The so-called “Global War on Terror,” which has wreaked the globe in ceaseless warfare, has long been draped in the language of humanitarian imperialism. The United States has worked tirelessly in order to paint military invasions as liberatory efforts, using the 9/11 attacks as both a shield and a catalyst.
While men and women die fighting wars on behalf of US politicians, who admit that they cannot win the very conflicts they wage, patriotism is used to turn aimless combat into fundamental battles of legitimacy and self-security.
All the while, a US policy of aggression that spans democratic and republican administrations has ripped any sense of security out of the lives of Afghan and Iraqi civilians, among others. Afghanistan’s future was said to be democratic post-US invasion, but reality has been quite different. At the start, in order to combat Soviet influence in the region, not only did the US hand out millions of dollars and weapons in order to fund extremist groups, the mujahideen were warmly welcomed by White House officials. In Iraq the US employed sanctions in order to better decimate the country should politicians choose to divide it. That time came with the first salvo of the war on Iraq which turned the cradle of civilization into a bloody epicenter of cancer and orphans.
ISIS rose out of the ashes of the very death and chaos in the region that the US has created. US foreign policy, which is based on military and economic alliances, has given extremist forces the arms and the reason to continue in their brutalization of minority sects. But ISIS isn’t the only group arrogantly taunting civilians with death; Obama’s administration has turned the calm skies of places like Pakistan into nightmarish killing fields with his drone policy, and his drone program is only getting bigger.
Watch as Abby Martin delves into the lies of the US Empire and uncovers how the establishment media has distorted historic realities, and used 9/11 in order to fuel America’s two longest running wars.
From its inception, hip hop has always been an art form to foment resistance among the oppressed. This tradition is no more apparent than in the lyrics of Felipe Coronel, also known as Immortal Technique.
Confronting the crimes of empire head on, Technique stands out from the mainstream corporate-friendly hip hop that’s commonplace in American society. With politically potent anthems like “Bin Laden” and formidable albums like Revolution Vol. 1 and The Martyr, Technique’s passionate and critically engaged music is emblematic of the creativity necessary to strike a blow against the oppressive structures of privilege and power.
Defending the rights of the oppressed through a microphone, Technique offers a forceful rebuttal to the elite consensus built on myths of control and domination. These qualities and more come through in this hard-hitting and insightful interview with Breaking the Set.
“I make rap about lyrics, not beats and marketing.” – Immortal Technique
Xavier for Media Roots
**
Immortal Technique on Conspiracy Facts, Money as God & the Two-Party Dictatorship
**
AM: Just one of your albums carries the same punch as an entire Howard Zinn book, what is your music making process like?
IT: I had a room in my house where I wrote all over the walls and it literally looks like a madman lives there–literally everywhere on the wall. One side of the wall is The Martyr and the other side is The Middle Passage and it’s just written ideas that don’t mean anything to anybody else except me. It’s like shorthand writing, you know? So I think it’s a complicated writing process. There’s sometimes when I’ll write a song like for example Caught in the Hustle which took me about an afternoon or Bin Laden. Those songs took me about an afternoon. And then there’s a song like You Never Know which took me a couple of years to write or Dance with the Devil which took around the same time.
AM: In your song Akir I want to read some lyrics for our audience: “Capitalism’s a religion that makes Satan a god/ And teaches self-righteous people to embrace a facade.” I wanted you to expand on what you meant by that.
IT: Well I think I was making a reference to the fact that when you think that everything in this world revolves around money and that you can monetize anything or that everything’s for sale, then it’s hard for me to look at you as a person of faith. I think that people hide behind faith so that they can get their economic agenda completed but it strikes me as very difficult to consider a person that has love and god in their heart where every single action of theirs is built on trying to monetize something, not so people can get paid but so they can make money from things like water, air. And I think that what’s difficult for people to process is that this is going on within their soul right now or their life or however they choose to see their spiritual struggle or their physical struggle. This is going on within all the people that are watching this program now. Everyone has some sort of choice to make. I think the difference is that when people in power are making choices it affects people differently.
AM: Iraq’s elections were this week. Barely anyone noticed. You traveled to another country ravaged by war that no one else pays attention to anymore: Afghanistan. You mentioned that you helped build an orphanage there. After talking to local Afghans on the ground and getting that perspective what message do you think that they would want to send and relay to the US government and the people here?
