About to head out the door. This is a repost from an editorial we all worked on. The credit for it is at the bottom.
I hope to grab time to weigh in on a specific issue but don't have it right now. For now, I'll say I support Kat and she's a great writer. I do not support Bernie and think he's a lousy writer. I think he's dishonest as well for altering Kat's quote to make it say what he wanted it to say.
Here's the editorial:
"Editorial: War Got Your Tongue?"
Let's give it up to the bloggers and the op-ed columnists with bravery because they've weighed in the war. The war that hits the third year mark in March.
You do know there's a war going on, right?
We kind of feel like we have to ask that question because most people don't appear to. Again, give it up for the bloggers and the op-ed columnists. Give it up for progressive media.
"'Why Are You Here' and 'What's Changed'" we asked at the D.C. protests in September. Here's how one person responded:
74) Ivan, 62, Michigan: I think today is great and am thrilled with the turnout. I protested against the war on Vietnam and there it took us years to get the momentum going. What I worry about is where are the people? I don't mean the protesters, I'm really encouraged with the cross-section today. But, okay, you've got Cindy Sheehan. Great spokesperson. Ralph Nader's here and maybe he can make up for the recent past or maybe not, but he's here. The actress from Tootsie and Cape Fear, right Jessica Lange. She's here and I didn't remember her name but she really did give a great speech. I'm glad those people are here. But we need more.
And in my day, the people had others. Yes, we had Jane Fonda, Fred Gardner, Joan Baez, Tom Hayden and others front and center. But you also had people backing it up. Like Bob Dylan. I think he went to one protest with Joan Baez for civil rights. But his songs backed up what his actions didn't. Or you turned on Dick Cavett or David Frost and there was an author or singer or someone and they weren't at the protests but they'd put it on the line and they'd say, like John Phillips [Mamas and the Papas] that the war was wrong. I caught Jane Fonda on David Letterman, when her book came out. And he asked her about the war and she said she was against it and the audience just went crazy with applause and cheers. But are there younger people doing that? Is it just people my age? Maybe there are and I just don't know them. But part of the reason the movement finally did end the war is that our cultural heroes were willing to speak out. You hear a lot of that sneering "You're a celebrity, shut up" talk and that's really fearing the power if they do speak out. With Vietnam, and this isn't a full list, just names that come to mind, you had Joan Baez and Jane Fonda front and center, but you also had Phil Ochs, you had the whole Mamas & the Papas, you had John Lennon, Mia Farrow, Tim Hardin, Laura Nyro, Peter Fonda, Crosby, Stills & Nash, Joni Mitchell, Jim Morrison, Janis [Joplin], the Rolling Stones, Grace Slick and the [Jefferson] Airplane, this whole list of people. And you had people my age and younger and we weren't that different from kids today, we thought about what was in front of us. So when you have these people that you watch or listen to talking about it, it put it front and center. There were a lot of priests and a lot of Quakers and a lot of really solid activists who worked and gave their time to ending the war. But what kept it on the front page was a) real reporting with real photos and b) the fact that you couldn't escape it. You turned on the TV to escape but there was some entertainer talking about it. It was front and center. Now maybe there are people doing that today. I don't watch much TV now. Maybe if I turned on Letterman every night, I'd see some young people coming on to talk about a movie or TV show and I'd hear them speak out against the war. But I really don't get the sense that's happening.The right spent a lifetime demonizing Jane Fonda. There's a reason for that. They want to make sure no one else is tempted to use their power. They're scared of what would happen if entertainers really started throwing their weight around and making the people buying tickets or records think about this war.
Hard to believe it to look around today, but that did happen. C.I. had lunch today with a friend who's trying desperately to work the war into a show he writes for. During the conversation a number of issues were raised about what's being ignored by the mainstream press. C.I. shared the converstation with Jess who said, "I had that same conversation!" C.I. came up with the title of this editorial. Jess tossed in something else. By then it was going to have to be a Third Estate Sunday Review piece because we all wanted to weigh in.
All we are saying is JUST TAKE A STAND
On this anniversary of the assassination of John Lennon, we're surprised by how few seem to act as if a war's going on. Ripped from the headlines our asses. Hiding from the headlines. And it goes on everywhere.
Maybe pop culture doesn't allow you to comment on Harold Pinter's speech? Maybe a playwright is too "culture" and not enough pop? Maybe it's just not really handing out awards if no one asks, "Who are you wearing?"
All we are saying is just take a stand.
If you're presenting as being on the left, why are you so silent on a war that's waged for almost three years? War got your tongue?
Hey, if you're for the war, come out and say it. You can find readers who'll support you. But quit hiding behind "I'm left" if you can't comment on the war.
You're not looking "moderate." You're looking ignorant. And when people read you years from now and see that you had nothing to say about a war that waged and waged, they're going to wonder about that.
