The Bureau Of Investigative Journalism & Middle East Drones


Did you know there was and is a  Bureau of Investigative Journalism?  It seemingly has maintained a low profile in an era infected with outpouring of lies, damn lies and propaganda into America’s Current Events News Pool.  But now, perhaps, investigative journalism survived the passing away of Mr. Jack Anderson who was so good at what he did that the FBI wanted to investigate him even after his death.

Perhaps the Bureau of Investigative Journalism will return the press to its glory days  –  you know the days. It was the days before ethics divorced much of the Western press.

The issue of drones in the Middle East is certainly a worthy problem for journalism. The problem’s cause is shared by the users of drones and the recipients of drone output.

Drones were one man’s answer to the “new” style of warfare and a need for real live soldiers in Iraq. Iraq sits on the world’s second largest supply of oil.

This new style of “warfare” was introduced by what is called terrorists. Terrorists work from the protection of a civilian population. Terrorist leave a civilian population of men, women and children –  go to their destination – do their damage –  and then melt back into the civilian population of men, women and children. That puts the civilian population of men, women and children at risk in case of a retaliatory attack by the terrorist target.

The Middle East terrorists, at first, used their base of operations in a way similar to Mr. Fidel Castro’s base of operations. Uninhabited or sparsely inhabited regions was the base of operations. In that setting, reprisals against terrorists were less likely to include the civilian population.  So, what just happened in Syria did not happen in Cuba.

Prior to President George W. Bush’s administration, President Bill Clinton used bombs along the Pakistan – Afghanistan border. Real  live soldiers were used in the region. President Bill Clinton and his Democrats had no reason to shift soldiers to Iraq.

So, when was the first targeted killing by the United States? Listen:

[…] But since the first targeted killing by the United States in 2002, two administrations have taken the position that the United States is at war with Al Qaeda and its allies and can legally defend itself by striking its enemies wherever they are found.[…]

The following year – 2003 – found the Bush team needing soldiers for Iraq. They dared not restart the draft.  So, working under the idea that “you go to war with what you have” –  armor not withstanding – real live soldiers went to Iraq while an expanding “army” of  drones went into Afghanistan and surroundings. While America’s soldiers went to Iraq -  the neocon’s 2012 presidential candidate went to France. It is not possible to be in France and Iraq at the same time.

It is refreshing to hear that journalism is still “alive and kicking” in America. There is a “ton” of ethical issues that have been ignored by America’s press. Hugh made a list.  Hugh made a long list of neocon scandals. And it does not look like “people will soon  thank Bush for what he’s done”.  Nine years have already passed. Will  a decade do the trick?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s