IT: Well I mean I went there in 2009 when there were a huge amount of civilian casualties. There were drone operations. There were a lot of people very dissatisfied with the US role. They feel like they did the exact same thing anybody else did when they came there, that they came there under the guise of stabilizing the region, stabilizing the country, the same way the USSR backed the government of Dr. Najib and “oh we’re going to have reforms. We’re going to do this,” and little-by-little the people notice the reforms benefit corporations that you’re making money with that you’re taking natural resources out the country. You want to control more and more things about our lives. Go harass your own citizens. Leave us in peace. And you know if you’re not going to leave us in peace we’re not going to fight you because we’re the Taliban, we’re going to fight you because you’re in our country. We don’t want you here anymore and it’s not your decision whether you want to stay here or not. There’s no threat here anymore. Bin Laden has been annihilated.
The threat that we have now is an inner threat. See, I think this is the part that people don’t understand. We have a new Star Wars movie coming out and I always remember this one scene from Return of the Jedi–I’m sorry The Empire Strikes Back–where he’s like “I don’t want the emperor’s prize damaged. You’ll test this machine on someone else,” and I feel that that’s what Americans don’t realize is happening, that we’re testing this machine on other people. Human rights, civil rights: let’s test it on immigrants that way people will say “they’re illegal human beings it doesn’t matter what we do to them. We can put them in these internment camps. We can put them in these FEMA camps as long as well-to-do white American citizens are there for no reason other than speaking against the government .” Oh, it’s okay for someone who works like a slave to do that then have all their money confiscated, thrown into prison, apart from their family. I don’t think you see it. That’s what my message is. You don’t see what they are doing. They are testing it on people that aren’t the perfect candidates, you know. People forget that Rosa Parks was not the first person to be ripped off the bus or to have that sort of incident. There were some before but think that–the NAACP didn’t think that she was the “perfect candidate.”
AM: Rosa Parks. Of course she wasn’t the first person but the establishment wants you to believe revolution is not a process. That it’s just a moment in time. And Rosa Parks was that moment in time. Of course rejecting the years of struggle that went on before that moment, Felipe. Of course the pretext for US intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan : 9/11, hunt for Bin Laden. I want to talk about your song Bin Laden because it really impacted me, Felipe. It says: “They funded al Qaeda, and now they blame the Muslim religion/ Even though Bin Laden, was CIA tactician/ They gave him billions of dollars, and they funded his purpose/Fahrenheit 9/11, that’s just stratchin’ the surface.” What is your biggest question in regards to what we’ve been told about that entire story.
IT: I’ll have to get back to you on that one because it’s not just one. I mean there’s way too many. But overall I think people feel like they got their tooth capped. That’s it. There was some problem and that somehow it got fixed and now this bad guy has gone away, Ayman Zawahiri M.I.A. It’s funny to see how seriously we took al Qaeda and how much of a threat they were to global stability that we needed to in some shape or way or form to hunt each and every single one of those cells down and destroy them and yet we had no problem when those cells existed in Syria to get rid of somebody that we didn’t like. Now obviously it became a PR nightmare for the administration, for the country, for everyone that we were giving people that were connected to that organization money but at the same time it’s very exemplary of the length–not just this country because I won’t single out America–but that any country willing to go to.
When we talk about internal struggles it has to be spoken on that the United States is not the only empire that’s had that. You don’t know how many times I’ve had to talk to people Abby and tell them “hey listen, the war against Chechnya was not a handful of Muslim extremists against these poor white Russian people who were victimized.” No, it was like as if the United States declared war against Florida and said “hey, we’re going to invade you,” and everybody in high school and college in Florida said “I don’t want to be invaded. I’m going to join a military. We’re going to fight.” Yeah, and then we had a gigantic clash of people in which a hundred thousand people died. I think that this is a story that keeps getting told again and again and again. It’s not just one system. It’s not just one group of people.
I think it’s just the whole idea that some men are more fit to rule over others and that we have to conform all ourselves to that agenda. That only some cultures are acceptable and others are deemed as savage and primitive when we live in a very civilized and yet primitive society. We live in a very civilized and technologically advanced yet barbaric society. So I think unless we address those issues. Music is one way to do that. Bin Laden is the song that I wrote when Green Lantern came up with the most electrifying hook that we possibly could. Got Mos [Def] in the studio and said “just fill the bars with nothing but facts,” and that’s what we did. We talked about how Saddam Hussein was the worst thing in the world unless it was the time when Reagan was giving him weapons fight against Iran. I think that these things, these hypocrisies, when you point them out give humanity a little bit more perspective and give them the ability to become more self aware. And that’s what we need.
