Jeffrey Sachs: Will Netanyahu Bring Down Biden?

GCIOSGF NEWSLETTER 會訊

 OF OF GCIOSGF adappted from EMAIL 

PIC : ELIZABETH AND DIRRECTOR & PRO OF COLIMBUS UNIVERSITY SACHES WITH HIS WIFE

Will Netanyahu Bring Down Biden? Jeffrey D. Sachs   |   February 20, 2024   |   Common Dreams The cabinet of Israel’s Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu is filled with religious extremists who believe that Israel’s brutality in Gaza is at God’s command. According to the Book of Joshua in the Hebrew Bible, dated by scholars to the 7th century BC, God promised the land to the Jewish people and instructed them to destroy the other nations living in the promised land. This text is used by extreme nationalists in Israel today, including by many of the 700,000 or so Israeli settlers living in occupied Palestinian lands in violation of international law. Netanyahu pursues the religious ideology of 7th century BC in the 21st century. Of course, the vast majority of the world today, including the vast majority of Americans, are certainly not in line with Israel’s religious zealots. The world is far more interested in the 1948 Genocide Convention than in the genocides supposedly ordained by God in the Book of Joshua. They don’t accept the Biblical idea that Israel should kill or expel the people of Palestine from their own land. The two-state solution is the declared policy of the world community, as enshrined by the UN Security Council, and of the U.S. government. President Joe Biden is therefore caught between the powerful Israel Lobby and the opinion of American voters and of the world community. Given the power of the Israel lobby, and the sums it expends in campaign contributions, Biden is trying to have it both ways: supporting Israel but not endorsing Israel’s extremism. Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken hope to entice the Arab countries into yet another open-ended peace process with the two-state solution as the distant goal that is never reached. Israeli hardliners would of course block every step of the way. Biden knows all of this but wants the fig leaf of a peace process. Biden also hoped until recently that Saudi Arabia could be lured into normalizing relations with Israel in return for F-35 fighter jets, access to nuclear technology, and a vague commitment to an eventual two-state solution... someday, somehow.   The Saudis will have none of it. They made this clear in a declaration on February 6, stating: The Kingdom calls for the lifting of the siege on the people in Gaza; the evacuation of civilian casualties; the commitment to international laws and norms and international humanitarian law, and for moving the peace process forward in accordance with the resolutions of the Security Council and the United Nations, and the Arab Peace Initiative, which aims to find a just and comprehensive solution and establish an independent Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as capital. Domestically, Biden