Jeremy Scahill Testifies Before Congress on America's Secret Wars

when i searched scahill there were threads concerning his covering of the war contractors.
this i just came across. in general i think this guy is right on the money and one of the only reporters left that are holding their ground and being listened to by tptb.
i didn't want to quote the whole thing so visit link for the rest.

scahill testimony, the nation

My name is Jeremy Scahill. I am the National Security correspondent for The Nation magazine. I recently returned from a two-week unembedded reporting trip to Afghanistan. I would like to thank the Chairman and the Committee for inviting me to participate in this important hearing. As we sit here today in Washington, across the globe the United States is engaged in multiple wars. Some, like those in Afghanistan and Iraq, are well known to the US public and to the Congress. They are covered in the media and are subject to Congressional review. Despite the perception that we know what is happening in Afghanistan, what is rarely discussed in any depth in Congress or the media is the vast number of innocent Afghan civilians that are being killed on a regular basis in US night raids and the heavy bombing that has been reinstated by General David Petraeus. I saw the impact of these civilian deaths first-hand and I can say that in some cases our own actions are helping to increase the strength and expand the size of the Taliban and the broader insurgency in Afghanistan. As the war rages on in Afghanistan and--despite spin to the contrary--in Iraq as well, US Special Operations Forces and the Central Intelligence Agency are engaged in parallel, covert, shadow wars that are waged in near total darkness and largely away from effective or meaningful Congressional oversight or journalistic scrutiny. The actions and consequences of these wars is seldom discussed in public or investigated by the Congress. The current US strategy can be summed up as follows: We are trying to kill our way to peace. And the killing fields are growing in number. Among the sober question that must be addressed by the Congress: What impact are these clandestine operations having on US national security? Are they making us more safe or less? When US forces kill innocent civilians in "counterterrorism" operations, are we inspiring a new generation of insurgents to rise against our country? And, what is the oversight role of the US Congress in the shadow wars that have spanned the Bush and Obama Administrations? The most visible among these shadow wars is in Pakistan where the United States regularly bombs the country using weaponized drones. As we now know from diplomatic cables made public by Wikileaks, Pakistan's Prime Minister told a senior US official in Islamabad, "I don't care if [the US bombs Pakistan] as long as they get the right people. We'll protest in the National Assembly and then ignore it." At the same time, US Special Operations Forces are engaged in covert, offensive actions in Pakistan, including hunting down so-called high value targets, doing reconnaissance for drone strikes and conducting raids with Pakistani forces in north and south Waziristan. These raids are carried out in secret and denied by Pentagon spokespeople in public. Leaked US diplomatic cables have now confirmed that the sustained denials by US officials for more than a year are false. According to an October 9, 2009 cable classified by Anne Patterson, then the US ambassador to Pakistan, offensive operations have been conducted by US Special Operations Forces and coordinated with the US Office of the Defense Representative in Pakistan. A US Special Operations source told me that the US forces described in the cable as "SOC(FWD)-PAK" were "forward operating troops" from the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), the most elite force within the US military made up of Navy SEALs, Delta Force and Army Rangers. This despite senior Pentagon and State Department officials, including by Ambassador Richard Holbrooke and Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell, publicly claiming there are no US troops in Pakistan or that the only role of US troops is to train the Pakistani military. Those statements are demonstrably false. In the fall of 2008, the US Special Operations Command asked top US diplomats in Pakistan and Afghanistan for detailed information on refugee camps along the Afghanistan Pakistan border and a list of humanitarian aid organizations working in those camps. On October 6, Ambassador Patterson, sent a cable marked "Confidential" to senior US defense and intelligence officials saying that some of the requests, which came in the form of emails, "suggested that agencies intend to use the data for targeting purposes." Other requests, according to the cable, "indicate it would be used for “NO STRIKE” purposes." The cable, which was issued jointly by the US embassies in Kabul and Islamabad, declared: "We are concerned about providing information gained from humanitarian organizations to military personnel, especially for reasons that remain unclear. Particularly worrisome, this does not seem to us a very efficient way to gather accurate information." What this cable says in plain terms is that at least one person within the US Special Operations Command actually asked US diplomats in Kabul and/or Islamabad point-blank for information on refugee camps to be used in a targeted killing or capture operation.

reply to post by rubbertramp


This is an interesting point of view this gentleman has. If he was unembedded in units for journalism purposes he didnt have to have worry of an ensuing dog and pony show that military PR are all about. I remember having to bring journalists within the military and we did basic bs operations to get a story walk around Iraq and talk to favorable community leaders that paint a strange picture of Iraq and what we were doing in comparison non of the stories that I have read ever seemed to match up with reality. JSOC troops are an amazing group of people that have the power to do alot of good in times of need I dont think they should be let off the chain so to speak what we need is more journalists to be left off the chain and unembedded so they can draw conclusions from what they discover, not what they are led to believe.

reply to post by Brotherman


yes, i agree, he always has a point of view that doesn't necessarily wander in a different direction than the norm, but he's willing to dig a bit further and do what he feels right.
check out some of his coverage of the military contractors, blackwater changed their name and went more incognito due to this guy.

in case anyone isn't familiar with 'the nation', it is one of americas founding journalistic institutions.
if i remember correctly it was the first published periodical, magazine.

About The Nation The Nation will not be the organ of any party, sect, or body. It will, on the contrary, make an earnest effort to bring to the discussion of political and social questions a really critical spirit, and to wage war upon the vices of violence, exaggeration, and misrepresentation by which so much of the political writing of the day is marred. -- from The Nation's founding prospectus, 1865

reply to post by rubbertramp


I am vaguley familiar with the nation we breifly spoke about that a school awhile ago if my memory serves me right. I personally know a few military contractors, that worked for blackwater, TC they have all took their cash and got out last I heard of some of them. It is an effective illusion if people believe that they are doing the right hting when in fact they are not, I believe that aspect has something to do with the gray area in between honorable men in contracting outfits