AM: It definitely does and what’s unfortunate is that simply pointing out things that you just outlined I’ve been attacked as a conspiracy theorist. I mean simply mentioning the fact that the Grand Chessboard existed as Zbigniew Brzezinski’s book, I was called a conspiracy theorist in the mainstream media. And I know you been called one too and I think it’s really important to address this pejorative term and get your response to it.
IT: Okay, I was called a conspiracy theorist because on Revolutionary Vol. 2 I made a series of claims and I’m going to tell you them right now Abby so we can both laugh. I claimed that the federal government on volume 2 was tapping all your phones and that they were listening–
AM: [Laughter]
IT: Listen to me, I’m serious.
AM: It’s already funny.
IT: My album came out in 2004. I said the federal government is tapping your phone. People said “no they’re not. He’s a conspiracy theorist.” Okay, idiot number one check. Number two: I went out and I said I didn’t believe the government’s full story behind 9/11 and that they were holding something back and it came out that they were holding something back, that they weren’t telling people about the quality of air to breathe and what chemicals were in the building so countless numbers of first responders died of some pulmonary disorder or another, a very, very tragic situation. So that’s another precedent I told people would be set and it was set. I told them that the war in Iraq was under false premise and false circumstances. The only person who still denies that to this day is Dick Cheney. He’s the only one that thinks there were weapons of mass destruction there. And that’s probably, as the old joke goes, is because him and Reagan have the receipts.
I don’t know. I don’t know what the issue is when people who don’t like conspiracy theorists only because they’re afraid of what they’re saying might actually be true. I think that’s because those people that hate us the most are the people that really want change, that want to do something but they feel powerless and they would feel even more powerless if they found out that what you were saying was actually true because then not only their suspicions about what’s actually really going on be confirmed but the other thing that would be confirmed is that they’re too much of a coward to do anything about it or that they’re not capable of doing anything about it or that they have all the courage in the world but are physically incapable, or believe themselves to be physically incapable of doing anything about it. But they’re wrong on every account. It’s not that you’re a coward. Everyone’s afraid of the odds when they seem insurmountable but when you face those odds and when you’re unwilling to just hang up your hat and say “it’s too complex, it’s too hard,” that’s when you face your fears. When you say “okay, this government’s taking away rights from people. If I stand up for those people I might lose my rights too.” When you say “it’s worth it because if one of these people loses their rights I know that I’m next. I know that my family’s next. I know that other people who speak out against injustice are next.” And if it’s not down outright it’s done subtly first until it’s done outright.
AM: Absolutely man. I love this country and that’s why I’m here fighting. I’ll be here in the streets until I die trying to make it better. Telling the truth is not a conspiracy theory. It’s such a cheap shot to shut down debate and critical thinking.
IT: I always told people. They made it into a kind of meme of Instagram. I said “don’t call me a conspiracy theorist because I know more about this country’s history than you do.”
AM: I love it. Felipe, we have one minute left. I wanted to say we’re both going to be at United We Stand Festival. It’s this amazing festival bridging together the left and the right to provide an alternative to the two-party system. Why do you feel passionate about breaking the dictatorship of Democrats and Republicans.
IT: Well, I would say that all those people are not bad people. I just think that the system needs to understand that we won’t allow two parties that work for the same person to feed us the same lie again and again. Also I met people from the Democratic Party and people who are marginal Republicans who are very, very good people and they do good things in terms of their service and they’re pro-immigrant. They’re pro-civil rights but at the same time I think that the country needs an alternative to just one gigantic system funded by corporations or another gigantic system funded by corporations. I think that we need a voice of our own, a people’s tribune, so to speak. Unfortunately we don’t have that.
AM: We really don’t. Thank you so much. Felipe Coronel. Immortal Technique. Amazing to have you on man.
**
Transcript by Xavier Best, Photo by Flickr User Kieran Ferguson
Even though present-day Afghanistan flies under the news radar, it remains to be the longest military quagmire in US history. Aside from troops still occupying the country, thousands of private contractors are on the ground that the Pentagon can’t even account for. Considering how Obama’s foreign policy strategy has been to replace ground troops with drone strikes, the administration’s logic behind continuing the occupation remains unclear.
