Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
December 7, 2005
Pinter: The Dignity of Man

I believe that despite the enormous odds which exist, unflinching, unswerving, fierce intellectual determination, as citizens, to define the real truth of our lives and our societies is a crucial obligation which devolves upon us all. It is in fact mandatory.

Today Harold Pinter received the Nobel Prize in Literature 2005. He did give a conscience-rattling lecture:

Art, Truth & Politics.

Pinter first looks at art and describes how his plays grow:

Most of the plays are engendered by a line, a word or an image. The given word is often shortly followed by the image.

It’s a strange moment, the moment of creating characters who up to that moment have had no existence. What follows is fitful, uncertain, even hallucinatory, although sometimes it can be an unstoppable avalanche. The author’s position is an odd one. In a sense he is not welcomed by the characters. The characters resist him, they are not easy to live with, they are impossible to define.

The political play demands something else, objectivity he says, and he dissects post World War II U.S. politics using that tool.

Direct invasion of a sovereign state has never in fact been America’s favoured method. In the main, it has preferred what it has described as ‘low intensity conflict’.

It is estimated that 75,000 people died [in El Salvador]. Why were they killed? They were killed because they believed a better life was possible and should be achieved. That belief immediately qualified them as communists. They died because they dared to question the status quo, the endless plateau of poverty, disease, degradation and oppression, which had been their birthright.

The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good.

That veil is gone. Today, Pinter says, the U.S. does not even care about a cover up. He talks about openly force feed prisoners in Guantanamo and continues with Iraq.

The invasion of Iraq was a bandit act, an act of blatant state terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the concept of international law. The invasion was an arbitrary military action inspired by a series of lies upon lies and gross manipulation of the media and therefore of the public; an act intended to consolidate American military and economic control of the Middle East masquerading – as a last resort – all other justifications having failed to justify themselves – as liberation.

Death in this context is irrelevant. Both Bush and Blair place death well away on the back burner. At least 100,000 Iraqis were killed by American bombs and missiles before the Iraq insurgency began.


The 2,000 American dead are an embarrassment. They are transported to their graves in the dark.

But maybe there is some hope:

Many thousands, if not millions, of people in the United States itself are demonstrably sickened, shamed and angered by their government’s actions, but as things stand they are not a coherent political force – yet. But the anxiety, uncertainty and fear which we can see growing daily in the United States is unlikely to diminish.

Back to arts:

A writer’s life is a highly vulnerable, almost naked activity. We don’t have to weep about that. The writer makes his choice and is stuck with it. But it is true to say that you are open to all the winds, some of them icy indeed. You are out on your own, out on a limb. You find no shelter, no protection – unless you lie – in which case of course you have constructed your own protection and, it could be argued, become a politician.

[S]ometimes a writer has to smash the mirror – for it is on the other side of that mirror that the truth stares at us.

I believe that despite the enormous odds which exist, unflinching, unswerving, fierce intellectual determination, as citizens, to define the real truth of our lives and our societies is a crucial obligation which devolves upon us all. It is in fact mandatory.


If such a determination is not embodied in our political vision we have no hope of restoring what is so nearly lost to us – the dignity of man.

If only for this lecture, Pinter deserves the prize.

Comments

Brilliant. Thanks Bernhard, and thanks Pinter.

Posted by: roro | Dec 7 2005 21:30 utc | 1

From time to time, the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants
and patriots. –Thomas Jefferson

Posted by: mistah charley | Dec 7 2005 21:33 utc | 2

fortunately for everyone in the US, an Air Marshall was able to kill a passenger outside the plane on the tarmac today in Miami so no one will have to read or hear Pinter’s words.
The only solace I get from this award is that I can believe there are still some people in the world who think what the US is doing is wrong.

Posted by: dan of steele | Dec 7 2005 21:45 utc | 3

video of Pinter’s speech.

