After going dormant for a while, attacks on dissent against the Obama administration have returned. As Salon's Glenn Greenwald points out, a "senior American counterterrorism official" suggested that critics of US drone strikes in Pakistan want to help Al Qaeda (emphasis added):
British and Pakistani journalists said Sunday that the C.I.A.’s drone strikes on suspected militants in Pakistan have repeatedly targeted rescuers who responded to the scene of a strike, as well as mourners at subsequent funerals.
The report, by the London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism, found that at least 50 civilians had been killed in follow-up strikes after they rushed to help those hit by a drone-fired missile. The bureau counted more than 20 other civilians killed in strikes on funerals. The findings were published on the bureau’s Web site and in The Sunday Times of London...
A senior American counterterrorism official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, questioned the report’s findings, saying “targeting decisions are the product of intensive intelligence collection and observation.” The official added: “One must wonder why an effort that has so carefully gone after terrorists who plot to kill civilians has been subjected to so much misinformation. Let’s be under no illusions — there are a number of elements who would like nothing more than to malign these efforts and help Al Qaeda succeed.”
I've added this smear to my timeline of attacks on dissent against the Obama administration, which follow a long series of Republican attacks on dissent since 9/11. It's one of the ugliest parts of the war on terror.
I wonder if the anonymous senior official was a hire made before or after Obama took office. I also wonder about the intended meaning of the anonymous writer. Did he/she intend to state.
there are a number of elements who would like nothing more than to malign these efforts and this will help Al Qaeda succeed.
Seeing as how this was an anonymous comment we will never know. I do not like anonymous comments.
Posted by: Anonymous | February 08, 2012 at 01:38 PM
It seems that the official is speaking partly of the potential for misinformation that may have been reported on the ground (in Pakistan).
As for the actually reporting that's being criticized, I'm not so sure that British and Pakistani journalists fall under the umbrella of domestic dissenters.
But it is indeed an easy thing to cast aspersions on the motives of those who report information you either don't agree with or don't want to admit to.
They should have gotten a more specific statement from that anonymous source, or they shouldn't have used it. As it stands its quite vague.
Posted by: Even More Anonymous | February 11, 2012 at 08:41 PM