We should wonder about it right now.
Bloggers, op-ed writers, Laura Flanders, Amy Goodman, The Progressive, The Nation, go down the list. They're the people who have kept the conversation alive, who have forced it to the front. They did that without you. They're still doing it without you even though polling consistently demonstrates a trend of the people turning against the war.
You waiting for it to hit 99% before you feel "safe" about weighing in?
Naomi Klein rightly argued about the need to bring Iraq to the NYC during the Republican convention in 2004. We echo that only we say it's time to bring it to the people. That means no jerking off over Jessica and Nick or whatever "hot" topic. If you're not weighing in on a war, what are you but a couch potato?
Are you in a coma? Do you not see what's going on?
We ask that question because Bright Eyes gets slammed online by a left site. "When a President Talks To God" is "trite, crudely so, and certainly unenlightening"? Harold Bloom, when did you come online? Or is it the Professor from Gilligan's Island? (We felt the Bloom ref might be lost on the "wit" who penned the critique.)
Maybe you missed the performance of that song? Maybe you weren't at any of the sites on the left that talked of this or listening to The Majority Report whan Janeane Garofalo and Sam Seder played the clip? We're sure reading The New Rag takes up a lot of your time.
But is that your statement? Your full statement on the war?
Gee, thanks for weighing in. Maybe you're one of the sites or magazines that can also say you reviewed Jarhead?
We're so lucky to have you.
All we are saying is just take a stand.
Clooney and Damon have a new movie, you could blather on about that and claim you've addressed the war three times!
We're not sure what you're so scared of. Or why, having been silent, you think anyone cares what you think about the voices calling for an end to the occupation?
Are you Shelly Hack in Annie Hall?
"I'm bascially very shallow and have no ideas or thoughts of my own."
Is that it?
How's that working out for you?
As you muddle down the middle of the road, how's that working out for you?
All we are saying is just take a stand.
Or maybe you're a certain "lefty" radio personality who thinks it's "cute" to make fun of Pacifica Radio. You think it's "funny" to knock community radio that represents the people. We think it's "funny" that you defended your friend who wrote that article, you know the one, on Ann Coulter. We think it's funny that you excused him and let him off the hook, but never explained why or told listeners that he was your friend. We think that's almost as funny as the writer, an uncloseted gay man except in that article, acting like Ann Coulter got him all hot and bothered.
We're not hearing your brave voice. Last time we listened you were still pushing Colin Powell's (false) Pottery Barn analogy. Color us underwhelmed.
When you've done anything on the level of Margret Prescod, Deepa Fernandez, Jeremy Scahill, Juan Gonzalez, Andrea Lewis, Dennis Bernstein, Larry Bensky or anyone else at Pacifica then we'll take your little jabs a little more seriously. For now, deflate your ego, your nowhere near Amy Goodman's level.
All we are saying is just take a stand.
Or maybe you're the rag that helped lead us into war. Atrios puzzled this week over why one of the rag's writers attacked bloggers and defended The New York Times? We didn't puzzle. We know he writes for the paper's book review. We know he covers his own ass. When it takes years and years to turn out your simplistic book about how the world is just like soccer, you need those paychecks from The New York Times.
And if you had any self-respect, you wouldn't be working for The New Rag in the first place. Remember Stephanie's hilarious commercials on Air America? Having learned of the "joke" about Arundhati Roy, we've stopped laughing as we realize that while that attack occurred, Stephanie was schilling for the magazine, claiming it was left.
The New Rag didn't have Judy Miller -- it didn't need her to cheer on this war or every other one. Whether cheering on the contras or spinning false WMD claims, in times of strife, The New Rag will always lead the charge for war.
Remember when The New Rag pushed the racist Bell Curve? Or how about when it was home to such leading "lefties" as Fred Barnes and Andrew Sullivan?
All we are saying is just take a stand.
The New Rag took one. Now it tries to act like it didn't but people are wise to reality and that's why it's circulation is in the toilet. Of all the things that float in a toilet, we think The New Rag may be the most vile. It certainly gives off the worst odor. Can you smell it? It's the scent of death.
That's what war cheerleaders smell like. If and when Judith Miller puts out her signature fragance, I, Judith!, we'll all know the smell. In the meantime, take a sniff of The New Rag the way you would a perfume strip in Vanity Fair.
The New Rag pretends it's of the left when promoting itself -- but it's not. Maybe the fact that it's doing so poorly is why others can't declare that they're for the war?
We don't know. We just know that a lot of people who should have an opinion on the war and should express it don't seem to be able to.
Forget TV news for a moment, the war's hidden by more than TV news.
Seems like a lot of people are getting splinters up their hineys from sitting on that fence.
All we are saying is just take a stand.
Got an opinion on that war? Sitting on the fence waiting to see which way the wind's blowing? (No, that wasn't a Dylan ref.) It's blowing right past you.