Posted by: b | Dec 7 2005 22:11 utc | 4

thanks b
& what a wonderful text by pinter. he is one of those reversal of a relatively brutal & cynical man becoming over the years humane, profoundly humane
there feels no polemic in the text & the tears that are within it are not soi very far from the surface
but mostly – you sense as neruda in those last months before the u s empires military coup in chile the desire for decency & common sense to prevail. it didn’t in chile . nor will it now because we all know this important speech will either be censored, drowned in trivi or surrounded by the very indecencies pinter decries

Posted by: r’giap | Dec 7 2005 22:17 utc | 5

Just saw it on tv in North of Ireland – incredible to hear someone given the time and space to lay out the plain truth for a change. His speech for Bush which he delivered taking on persona of Bush was just the cold hard facts of life nowadays.

Posted by: drunk as a rule | Dec 7 2005 22:49 utc | 6

pinter
for anyone who missed the previous thread from 10/15

Posted by: annie | Dec 7 2005 22:51 utc | 7

Pinter’s speech is incredible. Never outside of a cold hall meeting amongst the converted have I heard anyone speak the truth like this. Bush and Blair, if they ever took the time to watch it (should) burn with shame and with guilt.

Posted by: theodor | Dec 7 2005 23:35 utc | 8

Thanks, b.

Posted by: beq | Dec 7 2005 23:57 utc | 9

“The horror the United States inflicted upon Chile in 1973 can never be purged and can never be forgiven. ” – h pinter
of all these magnificent words of pinter. that sentenced touched me enormously. chile, revealed to me once & for all – the unforgivable nature of the enterprise of u s imperialism.
chile – moved me not as a person engaged – but as a human iving amongst other humans. it made me wary of the sectarian nature of my own politics at that time but it gave birth in me to an anti imperialism that was not determined by edict from peking daily
chile was greece & indonesia underined & with insistence. then the furthering of the empire’s evil works in el salvador & in nicaragua made it clear to anyone with a heart or a head for that matter that this world was going wrong, was going very wrong
so that when sept 11 arrived – i was not surprised – i understood that one day the people of one country or another would bring their war to the territory of this infantilic empire. i thought in the first instance it would be yugoslavs because i had witnessed how deeply they had scarred that people & i thought of alll people – the yugoslavs are a patient people. they will take their revenge & i thought sept 11 was that revenge. but it could have been any of the nations pinter mentioned – where murder organised by the american empire has been a common language
indeed i was surprised when the islamic fundamentalists of a q said they were responsible & then not so – because in fact the islamic fundmentalist are the children of this empire in theory & fact, their theology not so different from that of the empire, just a different shading, that they mirrored each other perfectly. the people surrounding bush are exactly like the people surrounding bin laden – the egyptian doctor – is simply rumsfield with a beard
what pinter say in his speech confirms the worst for me & that is his saying three times – that the empire is doing it up front now, nothing is hidden, all that is palpably evil about that empire is before our eyes evry day – & you sense there is not only not shame, or even regret but anger & bitterness (witness for example the way condi von ribbentrop speaks to the europeans) & finally like cheney they are proud of that evil that men do

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 8 2005 1:44 utc | 10

Thanks for being on top of it as usual, B.
It seems appropriate to offer this today. Michael Ratner, Pres. of Center for Constitutional Rights, discussing how US govt. kidnapping people around the globe to torture them, is precisely what Pinochet did under “Operation Condor” in Latin America. Link.
Apparently Condi is pissed at Europeans for being so hypocritical…they knew, at least their “Intel” Agencies did, now they’re complaining.

Posted by: jj | Dec 8 2005 3:26 utc | 11

rereading the text & i also have the thoughts of theodor – outside of sites like our own we have become used to a level of debate that is completely impoverished or ones that are complete embelishments
but in pinters adress – we have r w fassbinders dictum – that if you cannot tell the truth at least do not lie
i am moved beyond measure by pinters speech

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 8 2005 3:45 utc | 12

@R’Giap, if, like me, you have a slow connection & thus haven’t watched the speech on Video, the Guardian’s Theater Critic, who has a frontpage review, suggests it’s a Must. Reading doesn’t do it justice – seeing it is Great Theater.