War has always been about resources and control. Alongside the supposed surprise discovery of Afghanistan’s $1 trillion wealth of untapped minerals, the Taliban had successfully eradicated the opium crop in the Golden Crescent before the US invasion. Now, more than 90% of the world’s heroin comes from the war torn country.
“Immediately following the October 2001 invasion, opium markets were restored…By early 2002, the opium price (in dollars/kg) was almost 10 times higher than in 2000. In 2001, under the Taliban opiate production stood at 185 tons, increasing to 3400 tons in 2002 under the US sponsored puppet regime of President Hamid Karzai.”
After more than twelve years of military occupation, Afghanistan’s opium trade isn’t just sustaining, it’s thriving more than ever before. According to a recent report from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, 2013 saw opium production surge to record highs:
“The harvest this May resulted in 5,500 metric tons of opium, 49 percent higher than last year and more than the combined output of the rest of the world.”
Wow, that’s a lot of opium – and a lot of money being made. So, who is reaping the spoils?
***
How Opium Greed is Keeping US Troops in Afghanistan
Many people outright dismiss the notion of the CIA overseeing the trade of illegal drugs as crazy talk. However, history shows that it’s crazy not to entertain such a notion, especially during times of war profiteering.
In 2012, a Mexican government official from Juarez told Al Jazeera that the CIA and other international security forces “don’t fight drug traffickers” and that instead, the agency tries to “manage the drug trade.”
Back in the fifties, the CIA turned a blind eye to drug trafficking through the Golden Triangle while training Taiwanese troops against Communist China. As William Blum reports in Rogue State:
“The CIA flew the drugs all over Southeast Asia, to sites where the opium was processed into heroin, and to trans-shipment points on the route to Western customers.”
These are far from isolated incidents. During the eighties, the CIA financially and logistically backed anti-communist contras in Nicaragua who also happened to be international drug traffickers.
Former Representative Ron Paul elaborated on the CIA’s notorious corruption when speaking to a group of students about Iran-Contra:
“[Drug trafficking] is a gold mine for people who want to raise money in the underground government in order to finance projects that they can’t get legitimately. It is very clear that the CIA has been very much involved with drug dealings. We saw [Iran-Contra] on television. They were hauling down weapons and drugs back.”
Surprisingly, mainstream publications still regard the Iran-Contra CIA drug trafficking scandal as a ‘conspiracy theory.’ I explain why it’s not on Breaking the Set:
***
Iran-Contra and the CIA’s Cocaine Trafficking
Circumstantial evidence aside, there is no conclusive proof that the CIA is physically running opium out of Afghanistan. However, it’s hard to believe that a region under full US military occupation – with guard posts and surveillance drones monitoring the mountains of Tora Bora – aren’t able to track supply routes of opium exported from the country’s various poppy farms (you know, the ones the US military are guarding).
In today’s globalized world of rule-for-profit, one can’t discount the role that multinational corporations play in US foreign policy decisions either. Not only have oil companies and private military contractors made a killing off the occupation, big pharmaceutical companies, which collectively lobby over 250 million dollars annually to Congress, need opium latex to manufacture drugs for this pill happy nation. As far as the political elite funneling the tainted funds, the recent HSBC bank scandal exposed how trillions of dollars in black market sales are brazenly being laundered offshore.
Multinational corporations are in it for the long haul, despite how low public support is for the war. A little mentioned strategic pact has already been signed that will allow a US troop presence to remain in Afghanistan until 2024.
The US’ goal of sustained warfare to oversee the world’s opium trade has been alleged by many, including foreign military officials. In 2009, a former commander in the Russian invasion of Afghanistan, General Mahmut Gareev, said to RT:
“Americans themselves admit that drugs are often transported out of Afghanistan on American planes. Drug trafficking in Afghanistan brings them about 50 billion dollars a year – which fully covers the expenses tied to keeping their troops there…[the US military doesn’t] have any planned military action to eliminate the [Taliban].”
The unwinnable nature of the war becomes more apparent when learning that the US government was paying Taliban insurgents to protect supply routes and “switch sides” in an attempt to neutralize the insurgency. The logic of funding both sides of the war to “win” is too incomprehensible a concept to grasp. Clearly, this war is meant to be sustained.
Baseless rhetoric aside, here’s the hard, hypocritical truth: this government is fighting a multi-billion dollar ‘War on Drugs’ worldwide, resulting in thousands of deaths every year and millions of nonviolent drug users rotting away in prison. Yet, the US is at the very least protecting the largest source of the deadliest and most addictive drug on the planet. If not for the obvious, then why?