Are you someone who rags on Pacifica, or think it's cute to make "jokes" about Arundhati Roy, or maybe you're too busy defending your friend who's penning mash notes to Ann Coulter, or maybe you just can't say anything? Maybe they forgot to program you before you showed up because you'd have to be a robot to have no opinion on the war, right?
Or maybe you're just so busy doing the Joe Lieberman that you've failed to note it's not, in fact, the new dance craze. As you lean over backwards to attempt to kiss ass, people are pointing at you. They're not saying, "What's that wild dance?" They're saying, "How pathetic."
And it is pathetic. It's pathetic that a slam on Bright Eyes will apparently have to pass for your war commentary. Or that Pacifica Radio, which gives voice to people who call in as well as guests like Naomi Klein and Norman Solomon and the Center for Constitutional Rights, is someone you think you're better then as you do your little skit, your little funny, and you summarize what was in the headlines yesterday or the day before or maybe several days before in that "moderate" voice you're so fond of using.
We must have missed you standing next to Amy Goodman and Alan Nairn in East Timor, huh? Because surely when you can knock Pacifica, you've done a butt load of things to be proud of. Not just for yourself of course, but for the whole world. Face it, you're a giver!
All we are saying is just take a stand
If Time had any guts (don't make us laugh), Cindy Sheehan would be their person of the year. The fact that she probably won't be, it has a lot to do with you. You who claim the left but can't be bothered by the war. Because surely what the world needs now is . . . distraction.
Mass distraction.
Danny Schechter, MediaChannel.org, and BuzzFlash are calling for the "Tell The Truth About The War" Campaign. We agree. But we also feel that sites and magazines wanting to get cred for being left and "left" need to start speaking out as well. It's not just the network news that fails us, it's the people who stay silent for whatever reason.
How is it that, after all this time, you still can't find your opinion? Reach around with both hands, maybe you'll fumble into it.
Again, Naomi Klein asked that we bring Iraq to NYC, meaning that we make it an issue that can't be ignored by demanding it be addressed. (Not, as a simp feared, that there be massive riots -- she wiped the floor with simpy -- the key was to bring up her age, he's very sensitive about his own.) But it is ignored as puff pieces and inane criticism is churned out.
Hey, we can talk about Nick & Jessica too. In fact, Ava & C.I. reviewed their special. Of course, Ava and C.I. got the point across early on that war has a cost -- even if Nick and Jessica couldn't grasp it. You can note the real world if you're reviewing something. You can note what's actually going on. It might require actual thought, as opposed to thumbing through your thesaurus, but it can be done.
All we are saying is just take a stand.
What purpose do you think you're serving? We're reminded of a classic film, of one scene in particular:
"I don't think that that's our function, Sally, I think that we're more a base gossip sheet. You know, fun and games for the fellas?"
"I-I just, I want to say that I'm really shocked, I'm just shocked that you'd rather write about a goddamn baseball homerun then what's going on in this hospital. I mean you wouldn't feel that way if they were your husbands."
Since for some of our brave "left" it was "fashionable" to trash Jane Fonda this summer, we might need to point out that the above is from Coming Home. Oh, but wait, she's spoken out against this war. Bright Eyes, he spoke out as well. Maybe you think trashing them qualifies for your war stance?
We think you need to figure out where you stand on the war. Choose a side already. Unless you are just a gossip sheet as well.
Kat's words can be distorted in any manner someone chooses. It doesn't change reality. It doesn't change the fact that anyone who reads her writing knows she's firmly against the war.So before a writer gets outraged that Kat disagrees with him, apparently after he took time off from scolding Kayne West over points of order, maybe that time would be better spent forming an opinion and actually expressing it. Not on the tired topic of Bob Dylan. No one needed, at this late date, your "moderate" view of Bob Dylan.
What a safe little post that was. On the one hand, on the other. He's wrong but I think Bob's great because . . .
Did you smell a Pulitzer? Or maybe a Webbie? We certainly had to hold our noses reading it.
It's not good enough. The war is about to enter year three. If you're for it, say you for it. If you're against it, say you're against it. Not some mealy mouth "on the one hand but on the other" statement. People are dying and if you can't find a voice you're not helping anyone. The fact that you're writing about "soft subjects" isn't an excuse. Kat can and has weighed in on the war in her CD reviews. Ava and C.I. have taken on Colin Powell and his "blot." This Sunday they highlighted a key line of narration, one that goes to where we are today, in their review of Everybody Hates Chris.
A war's gone of over two years, at what point do you find your voice? Knocking Pacifica or Bright Eyes, or Jane Fonda or Kat, may make you feel you look reasonable. You don't. You look indecisive.
Maybe you're afraid someone will distort your words? Kat's words got distorted, she lived.
All we are saying is just take a stand.
