“We want to continue to export democracy, but we want to deliver it in digestible steps”

 

 – Hillary Clinton on the imperialist U.S. occupation of Iraq in early 2007 (Goldberg 2007).

 

 

United States journalists often reveal and ignore the damndest things at the end of their articles.  Listen, for example, to the following comment by reporters Karen Tumulty and James Carney near the conclusion of a recent TIME magazine article on Hillary Clinton’s response to the electoral challenge of Barack Obama:

 

“Both Clintons [Hillary and Bill] have made the case to potential fund raisers that the U.S. will probably suffer a terrorist attack on the scale of 9/11 after the next President is sworn in – and that Hillary is the only Democratic candidate capable of handling such a crisis because of her Senate Armed Services Committee tenure and her years in the White House” (Tumulty and Carney 2007, p. 43).   

 

And look at the following formulation from writers Evan Thomas and Larry Kaplow at the end of a recent Newsweek story on the U.S . military’s effort to find three missing soldiers in Iraq: 

 

“A prolonged, massive search for the missing Americans GIs in Iraq may undermine the overall mission there.   But most U.S. solders interviewed by NEWSWEEK have long since stopped insisting that their greatest mission is to bring peace and democracy to Iraq.  More and more, they talk about their desire to simply protect their buddies and get everyone home alive” (Thomas and Kaplow 2007, p. 37)

 

 

 

HEGEMONY OVER SURVIVAL

 

Let’s deal with the first comment first. Would anyone at TIME (in a follow-up piece perhaps) like to make a connection between the apparently likelihood (by Bill and Hillary’s reckoning at least) of a 9/11-scale terror attack in late January or early 2009 (!) and the mass-murderous oil invasion of Iraq –

---