confronts AIPAC (the innocuously named American Israel Public Affairs Committee), the lead organization of the Israel lobby. AIPAC’s long-running success is to turn millions of dollars of campaign contributions into billions of dollars of U.S. aid to Israel, an amazingly high return. Currently, AIPAC aims to turn around $100 million of campaign funding for the November election into a $16 billion supplemental aid package for Israel.   So far, Biden is going along with AIPAC, even as he loses younger voters. In an Economist/YouGov poll of January 21-23, 49% of those aged 19-29 held that Israel is committing a genocide against the Palestinian civilians. Only 22% said that in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, their sympathies are with Israel, versus 30% with Palestine, and the remaining 48% “about equal” or unsure. Only 21% agreed with increasing military aid to Israel. Israel has utterly alienated younger Americans. While Biden has called for peace based on the two-state solution and a reduction of violence in Gaza, Netanyahu has brazenly brushed Biden aside, provoking Biden to call Netanyahu an asshole on several occasions. Yet it is Netanyahu, not Biden, who still calls the shots in Washington. While Biden and Blinken wring their hands at Israel’s extreme violence, Netanyahu gets the U.S. bombs and even Biden’s full backing for the $16 billion with no U.S. red lines. To see the absurdity—and tragedy—of the situation, consider Blinken’s statement in Tel Aviv on February 7. Rather than putting any limits on Israel’s violence, made possible by the U.S., Blinken declared that “it will be up to Israelis to decide what they want to do, when they want to do it, how they want to do it. No one’s going to make those decisions for them. All that we can do is to show what the possibilities are, what the options are, what the future could be, and compare it to the alternative. And the alternative right now looks like an endless cycle of violence and destruction and despair.” Later today, the U.S. is likely to veto the Algerian draft resolution in the UN Security Council calling for an immediate cease-fire. Biden has put forward a weak alternative, calling for a ceasefire “as soon as practicable,” whatever that means. In practice, it would also surely mean that Israel would simply declare a cease-fire to be “impracticable.” Biden needs to take back U.S. policy from the Israel lobby. The U.S. should stop backing Israel’s extremist and utterly illegal policies. Nor should the U.S. spend any more funds on Israel unless and until Israel lives within international law, including the Genocide Convention, and 21st century ethics. Biden should side with the UN Security Council in calling for an immediate ceasefire and indeed in calling for an immediate move to the two-state solution, including recognition of Palestine as the 194th UN member state, a move that is more than a decade overdue since Palestine requested UN