To paraphrase a line Michelle Pfeiffer delivers in The Russia House, "I hope you're not being frivilous with me. I only have time in my life now for the truth."
As of right now, we're looking at 22 American troop fatalites in Iraq. Who knows how many Iraqis have died this month -- Bully Boy don't do body counts. We need the truth and we're not getting it from slams at Bright Eyes or attacks on Arundhati Roy. You know what's "unenlightening"? Your boring us with your useless blathering shout outs to The New Rag. Your inability to speak to the realities we're living through right now. Your blind eye to torture.That's "unenlightening." And before you use a word that conjures up the enlightenment, you might want to ask yourself what you've weighed in with that spoke to that period because a historical look at Bob Dylan is neither "hot" nor needed when done so poorly. In fact, we'd suggest that you listen to the song Dylan wrote with Sam Shepard and pay close attention when the line about "original thought" comes up because we think you'll be able to relate.
Until then, keep cheering on whatever adult plays a teenager in a push up bra with a flat affect that you feel passes for deadpan. It's post-post-modern! Or maybe more can be wrung out of a Republican's fantasy of women where they're all dithering airheads, just play-things with nothing to do but be helpless or backbite or fight over a man. They're their own play-things so maybe you think that makes the difference? We didn't buy it when Madonna claimed she was showing power because she chained herself.
Maybe the big topic in your home honestly is arguing over what entertainment programs you will watch on TV because you just feel that there are a wealth of choices airing. If so, that's rather sad if you're no longer 14.
You take a stand or you accept that you're frivilous. In which case, stop trashing the people who do have the guts to take a stand against this war.
We support the Tell the Truth movement. We just think it needs to be expanded to include people who seem left but can't find the time to write a thing about the war.
All we are saying is just take a stand
Need a topic? Norman Solomon has rightly pointed out that the air war is getting no mainstream media coverage. Instead of slamming someone who had the guts to speak out or tossing out shout outs to The New Rag, how about writing about that? Too hard? How about writing about Laura Flanders or Amy Goomdan or any of the people who are making a difference. It may not be as fun for you as drooling over a young hottie or play to the beltway but it might get the word out on something that truly matters. And guess what? There are many more names. We're sure you can find at least one that you don't feel the need to trash.
[This editorial was written by The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and Jim, Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review, Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills), Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz and Wally of The Daily Jot.]
Read more!
posted by Third Estate Sunday Review @ Friday, December 09, 2005
Saturday, December 10, 2005
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
Carols etc.
Kat had me laughing so hard on the phone.
She has amazed me since her first review at The Common Ills ("Kat's Korner Green Day v. the Disney Kids") and getting to know her has only demonstrated that I didn't know how amazing she was.
There's only one Kat which is too bad because the world could use a lot more like her.
Three Cool Old Guys had a question and it was about Saturday's post. We all talked a lot more than is in that post about the process of doing The Third Estate Sunday Review. But what I printed was "on the record." C.I., for instance, had a little more to say but that was off the record. I figured everyone would know that because there was an issue about whether or not people were getting permission when they quoted people in the past.
I didn't mean for that to confuse anyone.
What am I doing these days? We're rehearsing to be really tight when we go caroling. We're also putting together a briefer version that we can do as part of the church service.
There's a lot of back and forth in the choir on that because everyone has their favorite Christmas carol. Mine's "Silent Night" so I'm lucky because no one ever suggests, "Why don't we cut that?" "Jingle Bells" survived the cut but "Deck the Halls" may not. It's in a fierce competion with "Away In A Manger." We're only going to do four in church and "O Come All Ye Faithful" is too popular to cut.
Our choir director is knocking himself out on every song. He's trying to work up some new arrangements and we've got a lot of different vocals going on throughout each song. He's also calling two additional rehearsals for the week. So that's already taking a lot of my time and will only take more as Christmas draws nearer.
Regardless of what you celeberate or if you celebrate nothing, I hope this is a good time of year for you. The year's winding down and it's gone by so fast. I can remember New Year's Eve last year so clearly, it doesn't seem like it's already time again.
Kat's got suggested readings and I want to offer three myself. Kat's "White mobs do love their Bobby Dylan," Rebecca's "Peanuts & the Press" and C.I.'s "NYT: 'U.S. Interrogations Are Saving European Lives, Rice Says' (Joel Brinkley)."
the common ills
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the third estate sunday review
cedrics big mix
kats korner
She has amazed me since her first review at The Common Ills ("Kat's Korner Green Day v. the Disney Kids") and getting to know her has only demonstrated that I didn't know how amazing she was.
There's only one Kat which is too bad because the world could use a lot more like her.
Three Cool Old Guys had a question and it was about Saturday's post. We all talked a lot more than is in that post about the process of doing The Third Estate Sunday Review. But what I printed was "on the record." C.I., for instance, had a little more to say but that was off the record. I figured everyone would know that because there was an issue about whether or not people were getting permission when they quoted people in the past.