Written by Abby Martin for Media Roots
Follow me @AbbyMartin
Photo by Flickr user Beggs, thanks to Sherwood Ross for the quotes
BREAKING THE SET— US Congressman, Dennis Kucinich, and Breaking the Set’s Abby Martin discuss accountability on the 10th anniversary of the Iraq war, Obama turning the US ‘Orwellian’, civil liberties, GMOs and other issues that have set him aside from the average establishment politician.
***
Congressman Dennis Kucinich on BTS
***
Abby Martin: “I’m really excited right now to introduce one of the few politicians I actually admire. I’m talking about Congressmand Dennis Kucinich, one of the most honest, credible politicians who ever served, a man who spent his 18-year tenure fighting for the issues, that Americans care the most about. From thewar in Iraq to the food we eat, Kucinich has always stood on the right side, the side of truth, which is why I’m honoured to have the chance to speak to Congressman Kucinich, himself. I first asked him about oil being a motivating factor in the Iraq War, particularly, in light of Bush’s former speechwriter coming out to validate that claim. And here’s what he had to say.”
Dennis Kucinich (c. 0:42): “Well, right from the beginning, it was very clear that there was no legitimate reason to go into Iraq. The only compelling reason would be to try to help corner the market on oil. It didn’t work out that way for those who thought that it would. But the fact of the matter is oil was so well-known to be the motivating factor, that when I ran for President in 2004, going across the country, I’d ask audiences, ‘Tell me what this is about, what this war is about, in three letters.’ And thousands of people would respond, simultaneously, OIL! It was never a secret.”
Abby Martin (c. 1:19): “Right. In 2007, Congressman, you actually introduced articles of impeachmentagainst George Bush and Dick Cheney. When you look at things like Nixon being ousted for wiretapping, Clinton being [impeached] for an affair, how is it that these two men could not be held accountable for initiating an illegal war based on known lies?”
Dennis Kucinich (c. 1:40): “Well, I think we have to place the responsibility for that on the shoulders of Democratic leadership because we could have moved forward with an impeachment, but the Democratic leadership wouldn’t do it. Now, there has to be accountability in a democracy. It is widely understood today that the war was based on lies. So, then, should not the thousands of Americans being killed, tens of thousands being injured, maybe a million innocent Iraqis died, perhaps, damage, in the hundreds of billions of dollars to Iraq—shouldn’t there be some accountability?
“So, what I’ve called for is a process of truth and reconciliation, like South Africa had many years ago, where leaders are required to come forward and state their role in the decision-making process. And, if they lie, then they’re subject to perjury charges. We need to clear the air in America. We need the truth. And it is time, since everyone knows it was based on a lie, then what’s wrong with calling those, who lied to us, forward to, not only, require an explanation, but also to clear the air?”
Abby Martin (c. 2:45): “Absolutely, I remember Pelosi, at the time, saying impeachment was off the table.”
Dennis Kucinich: “Right.”
Abby Martin: “I mean, could it be the Democrat leadership was scared they would open up their can of worms and somehow be complicit in the lies?”
Dennis Kucinich: “Well, you know, two-thirds of the Democrats voted against going to war. But the third, that did vote for it, were involved—as were their counterparts in the Senate—in establishment-type politics, that favoured war. Some of the leading senators, who have become exalted public figures, took a stand for that war. And they’ve never been held accountable, even politically. And, interestingly enough, it would seem as though to be qualified to speak on foreign policy—even still today—that you have to have been for the war, even though it was based on lies. That’s the kind of upside-down thinking, that continues to guide foreign policy decisions in Washington, D.C.”
Abby Martin (c. 3:37): “Well, speaking of upside-down policy, Obama’s reason for not prosecuting—or even investigating—the Bush officials was because he wanted to look forward, not backward. However, I can’t help, but wonder, why he continues to look backward to prosecute those who exposed war crimes, as whistleblowers, instead of the war criminals.”
Dennis Kucinich: “No good deed remains unpunished. And those who were the whistleblowers are being punished. Those who took us into a war based on lies are being celebrated. This inversion of reality isOrwellian. It needs to be, um, reckoned with. And that’s why I call for this period of truth and reconciliation. And, you know what? Isn’t all law enforcement about looking backwards?”