membership in 2011. Israeli leaders have shown not the slightest compunction in killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians, displacing 2 million Gazans, and calling for ethnic cleansing. The International Court of Justice has determined that Israel may well be committing genocide, and the ICJ could make a definitive determination of genocide in the next year or two. Biden would enter history as an enabler of genocide. Yet he still has the chance to be the U.S. president who prevented genocide. How the CIA Destabilizes the World Jeffrey D. Sachs   |   February 12, 2024   |   Common Dreams There are three basic problems with the CIA: its objectives, methods, and unaccountability. Its operational objectives are whatever the CIA or the President of the United States defines to be in the U.S. interest at a given time, irrespective of international law or U.S. law. Its methods are secretive and duplicitous. Its unaccountability means that the CIA and president run foreign policy without any public scrutiny. Congress is a doormat, a sideshow. As a recent CIA Director, Mike Pompeo, said of his time at the CIA: "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole. We had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." The CIA was established in 1947 as the successor to the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). The OSS had performed two distinct roles in World War II, intelligence and subversion. The CIA took over both roles. On the one hand, the CIA was to provide intelligence to the US Government. On the other, the CIA was to subvert the “enemy,” that is, whomever the president or CIA defined as the enemy, using a wide range of measures: assassinations, coups, staged unrest, arming of insurgents, and other means.   It is the latter role that has proved devastating to global stability and the U.S. rule of law. It is a role that the CIA continues to pursue today. In effect, the CIA is a secret army of the U.S., capable of creating mayhem across the world with no accountability whatsoever.   When President Dwight Eisenhower decided that Africa’s rising political star, democratically elected Patrice Lumumba of Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of Congo), was the “enemy,” the CIA conspired in his 1961 assassination, thus undermining the democratic hopes for Africa. He would hardly be the last African president brought down by the CIA. In its 77-year history, the CIA has been held to serious public account just once, in 1975. In that year, Idaho Senator Frank Church led a Senate investigation that exposed the CIA’s shocking rampage of assassinations, coups, destabilization, surveillance, and Mengele-style torture and medical “experiments.” The expose by the Church Committee of the CIA’s shocking malfeasance has recently been chronicled in a superb book by the investigative reporter James Risen, The Last Honest Man: The CIA, the FBI, the Mafia, and the Kennedys―and One Senator's