I didn't mean for that to confuse anyone.
What am I doing these days? We're rehearsing to be really tight when we go caroling. We're also putting together a briefer version that we can do as part of the church service.
There's a lot of back and forth in the choir on that because everyone has their favorite Christmas carol. Mine's "Silent Night" so I'm lucky because no one ever suggests, "Why don't we cut that?" "Jingle Bells" survived the cut but "Deck the Halls" may not. It's in a fierce competion with "Away In A Manger." We're only going to do four in church and "O Come All Ye Faithful" is too popular to cut.
Our choir director is knocking himself out on every song. He's trying to work up some new arrangements and we've got a lot of different vocals going on throughout each song. He's also calling two additional rehearsals for the week. So that's already taking a lot of my time and will only take more as Christmas draws nearer.
Regardless of what you celeberate or if you celebrate nothing, I hope this is a good time of year for you. The year's winding down and it's gone by so fast. I can remember New Year's Eve last year so clearly, it doesn't seem like it's already time again.
Kat's got suggested readings and I want to offer three myself. Kat's "White mobs do love their Bobby Dylan," Rebecca's "Peanuts & the Press" and C.I.'s "NYT: 'U.S. Interrogations Are Saving European Lives, Rice Says' (Joel Brinkley)."
the common ills
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the third estate sunday review
cedrics big mix
kats korner
Saturday, December 03, 2005
Collaborative working
Like Rebecca, I'm attempting to provide "content" when people feel that there's nothing go up at any of the community sites.
We're all working on the latest The Third Estate Sunday Review. And I'll copy and paste to show who's working:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and Jim, Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review, Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills), Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz and Wally of The Daily Jot.
The biggest question I'm asked by friends at work, the woman I've started seeing and Three Cool Old Guys is, "What's it like when you all work together on this?"
So I asked for impressions during the first half of a session tonight. We're on a break right now.
Collectively, we have four pieces started. Two of those are completed. Dona says that she feels the crunch on every edition. Jim talked about how it "keeps the creative juices flowing." Ava offered that she and C.I. think they'll do a compare and contrast of two shows, one no longer airing, for their review this week but they haven't started it yet. Mike says it feels like it's moving along pretty good considering the hour. Betty's eager to get started on a planned piece.
Jess points out that the four started will probably result in only one or two that makes it online (all will go in the print edition). Ty's wondering how late this session will go. Kat says she slept in Saturday morning to be sure she had the energy for tonight/this morning. Rebecca points out that not only does C.I. have to do this but as soon as everything's posted, C.I. has to go over and come up with an entry for The Common Ills. Elaine says she's chilling by listening to the Cowboy Junkies. C.I.? "What's the question?"
How do you feel about the latest edition?
"I'm a little tired tonight so it's probably better that I don't note anything but that."
The feature Betty's eager to get started on has to do with Bob Woodward. Jess says that it should make the online edition regardless of how it's rated when it's completed because "the watchdogs are sleeping on this topic."
Another question I got asked a lot this week was why I didn't want my stuff blog spotlighted at The Third Estate Sunday Review?
I just didn't personally feel that I'd done anything worthy of note. C.I. called on Friday to say that I had to let them spotlight "Race." I don't know if it was C.I.'s persuasive powers or the fact that the feedback's been so strong on it, but I've agreed.
There are a number of sites in the community and I just feel like if I'm grabbing a spotlight, I should be doing so for something really worthy of noting. Copying and pasting those things in takes time and they can't highlight every site every week. I prefer that they note Betty just because I know she's worried that people aren't interested since she's gotten some threatening e-mail and since she's only able to do one chapter a week. So she usually has my vote.
It's kind of like instant run off voting some weeks with us picking our favorites and ranking them. That's why C.I. tries not to be spotlighted. C.I. feels like The Common Ills doesn't need the spotlight. (One will be spotlighted this week because Jim's successfully argued for "Target: the 9th Circuit (The Republican war on the judiciary continues).")
I'm not being bashful or modest, I just know that there's a lot of strong posts coming from everyone and I feel like there's other stuff to be highlighted. A lot from The Common Ills because C.I. posts over twenty-eight times a week.
Here's a trick that C.I. pulls that I don't think anyone else has noticed. "Don't spotlight it this week, but if you really think it should be, we can do it next week." C.I. counts, I think, on the fact that no one's remembering by the next week.
When we all get back from break, that's the first thing we'll discuss. What's getting highlighted.
It's an easy way to get back into step.
Is there a lot of back and forth during the writing? Yes, there is. If it's something identified as being a member's pick or a member's statement, it's no problem. But if it's something that we're all going to be responsible for, we do have a back and forth over it.
