On Blowback

Blowback is a term originating from within the American Intelligence community, denoting the unintended consequences, unwanted side-effects, or suffered repercussions of an overt or covert operation that fall back on those responsible for the aforementioned operations.

Couple of times a year or less, there's a terrorist attack against the West, usually in Europe but occasionally spanning the globe, including lone wolf attacks in America. These are invariably carried out by solo terrorists or small cells of like individuals. They mostly have a common thread: hatred of the West for waging war on Muslim countries in the Middle East and Africa. And wage war we do sending tens of thousands of murderous bombs on imagined bad guys each year, killing thousands of innocents as well as intended targets, in violation of the Nuremberg prohibitions against criminal war and without any semblance of sanity. Just yesterday, the US admitted that 'opps', one of its bombs offed one hundred civilians in Mosul, But you'll never hear any US agonizing lamenting the horror we visited upon dozens of families there. These atrocities occur much more frequently than the blowback from the folks we inspire to inflict revenge.

Our responsibility for 'blowback' attacks goes beyond inspiring them. We create the training ground for these perpetrators to plan there attacks. Salman Abedi, the 22-year-old son of Libyan immigrants, who killed 22 concert-goers in Manchester, UK, was the product of the US and UK overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya. He was living in a radicalized Muslim neighborhood in Manchester, having returned to Libya several times after the overthrow of Muamar Gaddafi, where he came under influence of previously outlawed and fiercely suppressed radical jihadist groups, which our criminal intervention in Libya gave free rein to operate. Libyan strongman Gaddafi warned Europe in January 2011 that if they overthrew his government the result would be radical Islamist attacks on Europe. European governments and their US puppet masters paid no heed; but now have to mop up blood and body parts in Manchester, a result of inevitable blowback.

That's blowback. Besides ending the West's slaughter of innocents over there, ending our perpetual wars could end the slaughter of innocents via blowback over here.

It's not remembering the radical...it's remembering the patriot

There was one benefit to reading Penelope Blake's letter 'Remembering the radical' which complained about Michael Workman's piece on Chicago Home Theater Festival featuring Bill Ayers contribution to this wonderful Chicago cultural gem. It informed me of another fascinating facet of Ayers life which has been inspirational to me going on half a century. 

As one who opposed the Vietnam War in the 1960s, I understand the frustration of those who worked to end an immoral war that needlessly killed over a million Vietnamese and 58,000 Americans for no reason at all. Ayers  make no apologies for efforts which included condoning if not participating in violent conduct, albeit directed at buildings, not people. He long ago fulfilled his legal responsibility for radical activities that jeopardized his freedom, if not his life.  He could have thrown away the rest of his life while still a young man as many in the antiwar movement did. Instead, he redeemed himself by becoming productive citizen, working to make this a better country and world. A half century later, Ayers remains a leader in the resistance movement against a power elite systematically degrading every decent American value we cherish. A revered educator, social activist and now, based on Workman's informative post, a devotee and patron of the arts, Ayers is not spending his golden years coasting while our society is endangered beyond our poor powers of comprehension. If he'll never quit, neither will I, and I would hope he'll inspire more people like Penelope Blake, whose snapshot view of fifty years ago, misses the enormity of Ayers contribution to the American Story.  

How Trump can make Israel visit truly productive

Trump should insist on visiting the hundreds of Palestinian prisoners conducting a hunger strike against their Israeli jailers during his upcoming visit to Israel. Though harmful to themselves and their families, they're using the hunger strike as peaceful protest against what both the UN and humanitarian agencies have called torture, inhumane, degrading treatment and medical neglect. The strike, which began April 17, is in its fifth week and involves nearly a quarter of the roughly 6,000 Palestinians held under conditions prompting it. Israel's response has been to ratchet up their already horrific treatment by moving strikers to prolonged solitary confinement, force feeding them, and cutting off all family visits, a move condemned by the International Red Cross.

Of course, the chances of Trump seeking to visit the hunger strikers is zero, as is the willingness of Israeli authorities to permit it. But they can't stop him from making the first side trip ever of an American president to the West Bank or Gaza, to see first hand what our national policy of supporting Israel's Apartheid of the Palestinians, along with our $3.8 billion yearly in free money, helps enable.

Walt Zlotow

Glen Ellyn