Posted by: jj | Dec 8 2005 7:58 utc | 13

Superb – “speak truth to power.” A man on what could be the crowning achievement of his career takes the time not to celebrate but to take on the world’s only superpower (and its sheep on a lead)…having someone say with no hint of satire that Bush and Blair should be brought before the ICC was perhaps the high point. Though I am a fan of satire, and calling the US the “greatest show on the road” at about the 26 minute mark was also superb. I keep using the word superb, but I can’t think of anything better.
I have in the past dreamed that I had some modicum of fame which I could use as a platform to make a speech against not Bush, not Republicans, but the American power structure. This? beyond my wildest dreams – and it was real.

Posted by: Rowan | Dec 8 2005 9:43 utc | 14

Also – just to check on what dan of steele said, a quick scan of Google News reveals…absolutely nothing on this speech.

Posted by: Rowan | Dec 8 2005 9:43 utc | 15

Thanks b — for posting this, an echo from far away — in that Pinter surely has achieved official dissident status, at least as far as official-dumb here is concerned. Soporific, all — to the truth at the crossroads, which Pinter is well acquainted and has no doubt presumed. In advance of the more fleeting truth in art.

Posted by: anna missed | Dec 8 2005 9:51 utc | 16

The Guardian’s piece on Pinter’s speech

There was something oddly Beckettian about Harold Pinter’s Nobel lecture, which was broadcast yesterday by More4, and which even now is blazing its way across the world’s media. It was Beckettian in that Pinter sat in a wheelchair, with a rug over his knees and framed by an image of his younger self, delivering his sombre message: memories of Hamm in Beckett’s Endgame came to mind. But if Pinter’s frailty was occasionally visible, there was nothing ailing about his passionate and astonishing speech, which mixed moral vigour with forensic detail.

Posted by: b | Dec 8 2005 11:19 utc | 17

Thanks B.
@Rowan & Dan of Steele
There is coverage, though virtually nothing in the U.S. press … hardly surprising given the content … google search here
The crystalline clarity of brutal truths … surrounded by millions upon millions of sleepers and willing cogs … futility … despair.
Not another … ‘Dead body’.

Posted by: Outraged | Dec 8 2005 11:37 utc | 18

Campaigners accuse leaders of ‘war crimes’
The governments of Tony Blair and George Bush have been charged with war crimes by a distinguished group of anti-war campaigners, who are calling for an investigation by the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, into breaches of international law.
Harold Pinter, the playwright, Tony Benn, the former Labour MP, Michael Mansfield QC and Professor Richard Dawkins were among the signatories to 28 charges against the Blair and Bush administrations, covering ministers, officials and generals who were a party to the decisions that led to war on Iraq and the chaos in its aftermath…

Posted by: Outraged | Dec 8 2005 11:45 utc | 19

I think that the only real difference between the Bush thugs and previous American regimes is that they do everything out in the open.
That is the only positive thing I can say about them.
They are also now doing to the American people what they formerly did to the people of Chile and Guatemala. It was only a matter of time before this happened. They don’t fight tyranny, they admire it.
I’m still waiting for the impeachment hearings to start, and then the ‘rendering’ to the International Criminal Court. But there is no sound from the 75% of the populace that reportedly disapproves of Bush, or the 45% that says he should be impeached if he has been proven a liar.
I was glad to hear Mr. Pinter’s speech since he expressed the sentiments of revulsion better than I ever could, but this speech clearly did not reach the people who needed to hear it.