That's not screaming and yelling. Elaine's good about saying, "I can't live with that sentence. If you take out the clause, I can live with it." But everyone does that and that's the back and the forth as we hammer out an editorial or whatever. So that's how the process works.
Tags never get read at my site but I'll go ahead and swipe some from Kat's site and try again.
This may not have been bold content, but it was new content. Rebecca and Kat also blogged today and C.I. posted several entries. Check out The Third Estate Sunday Review tomorrow.
Nearly forgot to put in Wally's description of the process. He says it's like running a track marathon and you're always reaching for that one last bit of energy.
the common ills
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
like maria said paz
the third estate sunday review
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
the daily jot
kats korner
thomas friedman is a great man
We're all working on the latest The Third Estate Sunday Review. And I'll copy and paste to show who's working:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and Jim, Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review, Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills), Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz and Wally of The Daily Jot.
The biggest question I'm asked by friends at work, the woman I've started seeing and Three Cool Old Guys is, "What's it like when you all work together on this?"
So I asked for impressions during the first half of a session tonight. We're on a break right now.
Collectively, we have four pieces started. Two of those are completed. Dona says that she feels the crunch on every edition. Jim talked about how it "keeps the creative juices flowing." Ava offered that she and C.I. think they'll do a compare and contrast of two shows, one no longer airing, for their review this week but they haven't started it yet. Mike says it feels like it's moving along pretty good considering the hour. Betty's eager to get started on a planned piece.
Jess points out that the four started will probably result in only one or two that makes it online (all will go in the print edition). Ty's wondering how late this session will go. Kat says she slept in Saturday morning to be sure she had the energy for tonight/this morning. Rebecca points out that not only does C.I. have to do this but as soon as everything's posted, C.I. has to go over and come up with an entry for The Common Ills. Elaine says she's chilling by listening to the Cowboy Junkies. C.I.? "What's the question?"
How do you feel about the latest edition?
"I'm a little tired tonight so it's probably better that I don't note anything but that."
The feature Betty's eager to get started on has to do with Bob Woodward. Jess says that it should make the online edition regardless of how it's rated when it's completed because "the watchdogs are sleeping on this topic."
Another question I got asked a lot this week was why I didn't want my stuff blog spotlighted at The Third Estate Sunday Review?
I just didn't personally feel that I'd done anything worthy of note. C.I. called on Friday to say that I had to let them spotlight "Race." I don't know if it was C.I.'s persuasive powers or the fact that the feedback's been so strong on it, but I've agreed.
There are a number of sites in the community and I just feel like if I'm grabbing a spotlight, I should be doing so for something really worthy of noting. Copying and pasting those things in takes time and they can't highlight every site every week. I prefer that they note Betty just because I know she's worried that people aren't interested since she's gotten some threatening e-mail and since she's only able to do one chapter a week. So she usually has my vote.
It's kind of like instant run off voting some weeks with us picking our favorites and ranking them. That's why C.I. tries not to be spotlighted. C.I. feels like The Common Ills doesn't need the spotlight. (One will be spotlighted this week because Jim's successfully argued for "Target: the 9th Circuit (The Republican war on the judiciary continues).")
I'm not being bashful or modest, I just know that there's a lot of strong posts coming from everyone and I feel like there's other stuff to be highlighted. A lot from The Common Ills because C.I. posts over twenty-eight times a week.
Here's a trick that C.I. pulls that I don't think anyone else has noticed. "Don't spotlight it this week, but if you really think it should be, we can do it next week." C.I. counts, I think, on the fact that no one's remembering by the next week.
When we all get back from break, that's the first thing we'll discuss. What's getting highlighted.
It's an easy way to get back into step.
Is there a lot of back and forth during the writing? Yes, there is. If it's something identified as being a member's pick or a member's statement, it's no problem. But if it's something that we're all going to be responsible for, we do have a back and forth over it.
That's not screaming and yelling. Elaine's good about saying, "I can't live with that sentence. If you take out the clause, I can live with it." But everyone does that and that's the back and the forth as we hammer out an editorial or whatever. So that's how the process works.
Tags never get read at my site but I'll go ahead and swipe some from Kat's site and try again.
This may not have been bold content, but it was new content. Rebecca and Kat also blogged today and C.I. posted several entries. Check out The Third Estate Sunday Review tomorrow.
Nearly forgot to put in Wally's description of the process. He says it's like running a track marathon and you're always reaching for that one last bit of energy.
the common ills
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
like maria said paz
the third estate sunday review
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
the daily jot
kats korner
thomas friedman is a great man
Thursday, December 01, 2005
Race
This post is in reference to "Help Make Thursday, December 1st 'Blog Against Racism Day'" which Leah posted at Corrente Wire.
So we're all supposed to write about race today. Everyone in the community.
It's a web project and here I thought I was done with homework a long time ago.