Fight to Save Democracy. That single episode of oversight occurred because of a rare confluence of events. In the year before the Church Committee, the Watergate scandal had toppled Richard Nixon and weakened the White House. As successor to Nixon, Gerald Ford was unelected, a former Congressman, and reluctant to oppose the oversight prerogatives of the Congress. The Watergate scandal, investigated by the Senate Ervin Committee, had also empowered the Senate and demonstrated the value of Senate oversight of Executive Branch abuses of power. Crucially, the CIA was newly led by Director William Colby, who wanted to clean up the CIA operations. Also, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, author of pervasive illegalities also exposed by the Church committee, had died in 1972.   In December 1974, investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, then as now a great reporter with sources inside the CIA, published an account of illegal CIA intelligence operations against the U.S. antiwar movement. The Senate Majority Leader at the time, Mike Mansfield, a leader of character, then appointed Church to investigate the CIA. Church himself was a brave, honest, intelligent, independent-minded, and intrepid Senator, characteristics chronically in short supply in U.S. politics. If only the CIA’s rogue operations had been consigned to history as a result of the crimes exposed by the Church Committee, or at the least had brought the CIA under the rule of law and public accountability. But that was not to be. The CIA has had the last laugh —or better said, has brought the world to tears—by maintaining its preeminent role in U.S. foreign policy, including overseas subversion. Since 1975, the CIA has run secretive operations backing Islamic jihadists in Afghanistan that utterly wrecked Afghanistan while giving rise to al-Qaeda. The CIA has likely run secretive operations in the Balkans against Serbia, in the Caucuses against Russia, and in Central Asia targeting China, all deploying CIA-backed jihadists. In the 2010s, the CIA ran deadly operations to topple Syria’s Bashir al-Assad, again with Islamic jihadists. For at least 20 years, the CIA has been deeply involved in fomenting the growing catastrophe in Ukraine, including the violent overthrow of Ukraine’s President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 that triggered the devastating war now engulfing Ukraine. What do we know of these operations? Only the parts that whistleblowers, a few intrepid investigative reporters, a handful of brave scholars, and some foreign governments have been willing or able to tell us, with all of these potential witnesses knowing that they might face severe retribution from the U.S. government. There has been little to no accountability by the U.S. government itself, or meaningful oversight or restraint imposed by Congress. On the contrary, the government has become ever-more obsessively secretive, pursuing aggressive legal