I'll keep this short. It's far too beautiful a day to dwell on things that set my teeth chattering -- like Naomi Klein.
But alas, Klein -- who has been a respected luminary among a young generation of dissidents-- now seems to be headed defintively around the bend.
After her piece of a few weeks ago flakking for Moqtada Al Sadr which I and and others
spent some time fisking, Naomi's back this week with another whopper
This time she and co-author Jermy Scahill write in The Guardian
that the recent Baghdad kidnappings of two Italian peace workers were likely carried out not by the good guys in the Islamic resistance, but rather by the bad guys in un-named "foreign intelligence services" whose operatives apparently speak... English.
One problem with Naomi's story. It has no sources
. And no facts
If one of my USC journalism students had dared to turn such a thread-bare piece of unsupported reporting I would have him or her thrown out of the school.
Hurry Up Harry
does a quick and dirty job of dispensing with this piece. Take a look.
But allow me to join in his amazement over Klein and Scahill's staggering assertion that the motive for such a kidnapping by CIA agents would be to "discredit the resistance"
and "justify the brutal occupation."
The Bush administration has been justifying the occupation now for 16 months and hardly needs to invent the kidnapping of two peace workers to continue.
But the really scary part is that, apparently, in the eyes of Scahill and Klein, the resistance's penchant for blowing up dozens of civilians at a time with car bombs
and carrying out beheadings
of other innocent workers doesn't already qualify them for "discrediting."
My God, we've come to this?
Scahill already has an established record of producing blatantly
pro-Saddam and pro-Milosevic pieces for his Democracy Now! employers. No surprise that this new nonsense comes from him.
But from Naomi Klein I would expect more. At least, I used to.