God bless Matt Taibbi.

Matt Taibbi continues to be the only journalist working in America who I can stand.

Do click on over to read his latest article on drones, and his take on the rest of the media's take on the news about them. I myself was appalled last week when I was listening to public radio and even their supposedly "liberal" guest couldn't get himself to say too much against the use of drones to kill American citizens abroad, even without concrete evidence of their terrorist complicity.

If you don't have time for the entire article, I can give you the takeaway:

"This whole thing is crazy. In our own country, we don't allow the government to torture criminal suspects and/or kill people without trial – because it's wrong. If it's wrong here, it's wrong in Yemen or Iraq or Afghanistan; if it's wrong to do it to an American citizen, it's wrong to do it to a Pakistani. Our failure to recognize that and our increasingly desperate attempts to rationalize or legitimize this hideous program gives the entire world an automatic show of proof of American bigotry and stupidity."

But really. DO read the article. And read the entire editor's note at the bottom: Taibbi has a little something to say on the morality of how we as Americans kill people (and I do mean we--we are all complicit). And he's the only one out there saying it, as far as I can tell.

Comments

[lesbrarian]

My favorite part is the Lindsey Graham version of bipartisanship.

[Citizen Reader]

Lesbrarian,
I had so many favorite parts, but that's high on the list. That and "we can be proud of America for killing fewer kids than measles."

[hapax]

As always, Taibbi is an amazing read.

One of my favorite bloggers called this type of moral reasoning "the Anti Kitten Burning Coalition."

As in, "Sure we're doing bad things, but at least we're not BURNING KITTENS ALIVE! So we're not that bad -- or do you support burning kittens?"

(of course, then you have to convince yourself that your enemies ARE burning kittens, even if you have to make the evidence up.)

[Citizen Reader]

Hapax,
Ha, "anti kitten burning coalition." That'd be hilarious if the whole concept wasn't exactly what goes on every day. Around here we call it the Republican Principle--"say it and it will become true"--you know, things like "there ARE WMD in Iraq," etc. etc.

[Rick Roche]

First time I heard about drones and assassinating terrorist suspects, I was appalled. No innocence until proven guilty required. Hearsay evidence admissible. Accuracy in targeting optional. Also, I feared that if we use drones, then every one will soon be using drones because every secret we have is eventually leaked. Soon has proved to be very soon, and there does not even have to be a leak, as commercial drones are becoming available. If drones the size of insects can truly be deployed, we can never trust that we are safe.

[Citizen Reader]

Rick,
I'm still appalled. Relieved to find someone else who is, too--seems like everyone's response these days to drones is "no big deal--and it least it saves our soldiers, right?"
That kind of thinking won't save anyone when, as you note, commercially available and nastier (and littler) versions become available. Should be interesting to follow public opinion then, although maybe people still won't be bothered?