I’ve started reading Eichenwald’s 500 Days, which is about
the reign of error and terror that characterized the first half of the Bush
administration. The preface contains an abbreviated countdown to 9/11, citing
this or that FBI man or reporter who stumbled on the fact that something big
was being planned. As is usual in the establishment press, we go easy here on
the obvious: the massive incompetence of the Bush administration. If Al Gore
had managed to pass through the coup designed by the court and the Bush
handlers and actually assume the office of president to which he was elected, I’m
pretty confident that Mohammed Atta and his merry crew would have ended up
crashing a private plane into a tower in Portland Maine – if they managed to
get on board a plane at all. Americans have a hard time facing up to the fact
that the elite that they pay so much to is basically as dumb as any elite in
history. These aren’t the smartest guys in the room, unless they have rented
the room and put a bodyguard up to keep smart guys out.
Eichenwald has, unfortunately, imbibed the NYT anecdote
heavy style of reporting. Thus we move between a disparate group of people as
though we were in some badly directed episode of Homeland. Here’s a reporter
three months before 9/11 interviewing Osama the B. Here’s a customs official
two months before 9/11 deporting a mysterious Saudi. These events are covered
in a minimal fashion, without any attempt to place them in a context. What
would have made for a much more fascinating intro is a much denser stringing together
of anticipatory events, because if ever there was an attack foretold, it was
9/11. The only people who didn’t know it was coming worked for the Bush
administration in high offices. Just as they didn’t know that occupying Iraq
was an expensive, long process, just as they didn’t know how to cope with Katrina,
just as they allowed the economy to blow up in 2008 when, after Bear Stearns
fell, the merest babe could have told them that they better move fast or the
whole system would blow - so it was with
9/11. But because the U.S. media has long taken its job to be one of providing
fluff stories to disguise the awful and criminal incompetence of the powerful,
we were treated to an imperial fan dance, and – incredibly – the man most
responsible for allowing an amateur group of 19 to take down the WTC – George W.
– became, for a while, the most popular president since the other George W –
Washington, that is.
Now, there are many dimensions of bad. In one respect,
surely, our worst president was Dwight Eisenhower, who presided over the era of
above ground nuclear tests which resulted in – according to a study
commissioned by Congress – around 200,000 extra cases of thyroid cancer, due to
the release of the iodine isotope in the fallout. Of course, that is a
conservative estimate, since the group was not allowed to investigate all the
elements in the fallout that effected most of the country from these tests.
Eisenhower also, as we now know from declassified NSA documents, played a
Doctor Strangelove game with SAC, ordering our nuclear armed jets to penetrate
Soviet Airspace on numerous occasions just to check on the Soviet response. If
I were to nominate the most dangerous of all U.S. prezes, I’d have to go for
Eisenhower.
But Bush is still in the running for greatest bad president,
in that he stamped, or his spirit stamped, not only the first decade of the 21st
century in these here states, but the second as well. Obama’s administration
has so far been but a variable in the Bush paradigm of plutocratic
incompetence. You could take Obama’s Defense, Justice and Treasury departments
and comfortably plug them into the Bush administration. In this sense, Eichenwald’s
book, minus the corny prose – Eichenwald can’t write about the hijacking
without calling it a “murderous” hijacking, just in case the reader doesn’t
know that people died – is a timely reminder that we are ruled by a meritocracy
of shitheads.
1 comment:
Alas, Eichenwald's book is not the revelation I seek. Hell, it even skips over the Kunduz airlift when recounting, with astonishing haste and a narrow scope, the invasion of Afghanistan. Eichenwald has two things going against him: his Timesman's instinct to genuflect to power, and his evident lack of familiarity with the Middle East and Central Asia.
Post a Comment