Posted by: hopping madbunny | Dec 8 2005 12:31 utc | 20

Re Forgotten History …

Thirty years ago, on December 7 1975, Indonesia invaded East Timor. This began a brutal occupation that lasted almost a quarter of a century and led to the deaths of over 200,000 people. Even the C.I.A. has described it as one of the worst mass-murders of the 20th century.
Indonesia invaded East Timor almost entirely with U.S-made weapons and equipment. Newly released documents by the National Security Archive show the U.S government knew this and explicitly approved of the invasion. The formerly classified documents show how multiple U.S administrations concealed information on the invasion in order to continue selling weapons to Indonesia.
The documents show US officials were aware of the invasion plans nearly a year in advance. They reveal that in 1977 the Carter Administration blocked declassification of a cable transcribing President Ford and Secretary of State Kissinger’s meeting with Suharto on December 6, 1975 in which they explicitly approved of the invasion.
The National Security Archive handed over the documents to an East Timorese commission of inquiry into human rights abuses that occurred between 1975 and 1999. Last week East Timor President Xanana Gusmao gave the commission’s report to the Timorese Parliament but wanted it withheld from the public. Opposition politicians and human rights activists have called for the documents to be made public.

See video, audio or transcript at DemocracyNow.org
The declassified record (National Security Archive):

East Timor Truth Commission report uses declassified U.S. documents to call for reparations from U.S. for its support of Indonesian invasion and occupation of East Timor from 1975 until U.N. sponsored vote in 1999
National Security Archive provides more than 1,000 documents to East Timor Truth Commission after Bush Administration refuses cooperation
Recently Declassified British Documents Reveal U.K. Support for Indonesian Invasion and Occupation of East Timor. 1975-1976
National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 174

Posted by: Outraged | Dec 8 2005 13:35 utc | 21

http://www.robnewman.com
Quote of the Day
Americans are starting to feel like there are just 2 countries in the world, the USA and ‘The Rest of The World’. Ironically the flag for ‘The Rest of the World’ is the same as the flag for the USA, except that its on fire.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Dec 8 2005 18:26 utc | 22

Awesome! Thanks. Should be printed on leaflets and dropped by the millions on the bovine American public.

Posted by: Anonymous | Dec 8 2005 20:53 utc | 23

seek out a song called patriots heart by american music club. It’s the ideal closing soundtrack to pinters dramatic monologue.

Posted by: drunk as a rule | Dec 8 2005 22:05 utc | 24

here it is – for rgiap who rocks like royal trux
http://www.american-music-club.com/downloads.html
http://www.american-music-club.com/audio/Patriots_Heart.m3u

Posted by: Anonymous | Dec 8 2005 22:07 utc | 25

JJ, you’re right. One needs to watch it. The poor bastard is probably not long for this earth, but he struggled heroically with the discomfort is is obviously in, giving the text a profound conviction.

Posted by: theodor | Dec 8 2005 22:46 utc | 26

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4505874.stm‘>bbc w/video link too

Referring to Blair’s support for the US-led war on Iraq, Pinter described the “pathetic and supine” Great Britain as “a bleating little lamb tagging behind (the US) on a lead”.
He called for President Bush and Prime Minister Blair to be “arraigned before the International Criminal Court of Justice”.

crooks and liars linked to this so i think it’s getting a little traction here but i guess i am not surprised no gutless msm has published this.

Posted by: annie | Dec 8 2005 23:01 utc | 27

what a magnificent man like his two brothers – dennis potter & r d laing who in their last moments sd things we should never, ever forget

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 8 2005 23:14 utc | 28

“The condition of alienation, of being asleep, of being unconscious, of being out of one’s mind, is the condition of the normal man. Society highly values its normal man. It educates children to lose themselves and to become absurd, and thus to be normal. Normal men have killed perhaps 100,000,000 of their fellow normal men in the last fifty years.”
-r d laing

