Here’s an excerpt from a new book,Hopeless but Optimistic: Journeying through America’s Endless War in Afghanistan, by Douglas Wissing. The passage deals with the unnecessary death of State Department diplomat Anne Smedinghoff at age 25. Anne gave her life for a needless PR stunt as part of America’s failed reconstruction project in Afghanistan. It could have been any of us.
Anne Smedinghoff is a rising 25-year-old diplomat, an assistant information officer in the Kabul embassy. She’s my minder, assigned to escort me to an interview with a Justice Department official who is heading up the Afghan Threat Finance Cell (ATFC) that is charged with finding and disrupting sources of Taliban funding.
In many ways, Smedinghoff is representative of many young American women working in Afghanistan, where they can combine adventure with a career-enhancing posting and hefty paychecks plumped with danger pay. As we walk to the meeting room, Smedinghoff quizzes me about life outside the embassy compound, as the staff is trapped inside.
In a surveillance state, no one is immune from the government’s watchful eyes. Not even the government. It looks like the Obama Administration used the NSA to dig up dirt on the Trump people before and after the election. Possibly, the “Russia hacked the election” story was meant to cover-up for that real crime. But our concern is not the political implications of this potentially monumental scandal. Rather, we focus on the bigger picture: if we want to live in a surveillance state, this is the kind of society we will become. More in today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report:
Russia’s reaction to the terror attacks yesterday in St. Petersburg stands in stark contrast to what we have seen in public behavior in Paris, in Berlin, in Brussels following similar attacks over the past 18 months.
There is some commonality, to be sure: in every case, the head of state visited the scene of the horror to pay respects to the fallen. Vladimir Putin did just that last night, when he lay flowers at the metro station where 14 citizens died and scores more were injured, requiring hospitalization. However, Putin delivered no maudlin speech to the nation and Russian state television coverage was not dominated by images of tearful and shocked citizens lighting candles, reaffirming their faith in a free and open society and denouncing Islamophobia – all of which were the dominant themes of the media in France, Germany and Belgium.
As in the West, days of mourning for the victims were immediately declared.
However, other official reactions were more down to earth and practical. To ease the plight of the millions of residents and visitors to the city center faced with the shutdown of the entire metro system pending security searches to uncover other possible bombs, the city authorities declared that all surface transport including taxis and suburban trains would be offered free of charge for the day.
Grant Smith: Everybody, we need to start. So please take your seats. While you do, we’re going to roll a very short clip of an interesting panel that took place. Everyone has been talking about J Street. Well, this is a J Street panel. We’re just going to roll a very short clip about a former fundraiser speaking on J Street, Stephanie Schriock [now president of Emily’s List], and her experience in obtaining startup capital for political campaigns. Can you cue [“Beholden to Israel and AIPAC Even before Running for Office”], Nart [Shekim]?
Janet McMahon: Hi. For those of you who may be just joining us on our livestream video, I’m Janet McMahon, managing editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. One of our main focuses is keeping track of members of Congress and the pro-Israel PAC contributions so many of them receive. I think Grant Smith made it clear this morning that these pro-Israel members of Congress increasingly do not reflect the views of the majority of Americans.
Today I’m very happy to introduce two Democratic former members of Congress who do reflect those views. Fortunately, I don’t have to introduce them to each other, since they have been colleagues and friends for nearly a quarter of a century. We thought it would be fascinating and informative to hear a conversation between them about their experiences as congressmen and how they continued to win re-election for decades despite the opposition of the Israel lobby.
Jim Moran, on my far right, represented Virginia’s 8th congressional district, just across the river from here, from 1991 until he retired in 2015. He was the mayor of Alexandria, VA from 1985 to 1990, when he defeated incumbent Stanford Parris. As a congressman, Jim was a staunch critic of moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem – an issue which never seems to die – and of the major role the Israel lobby played in pushing for the disastrous US invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Of Irish decent, Jim is the son of professional football player James Moran, Sr. and the brother of Brian Moran, the former chairman of the Democratic Party of Virginia. He is currently a professor of practice at Virginia Tech’s School of Public and International Affairs.
Nick Rahall, to my immediate right, is the grandson of Lebanese immigrants and the longest serving ever member of Congress from West Virginia, whose 3rd and 4th districts he represented from 1977 to 2015. He was one of only eight House members to vote against the authorization for use of military force against Iraq in 2002 that preceded the US invasion. He has repeatedly expressed concern about America’s relationship with Israel stating, “Israel can’t continue to occupy, humiliate, and destroy the dreams and spirits of the Palestinian people and continue to call itself a democratic state.”
Just days before President Trump is set to meet Chinese Premier Xi Jinping he let loose with a threat: either China “solves” North Korea or the US will do it. One way would be good for China, the other would not, he added. But how much sway does China really have over Kim Jong-Un and his nuclear policy? Could Trump be miscalculating? What’s at stake? We look at the possibilities in today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report:
Dale Sprusansky: As I mentioned earlier, we had one speaker change today, and that is that Columbia Law professor Katherine Franke, who was scheduled to speak, came down with pneumonia. But no need to worry, because we have the wonderful Maria LaHood here to take her place. Maria will be addressing an immensely important topic. As many of you know, there has recently been a rash of anti-BDS legislation introduced and passed at both the state and federal levels. These anti-BDS bills have raised concerns about the First Amendment rights of Palestinian solidarity activists. They have also kept the lives of lawyers such as Maria very busy.
Maria is deputy legal director at the Center for Constitutional Rights. She has worked tirelessly to defend the rights of those who face legal pushback for challenging Israel’s policies. She has defended Olympia Food Co-op board members for boycotting Israeli goods, represented Prof. Steven Salaita, who was terminated from a tenured position for tweets critical of Israel. She also works closely with Palestine Legal to support students whose speech is being suppressed for their Palestinian advocacy.
For those of you who were here last year, you will remember her brilliant overview of the challenges faced by Palestinian advocates on campus. This year she will be discussing the recent legislation that threatens First Amendment rights of Palestinian activists, and the legal challenges thereto. We couldn’t be happier to have her with us here today, and are so happy she agreed to join us the last second.
Maria LaHood: Thank you very much. Thanks to IRmep and the American Educational Trust for inviting me to speak. It’s an honor to be here with you all.
Israel has declared that BDS is the biggest threat it faces. As mentioned earlier, it has recently banned BDS supporters from even entering the country. Boycott, divestment and sanctions is a nonviolent, time-honored tactic to demand basic rights, such as equality. Proponents of BDS simply demand that Israel comply with international law. Yet, tens of millions of dollars are being spent to combat BDS; to combat a peaceful means of seeking social change and respect for human rights. Students for Justice in Palestine groups have been active all over the country educating their campuses. This is despite being maligned as uncivil, divisive, anti-Semitic, or supportive of terrorism; despite being investigated and disciplined when they protest; despite the bureaucratic barriers they face when they try to form a club or bring in a speaker to talk about BDS.