Abby Martin: “Right. Exactly.”
Dennis Kucinich: “Hello.”
Abby Martin: “Exactly. I couldn’t agree more. Let’s talk about the Afghanistan war, in terms of looking backwards. It was sold to us as a war of necessity in a post-9/11 world. Of course, Bush, at the time, had a 95% approval rating [after 9/11]. I don’t blame people for voting for it, thinking that we needed some form of retaliation [for 9/11]. But don’t you find the logic flawed now, looking back? Do you regret your vote to invade and occupy a country to find one man?”
Dennis Kucinich (c. 4:43): “No, we did not, Congress did not vote to invade and occupy. They voted to give the President the ability to respond to the attack on 9/11. And, frankly, I think it was appropriate thatthe United States struck at the training camps and made the point that you are not going to attack the United States with impunity—stop there, end of story—not to invade and occupyand, basically,try to break a country, that hasn’t been successfully conquered in modern times.
“So, this, too, points to the serious flaws in our foreign policy. We have an obligation to defend this country. And I don’t take a backseat to anyone in saying that if Americans are attacked, we have a right to defend ourselves. But it was absolutely—it was criminal to go and think we’re gonna knock off Afghanistan, occupy it, control it, remake a country where a lot of it is just a box of rocks.
“And what do we think—who do we think we are? This was a major flaw. It’s hubris, arrogance. And we need some explanation to the American people.”
Abby Martin (c. 5:55): “Absolutely. Let’s talk about your Presidential run in 2008. Both, you and Ron Paul were pretty much the leading anti-war figures, of course, on both sides of the spectrum, of both parties. I remember leftists and Libertarians, at the time, calling for you guys to be running mates because you were so united against the wars and for the restoration of our civil liberties.
“Now, these factions are so divided. They’re more divided than ever before. And it just seems like, without any representation, to have us—these dividing factions—fighting each other, instead of the forces we should be fighting against is really counter-intuitive. How do you think it got this way? And how can we unite these factions to really focus on cohesive, unified opposition again?”
Dennis Kucinich (c. 6:34): “Well, I think what Ron Paul and I proved is that there is plenty of space in American politics for a new movement, which goes across partisan lines, which embraces the concerns of Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, that’s based on the truth, on protecting the Constitution, taking care of our practical aspirations here, at home, and in sharply curtailing this aggression, that America has practised around the world.
“So, I think Ron Paul and I have been able to demonstrate this capacity of creating new possibilities. And, frankly, since the two parties continue to fail to address America’s economic problems, I think the American people, increasingly, will be looking, to alternatives, as we move toward the future.”
Abby Martin (c. 7:24): “I call it the two-party dictatorship, Congressman. Let’s talk about civil liberties, which is something that you had been very vocal about in your entire term. Rand Paul, his epic filibuster, not really supported by a single Democrat, I mean, how is that drones and due process are partisan issues now?”
Dennis Kucinich: “Well, they shouldn’t be. What happens in Washington is this: Whatever party holds the White House, their supporters in Congress try to protect the president of a party. But the president isn’t just the president of a party. He’s a president of the United States. And members of Congress aren’t just partisan participants in a process, they are United States Congresspersons. And what we have to remember is that, both, myself and Ron Paul—Rand’s father—raised this issue of the drones in the Congress relentlessly, brought a resolution in front of the Congress, forced a committee to have to consider to it.
“And, you know, finally people are starting to understand there are Constitutional issues here. And good for Senator Rand Paul for raising the issue on the floor of the Senate, but we haven’t resolved it. Other countries are gonna start to use drones. Imagine for a moment that if China thought—or any other nation—thought they could invade US airspace with a drone, as we invade other people’s airspace. We wouldn’t stand for it. How can we expect other countries to continue to standby, while we violate their sovereignty and their territorial integrity? And, then, on the domestic level, we gotta worry about the domestic use of drones. It won’t be long—mark my words—that law enforcement, domestically, will start using these drones to go after suspects using armed force.”
Abby Martin (c. 9:00): “Yeah, and they are counter-intuitive abroad. I mean, it doesn’t take a genius to see that killing people with drones is not a good way to fight, quote, ‘terrorism.’
“You served an epic 18-year run in Congress. You were one of the most vocal leaders against the establishment line time and time again. When you were redistricted, did you feel you were deliberately gerrymandered out of office because of your politics?”
Dennis Kucinich: “By the Democrats, not by the Republicans.”