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Dec 8 2005 23:24 utc | 29

anni
one of the reasons pinters glorious speech will not get the coverage it deserves is because it exposes in the most brutal & banal way – the povery not only of journalism – but of commentary
it reveals that ‘journalism’ & that ‘commentaty’ as nothing other than propaganda at worst & complicit neglect, at best
when he speaks of the histories that have not happened – yes he is speaking of a media that drowns every event with its mediocre brush & how we as a complit public allow not only the revision of history but as pinter suggest – the complete absence of ‘it’
he dares in his speech to call the nightmare by its real name – u s imperialism. he encapsulates well the bloody history of that empire & as a writer he tells us ironically but with the profoundest rage – how the us empire sells itself & how until recently – it has succeeded
& make no mistake about it – this empire is being defeated on the ground every day – not by a standiong army but by a ragtag collection of people who love their country above themselves – who are in & of themselves embodiments of their country’s memory
he is telling us that these violent & immoral armies & agents of u s imperialism are the opposite of memory – they are its complête absence but what is happenign in iraq is almost without parallel – they are forgetting their own soldier – as they die. they ffer conflicting stories of their deaths, where they died, how many have died back in germany or america, that their coffins cannot be ‘seen’ & that their deaths can not be memorialised in the public sense – which is all that cindy sheehan is doing, after all.
they are being forgotten as they die for a lie that will not last the week
& my argument with the cole’s of this world is that in refined commentary they seem to forget the terrible facts – that facts that should be in any civilised world the deciding factor
commentary is not just another talkshop like parliaments – but a public & open interrogation of state
what was it martin luther king sd – that those that make peaceful change impossible make violent revolution inevitable

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 8 2005 23:52 utc | 30

Annie,
Thanks for the video link, but did anyone notice that the BBC shunted it to the ‘entertainment’ section of their website? Almost funny if not so scandalous and depressing. Is the age-old BBC self-censorship developing a sense of ironic humour?

Posted by: theodor | Dec 9 2005 1:02 utc | 31

even the new york times understood -quoting pinter’s speech -“The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless”
they clearly understood that
but interestingly they have called the nobel prize a left wing prize because it has been awarded to gunter grass, dario fo & josé saramago
in their words :
“the literature prize has in recent years often gone to writers with left-wing ideologies. These include the European writers José Saramago of Portugal, Günter Grass of Germany and Dario Fo of Italy.
what drugs do these people take & where can you buy them?

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 9 2005 1:02 utc | 32

A friend of mine who overheard me listening to the speech asked what percent of the US population might be receptible to Pinter’s speech. He was optimistic – he said 30-40. I told him 1% or so would be directly receptible to the speech, nodding in agreement and understanding of the important points. 10% would agree with some qualms, and 30-40 would be about right if the focus of the speech was Republican policy, not American. It was, I think, a slight error that the only presidents he mentioned by name were Bush and Reagan, not Clinton, Carter or LBJ, as it might have given that appearance.
But too many Americans are members of the Americanist, be it the Democrat or Republican wing, to accept an assault like that. I dunno, maybe I’m a pessimist, what percent do the barflies think would consider that speech?

Posted by: Rowan | Dec 9 2005 7:34 utc | 33

> The horror the United States inflicted
> upon Chile in 1973 can never be purged
> and can never be forgiven.
i grew up in chile. in 8th grade i had the privilege of attending a public school – before and after that year i always went to private schools. in my class, there was a guy with whom i made friends quite soon. we smoked our first smokes, drank our first drinks, played billiard … this guy had a father who was always home. the father had been “relegado”, that is, sent by the military to some concentration camp in the desert in the north of the country, and now he was back home. he told us of what they did to him during the years he had been at the concentration camp.
from what i remember now, after 25 years, most of the stuff he told us is what the US, the UK and all their friends and partners in crime do to muslims and is not considered torture: “sleep management”, “stress positions” – he showed us how he had to stay for days, we imitated one position, fetal position on your knees on the floor with hands behind your back for some minutes, i had to stretch my legs afterwards because even after this short time they went numb – beatings, food and water deprivation, and other mistreatments.
the crime of my classmate’s old man was that he had been in the local communal council for the socialist party during the allende time. for this they sent him to a concentration camp for 3 years. i remember him because i am now about the same age as he was then, and in the meantime i’ve also been council member for a more or less leftist party.