actions against disclosures of classified information, even when, or especially when, that information describes the illegal actions by the government itself. Once in a while, a former U.S. official spills the beans, such as when Zbigniew Brzezinski revealed that he had induced Jimmy Carter to assign the CIA to train Islamic jihadists to destabilize the government of Afghanistan, with the aim of inducing the Soviet Union to invade that country. In the case of Syria, we learned from a few stories in the New York Times in 2016 and 2017 of the CIA’s subversive operations to destabilize Syria and overthrow Assad, as ordered by President Barack Obama. Here is the case of a dreadfully misguided CIA operation, blatantly in violation of international law, that has led to a decade of mayhem, an escalating regional war, hundreds of thousands of deaths, and millions of displaced people, and yet there has not been a single honest acknowledgment of this CIA-led disaster by the White House or Congress. In the case of Ukraine, we know that the U.S. played a major covert role in the violent coup that brought down Yanukovych and that swept Ukraine into a decade of bloodshed but to this day, we don’t know the details. Russia offered the world a window into the coup by intercepting and then posting a call between Victoria Nuland, then U.S. Assistant Secretary of State (now Under-Secretary of State) and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt (now Assistant Secretary of State), in which they plot the post-coup government. Following the coup, the CIA covertly trained special operations forces of the post-coup regime the U.S. had helped bring to power. The U.S. government has been mum about the CIA’s covert operations in Ukraine. We have good reason to believe that CIA operatives carried out the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline, as per Seymour Hersh, who is now an independent reporter. Unlike in 1975, when Hersh was with the New York Times at a time when the paper still tried to hold the government to account, the Times does not even deign to look into Hersh’s account.   Holding the CIA to public account is of course a steep uphill struggle. Presidents and the Congress don’t even try. The mainstream media don’t investigate the CIA, preferring instead to quote “senior unnamed officials” and the official cover-up. Are the mainstream media outlets lazy, suborned, afraid of advertising revenues from the military-industrial complex, threatened, ignorant, or all of the above? Who knows. There is a tiny glimmer of hope. Back in 1975, the CIA was led by a reformer. Today, the CIA is led by William Burns, one of America’s long-standing leading diplomats. Burns knows the truth about Ukraine, since he served as Ambassador to Russia in 2008 and cabled Washington about the grave error of pushing NATO enlargement to Ukraine. Given Burns’ stature and diplomatic accomplishments, perhaps he would support the urgently needed