I told C.I. that I would be happy to write about it but that I might not have anything anyone wanted to hear. C.I. said, "Even better. Be true to you."
Is this the day where the web purges the guilt for being white-white-white every other day of the year?
Will we see "fab post! hat tip to . . ." nonsense all over the net?
Rebecca wrote something brave. In it she talked about the ways Whites can aid racists.
It was brave, it was Rebecca.
But maybe some White person will write a "moving post" about Rosa Parks and it will gather steam all over the net and we'll once again here how wonderful the net is and how brave.
I don't expect much from it.
I'd love to be wrong but we can't talk about racism online.
We're not supposed to.
We're supposed to look the other way.
Certainly if the net was racist, people of color would be shut out.
Oh wait, we are.
There's a token voice they include on their blog rolls and we're all supposed to be happy about that.
"One of us made it!"
Today is apparently Black day.
Women get ready because you're day will be coming soon.
People of color and women get a day or two each year.
Otherwise it's white-white-white male-male-male.
So today a lot of people will get to feel good about themselves and sleep easy knowing that they did "their part."
Or maybe they'll kid themselves that because they blogged on TD Jakes/TD Jokes they're down with the peeps.
You have to be pretty white to think TD Jokes speaks to African-American liberals.
But hey, you looked in the paper, you saw a Black man and thought, "I'll write about this!"
Didn't matter that he's got nothing to say to the left. Doesn't matter what he preaches because us Blacks just love our preachers, right?
The net's racist as hell and that's what we're not supposed to talk about.
Ron of Why Are We Back In Iraq? links to Betty and links to me. He could play it safe and avoid that. I'll give him praise for linking to us. I don't know that I see a lot of other people offering support to emerging voices of color.
I don't see a lot of people offering any support to any emerging voices regardless of color or gender.
I see a lot of gas bags. If they'd had the internet 40 years ago, I bet Cokie Roberts would be blogging. She'd probably be starting some pac or some circle to promote other people like herself (white) and probably not many women on that list because she wants to be the token.
She's probably offer "sage" advice like "Don't use Blogspot!"
And she'd work talking points from the Democratic Party into every entry because she'd really, really want to be a player.
That's pretty much what the net is today.
Instead of a day of everyone "reflecting" on race and racism, how about a day where everyone found a voice that they'd never highlighted before and provided a link?
Especially to people of color?
Because the reality of racism is that it takes root in ignorance.
You don't know me, I don't know you. Easiest thing in the world to do is to reduce an issue to our skin colors.
When we get to know each other, we can see beyond stereotypes and we can start to relate as people.
This African-American man doesn't need a web day of essays on race and racism. Most people won't have the bravery to do what Rebecca did which was to be honest. Most people won't have the brains to do what Mike did which is bring on a person of another color, Betty, and actually have a conversation while they write. (That's not meant as an insult to Wally. His site is "jots." If you asked him if he wrote about race today he'd tell you he "jotted." A lot of other people will kid themselves. Kat's thinking up something, trying to, about music. I thought she had some good ideas when we were discussing what we were going to blog on. But I told her, "Kat, if it doesn't come, don't worry about it. You link to women, you linke to people of color, you link to straight and gay. You don't need a day to talk about inclusion because you practice it.")
I don't really see this as anything for African-Americans. I see it as a way for Whites not to feel guilty.
Not all Whites.
But it reminds me of Black History Month. I didn't see that get much attention elsewhere. C.I. spot lighted it each day at The Common Ills and whenever Gina and Krista interview an African-American for their round-robin, they always point that out. It's a plate set at the table. It says, "You are welcome here."
I don't know that one day of essays around the net says much of anything.
I'm not ragging on Leah. I think it's great that she and the guy (I think his name is Chris) wanted to get something started. But my problem is these things tend to be a once a year thing.
And then six months from now, you end up with a Blogger pointing back to it and saying, "See, I'm not racist."
My guess is Leah wouldn't do that. She's a woman. She knows the score which is that she has to write something ten times better than any man (White) just to get a little attention for it.
Tomorrow, some (White) man could blog on a new found bullet that hit JFK and Leah could post the true events of what happened. Leah wouldn't be spotlighted all over the net. Air America wouldn't have her on as a guest.
So when she blogs, it's because something has happened that she wants to comment on. (I'd assume it's the same with all the bloggers at Corrente Wire, but I only know her work and Lambert's.) So I believe she really believes in this and I don't mean to piss all over it.
But for everyone who means it, there are a lot more who don't.
And to me, that's part of the problem.
Someone writing their truth will get the same pat on the back as someone phoning in it just to say, "See, I care about racial issues."
I hope I'm wrong. I hope the excercise starts a really in depth conversation.
In the meantime, the reality is that there is a ceiling and that if you're not in the club, don't look to crack it.