Posted by: name | Dec 9 2005 8:17 utc | 34

Yes, Pinter’s is a Nobel acceptance speech that will be remembered with Faulkner’s, and rightly so.
I think Rowan is quite right: the state religion of Americanism is a virtually insuperable and paradoxical obstacle to realization of its own ideals. The ever more obvious mortification of those ideals at the hands of the priestly-political caste is producing a “religious” crisis in America that can be resolved by nothing less than a new Reformation. But that “great re-awakening” can only come about if first there is a national acceptance of responsibility for the atrocities that have been and continue to be perpetrated in the name of America. Like reformed alcoholics at AA meetings, or “born-again” Christians acknowledging their wretched need for “amazing grace”, Americans must acknowledge their nation’s sins before there can be anything more than cosmetic change, mascara and rouge applied to the cadaver of American democracy.

But this is clearly an “unrealistic” program, all the more so if propounded with evangelical zeal unleavened by humility. The problem facing those who wish to reverse the politics of democratic genocide is how to assist the American fly to emerge from the fly-bottle. There is no dearth of possible paths to follow: juridical, political, cultural, and even ethico-religious strategies are all currently in progress, but the ascent, if it proves possible, will be a long and tortuous trail fraught with obstacles and garrisoned by bandits. Pinter’s Nobel address is a devastating indictment: may it serve to focus attention on the urgency of the task at hand.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Dec 9 2005 8:55 utc | 35

Found you from a link at SPONTANEOUS ARISING. Thanks for this. Did a post on this myself with a link to over here. The Speech of the Century. Great stuff. Also adding you to my links list on my blog. Thanks again.

Posted by: Neil Shakespeare | Dec 9 2005 9:10 utc | 36

I’m not certain what form a Reformation would need to take, Hannah. I don’t know of many examples of a nation’s ideals being shattered enough that it has refomed its own beliefs about its centrality and necessity in the world. The most famous example is, of course, Nazi Germany, but that involved a crushing military, political, and economic defeat in WWII. Perhaps the shrinking pains Great Britain and France experienced in the 50’s and 60’s as they lost their colonial empires might be more comparable to what needs to happen in America, but even that is remarkably incomplete (see: sheep on a lead, also, Haiti).

Posted by: Rowan | Dec 9 2005 10:23 utc | 37

@ Rowan
You are quite right, alas, but there may be some hope in the fact that large swaths of the “scribbling classes” (both on the left and on the right) seem to be questioning national dogmas. A convincing break-through revelation about who was behind the “amazing success” of the 9/11 attacks might give a Samsonian shake to the U.S. temple, but of course that is not likely. ( I realize that not everyone shares my deep skepticism about the “official conspiracy theory” and views about likely “puppet masters”.) As long as the prevailing view that either the Republicans or the Democrats are the source of all evil and its corollary that an electoral victory by the “good guys” is sufficient to put things right remain substantially uncontested, we can expect that the divide and conquer strategy of the masters of the current duopoly will continue to be effective. An isolationist and populist counterforce would not be pretty, but that may be the only political two-by-four with sufficient heft for “bopping the mule just to get its attention”.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Dec 9 2005 12:03 utc | 38

From the LA Times …

Why Condi roiled Europe
MANY AMERICANS will be puzzled, and perhaps even a little hurt, that Europeans reacted with such incredulity to this week’s denial by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the U.S. has been ghosting suspected terrorist prisoners to countries where they are likely to be tortured.
– snip –
Finally, of course, some of us have long memories. We have been here before — in Chile, El Salvador, Iran under the shah, Vietnam … you name it.
In his book, “Decent Interval,” about the final days of the Vietnam War, former CIA agent Frank Snepp recounts the fate of a high-level communist prisoner, Nguyen Van Tai. “Just before the North Vietnamese tanks rolled into Saigon, a senior CIA official suggested it would be better if he disappeared. The South Vietnamese agreed. Tai was loaded into a plane and thrown out at 10,000 feet over the South China Sea.”
I have no doubt that the truth about the secret prisons and the mistreatment of detainees will emerge in due course. Retired CIA agents will start writing their memoirs. There will be hearings in Congress, official breast-beating, promises that it will never happen again, perhaps even a resignation or two. Openness is one of the great strengths of American society.
The weakness, however, is that memories are short and, after 20 years, it happens all over again.