Abby Martin: “Wow.”
Dennis Kucinich: “It was Democrats in the Ohio legislature who went out of their way to totally distort the map in Ohio and to cut my district up into four pieces, making it impossible for me to win.
“Now, I can tell you, I don’t have any—that’s just a fact. I’m not bitter about it. You know? I still have a home in Washington and a home in Cleveland. I can occasionally see the light of the Capitol on. I just wanna know who’s home.”
Abby Martin: “Unbelievable when your own party turns against the ideals, that this country was founded on.
“When you did leave, Congressman, the media portrayed you as fringe. I mean they even called you the Congressman with the most wacky ideas. Yet, the majority of Americans support what you stood up for. How is it that this depiction is even allowed to exist? And what damage does it do when people feel they are marginalised for sharing views, that you had?”
Dennis Kucinich: “Well, one, it doesn’t hurt my feelings. Two, it never changed my position. When you stand up for the truth, it’s very easy to understand that you take on certain interest groups, who are gonna try to marginalise you.
“It is interesting, as you point out, that someone would try to characterise, as fringe, having opposed the war in Iraq based on facts, having challenged those who made the decisions, that cost our troops, and our Nation, and the Iraqi people so dearly, having challenged other wars, and have proven to be right again and again and again. But you know what that means. If the truth is at the fringe, then what position is being celebrated?”
Abby Martin: “Exactly. And speaking from an inside perspective—you’ve been inside the system for so long—when you look at things like Monsanto, like Vermont not even being able to pass a labelling law because of the fear of a lawsuit from Monsanto—I mean, you were also one of the only people to try to get GMOs labelled.”
Dennis Kucinich: “1999.”
Abby Martin: “What does this say? Do corporations, essentially, have more power than voter resolutions and—”
Dennis Kucinich: “Yes.”
Abby Martin: “—how do—”
Dennis Kucinich: “Yes, after Buckley v. Valeo and Citizens United [v. Federal Election Commission], corporations took enormous power over our government. Monsanto, look, they were able to get the Bush Administration, in its waning days, to be able to claim—the first Bush Administration—to be able to claim in 1993 that genetically modified organisms were the functional equivalent of conventional food. No science based on that at all. But the dollar bill has a science all of its own.
“And, so, now, you have hundreds of millions of acres of crops, that have been planted with genetically modified organisms used to do that. We can’t—our markets are closing in Europe, as a result. People don’t want these crops to come in. And, even more than that, we have no idea, as to the effects with respect toallergenicity, toxicity, functional characteristics, antibiotic resistance. We’re part of a grand experiment now in our food. You know, this is another one of the reasons why I eat organic and I’m a vegan.”
Abby Martin: “Indeed. Thank you for bringing those fringe ideas to the mainstream and standing up to the truth, that so many of us don’t have a voice to share in the system. Thank you so much, Congressman Kucinich.”
Dennis Kucinich: “Thank you.”
Abby Martin: “I’m a huge fan.”
Dennis Kucinich: “Thank you.”
Transcript by Felipe Messina for Media Roots and Breaking the Set.
MEDIA ROOTS – Recently, I had the honor of going on the Joe Rogan Experience, a popular podcast hosted by comedian and TV show host, Joe Rogan. Although I was a little nervous before going on the show, I was eased by the dope art decorating the studio–especially the naked mannequins sporting Boba Fet heads.
Congressional candidate and activist, David Seaman, along with his campaign manager, Dell Cameron, joined me for a three hour conversation with Redban and Joe Rogan about everything from US politics to space exploration, including discussion about the NDAA, media activism, drone wars, the two-party system and Prometheus.
If you know me in real life you know I swear like a sailor, so don’t be alarmed at the language used during the broadcast.
The so-called “Global War on Terror,” which has wreaked the globe in ceaseless warfare, has long been draped in the language of humanitarian imperialism. The United States has worked tirelessly in order to paint military invasions as liberatory efforts, using the 9/11 attacks as both a shield and a catalyst.
From its inception, hip hop has always been an art form to foment resistance among the oppressed. This tradition is no more apparent than in the lyrics of Felipe Coronel, also known as Immortal Technique.
Even though present-day Afghanistan flies under the news radar, it remains to be the longest military quagmire in US history. Aside from troops still occupying the country, thousands of private contractors are on the ground that the Pentagon 
MEDIA ROOTS – Recently, I had the honor of going on the 