accountability. The extent of the continuing mayhem resulting from CIA operations gone awry is astounding. In Afghanistan, Haiti, Syria, Venezuela, Kosovo, Ukraine, and far beyond, the needless deaths, instability, and destruction unleashed by CIA subversion continues to this day. The mainstream media, academic institutions, and Congress should be investigating these operations to the best of their ability and demanding the release of documents to enable democratic accountability. Next year is the 50th anniversary of the Church Committee hearings. Fifty years on, with the precedent, inspiration, and guidance of the Church Committee itself, it’s urgently time to open the blinds, expose the truth about the U.S.-led mayhem, and begin a new era in which U.S. foreign policy becomes transparent, accountable, subject to the rule of law both domestic and international, and directed towards global peace rather than subversion of supposed enemies.  內塔尼亞胡會推翻拜登嗎？by  Jeffrey Sachs 以色列總理內塔尼亞胡的內閣充滿了宗教極端分子，他們認為以色列在加薩的暴行是上帝的命令。根據學者們可追溯至公元前七世紀的希伯來聖經《約書亞記》，上帝應許了這片土地給猶太人，並指示他們消滅居住在應許之地的其他民族。如今，這段文字被以色列的極端民族主義者所使用，其中包括居住在被佔領巴勒斯坦土地上的約 70 萬以色列定居者，其中許多人違反了國際法。內塔尼亞胡在21世紀奉行西元前7世紀的宗教意識形態。 當然，當今世界的絕大多數人，包括絕大多數美國人，肯定不會與以色列的宗教狂熱分子保持一致。世界對 1948 年種族滅絕公約的興趣遠遠超過對《約書亞記》中上帝所命定的種族滅絕的興趣。他們不接受聖經的觀點，即以色列應該殺死或將巴勒斯坦人民驅逐出自己的土地。兩國解決方案是聯合國安理會和美國政府所宣示的國際社會政策。 因此，喬·拜登總統陷入了強大的以色列遊說團與美國選民和國際社會輿論之間。考慮到以色列遊說團體的力量及其在競選捐款中花費的金額，拜登試圖雙管齊下：支持以色列，但不支持以色列的極端主義。拜登和國務卿安東尼·布林肯希望吸引阿拉伯國家進入另一個開放式和平進程，將兩國解決方案視為永遠無法實現的遙遠目標。以色列強硬​​派當然會阻止每一步。拜登知道這一切，但他想要和平進程的遮羞布。直到最近，拜登還希望沙烏地阿拉伯能夠被引誘與以色列實現關係正常化，以換取 F-35 戰鬥機、獲得核子技術以及對最終兩國解決方案的模糊承諾……有一天，以某種方式。 沙特人不會有這些。他們在 2 月 6 日的聲明中明確表示： 沙烏地王國呼籲解除對加薩人民的圍困；疏散平民傷亡；致力於遵守國際法和國際準則以及國際人道主義法，並根據安理會和聯合國決議以及阿拉伯和平倡議推動和平進程，該倡議旨在找到公正和全面的解決方案並建立以1967 年邊界為基礎、以東耶路撒冷為首都的獨立巴勒斯坦國。 在國內，拜登與以色列遊說團體的領導組織 AIPAC（無傷大雅地命名為美國以色列公共事務委員會）對抗。 AIPAC 的長期成功在於將數百萬美元的競選捐款轉化為美國對以色列的數十億美元援助，這是一個驚人的高回報。目前，AIPAC 的目標是將 11 月選舉的約 1 億美元競選資金轉化為針對以色列的 160 億美元補充援助計畫。 到目前為止，拜登仍與 AIPAC 保持一致，儘管他失去了年輕選民。在 1 月 21 日至 23 日進行的《經濟學人》/YouGov 民意調查中，19 歲至 29 歲的受訪者中，49% 的人認為以色列正在對巴勒斯坦平民實施種族滅絕。只有 22% 的人表示，在巴以衝突中，他們同情以色列，而 30% 的人同情巴勒斯坦，其餘 48% 的人「大致相同」或不確定。只有21%的人同意增加對以色列的軍事援助。以色列完全疏遠了美國年輕人。 儘管拜登呼籲基於兩國解決方案和減少加薩暴力實現和平，但內塔尼亞胡卻公然將拜登撇在一邊，導致拜登多次稱內塔尼亞胡為混蛋。然而，在華盛頓發號施令的仍然是內塔尼亞胡，而不是拜登。當拜登和布林肯對以色列的極端暴力行為束手無策時，內塔尼亞胡卻得到了美國的炸彈，甚至拜登對160億美元的全面支持，沒有美國的紅線。 要了解這種情況的荒謬性和悲劇性，請考慮一下布林肯2 月7 日在特拉維夫發表的聲明。布林肯並沒有對美國促成的以色列暴力行為施加任何限制，而是宣稱「將由以色列人來決定採取什麼行動」。他們想做、想做的時間、想做的方式。沒有人會為他們做出這些決定。我們所能做的就是展示可能性是什麼、選擇是什麼、未來可能是什麼，並將其與替代方案進行比較。而現在的替代方案看起來就像是暴力、破壞和絕望的無休止循環。” 今天晚些時候，美國可能會在聯合國安理會否決阿爾及利亞要求立即停火的決議草案。拜登提出了一個軟弱的替代方案，呼籲「在切實可行的情況下盡快」停火，無論這意味著什麼。實際上，這也肯定意味著以色列會簡單地宣布停火「不切實際」。 拜登需要從以色列遊說團體手中收回美國政策。美國應該停止支持以色列的極端主義和完全非法的政策。除非以色列遵守包括《種族滅絕公約》在內的國際法和 21 世紀道德準則，否則美國也不應該在以色列身上花費更多資金。拜登應該站在聯合國安理會一邊，呼籲立即停火，並呼籲立即採取兩國解決方案，包括承認巴勒斯坦為聯合國第 194 個成員國，這一行動自自成立以來已經逾越十多年了。巴勒斯坦於2011年申請加入聯合國。 以色列領導人在殺害數萬名無辜平民、迫使 200 萬加薩人流離失所以及呼籲進行種族清洗方面沒有表現出絲毫的悔意。國際法院已判定以色列很可能犯下種族滅絕罪，國際法院可能會在未來一兩年內對種族滅絕做出最終裁決。拜登將作為種族滅絕的推動者載入史冊。但他仍然有機會成為阻止種族滅絕的美國總統。 中央情報局如何破壞世界穩定 by Jeffrey Sachs 中央情報局有三個基本問題：目標、方法和不負責任。