Posted by: Outraged | Dec 9 2005 13:53 utc | 39

In case there is no Friday art post, here’s a link to Neil Shakespeare’s (comment above) dada-esque collages.
Pinter’s speech is now part of the record of the history of this time, and I’m thankful that he spoke for so many of us.
The sad and sorry thing is that all the murders that are going on now, on every side, will also be forgotten, and the powerful will make peace among themselves and enemies will be allies and the dead will remain dead.

Posted by: fauxreal | Dec 9 2005 15:20 utc | 40

Wow! that was impressive, you the King of fnords!, thanks fauxreal
and Neil Shakespeare. As I am lazy and unashamed I will quote someone more intelligent than I, ‘Life bears down and crushes the soul, art reminds you that you have one.’Art unsettles me. Art makes me feel helplessly ALIVE. Art cops a feel on my sensibilities. Happy weekend all.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Dec 9 2005 19:16 utc | 41

Being a Nobel Prize Laureate gives you immunity.
I am sure Harold P. knows all about that and exploited it as he could. He is dying of cancer — a last stand.
He has always been steadfast, clear, and voluble. Long times now.
Thanks, Harold.
Both my daily (Swiss) papers ran excerpts.
Sam Beckett, who had nothing to do with Harold (though literary-wise some links between the two have been assumed) always shied away from personal statements about world politics – his focus was elsewhere – say, the absurdity, horror and humor of being a human locked into a world – a world? – some scene (and thanks, Sam), some place, some time.
Watt in his kitchen. Sam never said more. That was enough for him.
Harold did different.
O tempora,.. Or sumptin’.

Posted by: Noisette | Dec 9 2005 19:56 utc | 42

re chile
peter kornbluh writes U.S. Leaders are Using Pinochet’s Playbook

Just as General Pinochet ordered his secret police to create Condor, President Bush has authorized the CIA to organize a system of “rendition.” The CIA also relies on covert international collaboration between secret police services to kidnap suspects, secretly transport them to a network of clandestine detention centers and brutally abuse them during indefinite interrogations.
The Condor nations were the first to practice the art of rendition. Their prisoners became known as the “disappeared.” Today, suspected terrorists who have been rendered by the CIA to other nations such as Jordan, Egypt, Morocco or Romania are known as “ghost detainees.”
The methods of interrogation also are similar. Condor victims were submitted to what their Southern Cone torturers called “the submarine.” Mr. Bush has authorized a series of “enhanced interrogation techniques” that includes “waterboarding” – simulated drowning – which is the CIA’s modernized version of the same type of torture.
Even the official denials sound the same. “We do not torture,” President Bush stated recently. “The United States government does not authorize or condone torture of detainees,” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice reiterated as she arrived in Europe this week.
In the wake of overwhelming evidence that U.S. officials have authorized, condoned and even committed acts of torture – in some cases torturing prisoners to death in Iraq and Afghanistan – those denials carry about as much credibility as General Pinochet’s did during his 17-year dictatorship.
Ms. Rice faces a furor in Europe, where citizens are condemning the CIA for engaging in human rights abuses and for using Europe to facilitate ongoing atrocities. And that repudiation also has echoes of the near-universal condemnation of the barbaric practices of the Condor nations three decades ago.
But there is a fundamental difference between then and now. The Condor countries were understood to be vicious police states. The United States purports to be the leader of the civilized world.

Posted by: b real | Dec 10 2005 5:41 utc | 43

noisette
that is not entirely true of beckett. he was engaged in the resistance against the german occupation here – except he was never particularly voluble about it
from the fifties in france he was politically engaged at a whole lot of levels & especialy with apartheid & the american violation of human rights in latin america – sam was extremely generous with time & money
sams work with the prsoner group at the peak of his carreer says volumes about his humanity
& i think harold became ‘close’ to sam in the sixties & they remained friends until his death

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 10 2005 13:15 utc | 44