A seam is found in our narrative about Iraq
I've been saying for quite some time that in the U.S. we have freedom of movement but not freedom of thought. There are multiple institutions that police the boundaries of what's thinkable, not the least of which are the supposed liberal media. Those who dare to have thoughts that aren't sanctioned by these institutions are labeled fanatics and are quickly marginalized. You'll never hear opinions that question some fundamental assumptions about the U.S. and our policies. For instance, it's unthinkable to posit that our policies are not enacted in support of freedom and democracy, despite the fact that all evidence points to the contrary.
Interestingly, last night there was an exception to this ideological whitewashing. As Glenn Greenwald notes, last night's Charlie Rose show unwittingly gave a platform to voices from beyond the ideological pale.
Rose's interview with Ali Fadhil and Sinan Antoon unwittingly contests the premises that led us to invade Iraq in the first place, not to mention the tragic aftermath of our invasion and subsequent occupation.
These are voices to which we should attend. Mainstream assumptions about what is and what is not acceptable are fundamentally flawed, and, as long as we believe them, our policies are doomed to failure.
What's exceptional is that these voices of dissent were ever aired.
Please enjoy this brief moment of truly free speech. Thanks to Greenwald for his excellent analysis.