其行動目標是中央情報局或美國總統在特定時間定義的任何符合美國利益的目標，無論國際法或美國法律如何。其手段是秘密且兩面性的。它的不負責任意味著中央情報局和總統在沒有任何公眾監督的情況下制定外交政策。國會是一個受氣包，一個餘興節目。 正如新任中央情報局局長邁克·蓬佩奧 (Mike Pompeo) 在談到他在中央情報局的經歷時所說：“我是中央情報局局長。我們說謊，我們欺騙，我們偷竊。我們有完整的培訓課程。它讓你想起美國實驗的輝煌。” 中央情報局 (CIA) 成立於 1947 年，前身為戰略情報局 (OSS)。戰略情報局在第二次世界大戰中扮演了兩個不同的角色：情報和顛覆。中央情報局接管了這兩個角色。一方面，中央情報局向美國政府提供情報。另一方面，中央情報局要顛覆“敵人”，即總統或中央情報局定義為敵人的任何人，使用各種措施：暗殺、政變、策劃騷亂、武裝叛亂分子和其他手段。 事實證明，後一種角色對全球穩定和美國法治具有毀滅性影響。這是中央情報局今天繼續追求的角色。實際上，中央情報局是美國的一支秘密軍隊，有能力在世界各地製造混亂而不承擔任何責任。 當德懷特·艾森豪威爾總統認定非洲冉冉升起的政治新星、民主選舉產生的紮伊爾（現剛果民主共和國）的帕特里斯·盧蒙巴為“敵人”時，中央情報局在1961 年密謀暗殺了他，因而破壞了非洲的民主希望。他不可能是最後一位被中央情報局打倒的非洲總統。 在其77 年的歷史中，中央情報局只在1975 年接受過一次嚴肅的公眾問責。那一年，愛達荷州參議員弗蘭克·丘奇(Frank Church) 領導了一項參議院調查，揭露了中央情報局令人震驚的暗殺、政變、破壞穩定、監視和破壞行為。門格勒式的酷刑和醫學「實驗」。 調查記者詹姆斯·里森（James Risen）最近在一本精彩的書中記錄了教會委員會對中央情報局令人震驚的瀆職行為的揭露，《最後一個誠實的人：中央情報局、聯邦調查局、黑手黨與甘迺迪家族——以及一位參議員的拯救之戰》民主。 這一單一事件的監督是由於罕見的事件同時發生而發生的。 在教會委員會成立的前一年，水門事件醜聞推翻了理查德·尼克森並削弱了白宮。身為尼克森的繼任者，傑拉爾德·福特未當選，曾任國會議員，不願反對國會的監督特權。由參議院歐文委員會調查的水門事件也賦予了參議院權力，並證明了參議院監督行政部門濫用權力的價值。至關重要的是，中央情報局由局長威廉·科爾比新領導，他希望清理中央情報局的行動。此外，聯邦調查局局長 J. 埃德加·胡佛 (J. Edgar Hoover) 已於 1972 年去世，他也是教會委員會揭露的普遍違法行為的作者。 1974 年12 月，調查記者西摩·赫什（Seymour Hersh）發表了一篇關於中情局針對美國反戰運動的非法情報行動的報道，當時的西摩·赫什（Seymour Hersh）是一名出色的記者，擁有中央情報局內部的消息來源。當時的參議院多數黨領袖麥克·曼斯菲爾德（Mike Mansfield）是一位有性格的領袖，隨後任命丘奇調查中央情報局。丘奇本人是一位勇敢、誠實、聰明、思想獨立、勇敢的參議員，這些特質在美國政壇長期缺乏。 要是中情局的流氓行動能夠因為教會委員會揭露的罪行而成為歷史，或者至少讓中情局接受法治和公眾問責就好了。但事實並非如此。中央情報局在美國外交政策（包括海外顛覆活動）中保持著卓越的地位，笑到了最後，或者更準確地說，讓世界落淚。 自 1975 年以來，中央情報局一直在阿富汗開展支持伊斯蘭聖戰者的秘密行動，這些行動徹底摧毀了阿富汗，同時催生了基地組織。中央情報局可能在巴爾幹地區針對塞爾維亞、在高加索地區針對俄羅斯以及在中亞針對中國開展秘密行動，所有這些行動都部署了由中央情報局支持的聖戰分子。 2010 年代，中央情報局再次與伊斯蘭聖戰士一起進行致命行動，推翻敘利亞的巴希爾·阿薩德。至少 20 年來，中央情報局一直深入參與煽動烏克蘭日益嚴重的災難，包括 2014 年 2 月暴力推翻烏克蘭總統維克多·亞努科維奇，引發了目前席捲烏克蘭的毀滅性戰爭。 我們對這些操作了解多少？只有舉報人、少數勇敢的調查記者、少數勇敢的學者和一些外國政府願意或能夠告訴我們的部分，所有這些潛在的證人都知道他們可能會面臨美國政府的嚴厲報復。美國政府本身幾乎沒有承擔任何責任，國會也沒有施加有意義的監督或限制。相反，政府變得越來越隱秘，對機密資訊的揭露採取積極的法律行動，即使是當或特別是當這些資訊描述了政府本身的非法行為時。 偶爾，一位前美國官員會洩漏秘密，例如茲比格涅夫·布熱津斯基透露，他誘使吉米·卡特指派中央情報局訓練伊斯蘭聖戰分子，以破壞阿富汗政府的穩定，目的是誘使蘇聯入侵那個國家。 就敘利亞而言，我們從《紐約時報》2016年和2017年的一些報道中了解到，中央情報局按照巴拉克·奧巴馬總統的命令，採取顛覆行動破壞敘利亞穩定並推翻阿薩德。這是中央情報局一次嚴重誤導的行動，公然違反了國際法，導致了十年的混亂、地區戰爭不斷升級、數十萬人死亡和數百萬流離失所，但迄今為止，還沒有白宮或國會對這場由中央情報局領導的災難的誠實承認。 就烏克蘭而言，我們知道美國在推翻亞努科維奇並使烏克蘭陷入十年流血的暴力政變中發揮了重要的秘密作用，但直到今天，我們還不知道細節。俄羅斯攔截並發布了時任美國助理國務卿（現為副國務卿）維多利亞·紐蘭（Victoria Nuland）與美國駐烏克蘭大使杰弗裡·皮亞特（現為助理國務卿）之間的通話，為世界提供了了解政變的一窗。他們策劃了政變後的政府。政變後，中央情報局秘密訓練了美國幫助上台的政變後政權的特種作戰部隊。美國政府對中央情報局在烏克蘭的秘密行動一直保持沉默。 根據現為獨立記者的西摩·赫什的說法，我們有充分的理由相信中央情報局特工破壞了北溪管道。與 1975 年不同的是，當時赫什還在《紐約時報》工作，當時該報仍在試圖追究政府的責任，而現在《紐約時報》甚至不屑於調查赫什的說法。 讓中央情報局承擔起公眾責任當然是一場艱苦的鬥爭。總統和國會甚至不會嘗試。主流媒體不調查中央情報局，而是更願意引用「不具名的高級官員」和官方的掩蓋行為。主流媒體是懶惰、被收買、害怕來自軍工複合體的廣告收入、受到威脅、無知，還是以上都有？誰知道。 還有一絲希望。早在 1975 年，中央情報局就由一位改革者領導。如今，中央情報局由美國長期領先的外交官之一威廉·伯恩斯領導。伯恩斯自2008年擔任駐俄羅斯大使以來就了解烏克蘭的真相，並致電華盛頓，指出推動北約東擴的嚴重錯誤。考慮到伯恩斯的地位和外交成就，也許他會支持迫切需要的問責制。 中央情報局行動失誤造成的持續混亂程度令人震驚。在阿富汗、海地、敘利亞、委內瑞拉、科索沃、烏克蘭以及其他更遠的地方，中央情報局顛覆活動造成的不必要的死亡、不穩定和破壞至今仍在繼續。主流媒體、學術機構和國會應盡其所能調查這些行動，並要求公佈文件以實現民主問責。 明年是教會委員會聽證會成立 50 週年。五十年過去了，在教會委員會本身的先例、啟發和指導下，現在是時候打開窗簾，揭露美國領導的混亂的真相，並開始一個美國外交政策變得透明、負責任的新時代了。遵守國內和國際法治，並致力於全球和平而非顛覆所謂的敵人。 無法使用表情符號回應群組