding US military presence all over the
planet. And that is a frightening experience and a frightening
thought for me because I know that if we provide weapons they get
used. And if our troops are there, they are going to use those
weapons and those weapons that we provide might even be used
against our own troops. We have to be very careful about that.
But interestingly, the Secretary said that they intended to "drain
the swamp", and it's intereseting to me that it appears that this
new mission of our military, to go into a capitol and take it
over, was started in Washington, DC.
DB: Final question, Congresswoman McKinney. These are mighty
powerful thoughts you are expressing here. I'm wondering how much
support you have in Congress, and perhaps you may have heard from
people who are quite unhappy with your voicing these kinds of very
strong, controversial thoughts.
CM: It's always good to hear from people who think like you. I
definitely hear from people who don't think like you. And that
tells us it's a part of the American process. But just as it's
healthy for me to hear from people who don't think like me, it's
also very healthy for people who think like me to have a voice and
to be willing to speak. And it's totally inappropriate, I believe,
for my patriotism to be questioned, my feelings of attachment and
loyalty for America to be questioned.
DB: Has it been questioned?
CM: You would be surprised at the hate mail that I get in the
Congressional office.
DB: What do people say to you?
CM: I wish I had a piece right here and I'd read it to you. We got
one piece that told me I needed to go back to Africa and take
Jesse with me. It seems that the people who write in find it
impossible to omit the fact that I'm black. And so the racial
aspect of the hatred also comes out. I can accept people who
disagree. But I don't know that we need thought police in our
universities, because our universities are supposed to teach
freedom of thought. And I don't know that we need thought police
and speech police inside the US Congress, because the Congress is
supposed to represent Americans of all stripes and all ideologies.
And I know that there is a very powerful peace movement in this
country. I hear from them. I know they're out there. I'd love to
hear a little bit more from them.
DB: Well, we have very much appreciated hearing from you today.
Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, reading her essay "Thoughts on our
war against terrorism", and then speaking with us on Flashpoints
here on Pacifica radio. We thank you so much for your time and
your good information and commentary.
CM: Thank you very much. I look forward to talking with you again.
------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/CynthiaMcKinney/
I suggest sending colorful, happy cards (postcards?) that can be
displayed at her office:
124 Cannon Building
Washington, DC 20515
ph 202 225 1605
fax 202 226 0691
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/CAM041302.html (hypertext)
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/CAM041302.txt (text only)
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/CAM041302.pdf (print ready)