C.I. did a great post yesterday, "Target: the 9th Circuit (The Republican war on the judiciary continues)" and where did you see it? You saw it on BuzzFlash, you saw it at the community sites and that was really it.
That's what I mean when I say Leah has to write something 10 times better than a (White) man just to get any attention for it. I don't know how Leah does it. I don't know how C.I. does it. Unless it's that they've accepted that they're not going to be the most linked on the net.
I assume Leah's built up a following the way C.I. has. Hopefully they are as fiercely loyal as C.I.'s is. But I know The Common Ills, that's my community. And when I see someone "stumble" upon something and I know that it was noted by C.I. days before or that C.I.'s words (usually a joke) are being reassembled and passed off as some blogger's at his site, I know that the net isn't going to be the brave new world Joe Trippie and others claim.
The gatekeepers are already in place. The new Cokie Roberts and Sam Donaldsons. "Cokie Roberts" singular. Apparently that's Wonkette. She's the leading token.
Chris' idea could be huge. If it was, how much you want to bet Leah would be written out of it?
Credit would be given to some male blogger that we've all heard too much about.
I hate to be so negative. I wish I could just tell you about how I first learned of Rosa Parks and act like "It's all good." But that's not reality.
But to end on a positive note, Wally and Mike have pointed out the obvious, C.I. broke through. Not with the gatekeepers (and not with help from them).
So hopefully it's changing. But the change is coming from outside the tight circle and in spite of the tight circle.
The reason C.I.'s turning down interviews is because The Common Ills found an audience. It can happen. But it doesn't happen with help from the gatekeepers, it happens in spite of them.
Hopefully, out there right now there's a blogger of color. I've never heard of him or her because, being of color, they won't get any attention. But hopefully, they are a voice that will break through. If they do, they'll do it the way C.I. did by peer to peer sharing. The way The Common Ills has taken off at colleges (and at the nursing home of Three Cool Old Guys).
To me racism is about closed minds and I just don't see a closed net being able to talk honestly about it. But I wish Leah (and Chris) luck.
corrente
the common ills
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
the daily jot
kats korner
thomas friedman is a great man
So we're all supposed to write about race today. Everyone in the community.
It's a web project and here I thought I was done with homework a long time ago.
I told C.I. that I would be happy to write about it but that I might not have anything anyone wanted to hear. C.I. said, "Even better. Be true to you."
Is this the day where the web purges the guilt for being white-white-white every other day of the year?
Will we see "fab post! hat tip to . . ." nonsense all over the net?
Rebecca wrote something brave. In it she talked about the ways Whites can aid racists.
It was brave, it was Rebecca.
But maybe some White person will write a "moving post" about Rosa Parks and it will gather steam all over the net and we'll once again here how wonderful the net is and how brave.
I don't expect much from it.
I'd love to be wrong but we can't talk about racism online.
We're not supposed to.
We're supposed to look the other way.
Certainly if the net was racist, people of color would be shut out.
Oh wait, we are.
There's a token voice they include on their blog rolls and we're all supposed to be happy about that.
"One of us made it!"
Today is apparently Black day.
Women get ready because you're day will be coming soon.
People of color and women get a day or two each year.
Otherwise it's white-white-white male-male-male.
So today a lot of people will get to feel good about themselves and sleep easy knowing that they did "their part."
Or maybe they'll kid themselves that because they blogged on TD Jakes/TD Jokes they're down with the peeps.
You have to be pretty white to think TD Jokes speaks to African-American liberals.
But hey, you looked in the paper, you saw a Black man and thought, "I'll write about this!"
Didn't matter that he's got nothing to say to the left. Doesn't matter what he preaches because us Blacks just love our preachers, right?
The net's racist as hell and that's what we're not supposed to talk about.
Ron of Why Are We Back In Iraq? links to Betty and links to me. He could play it safe and avoid that. I'll give him praise for linking to us. I don't know that I see a lot of other people offering support to emerging voices of color.
I don't see a lot of people offering any support to any emerging voices regardless of color or gender.
I see a lot of gas bags. If they'd had the internet 40 years ago, I bet Cokie Roberts would be blogging. She'd probably be starting some pac or some circle to promote other people like herself (white) and probably not many women on that list because she wants to be the token.
She's probably offer "sage" advice like "Don't use Blogspot!"
And she'd work talking points from the Democratic Party into every entry because she'd really, really want to be a player.
That's pretty much what the net is today.
Instead of a day of everyone "reflecting" on race and racism, how about a day where everyone found a voice that they'd never highlighted before and provided a link?
Especially to people of color?
Because the reality of racism is that it takes root in ignorance.
You don't know me, I don't know you. Easiest thing in the world to do is to reduce an issue to our skin colors.
When we get to know each other, we can see beyond stereotypes and we can start to relate as people.
This African-American man doesn't need a web day of essays on race and racism. Most people won't have the bravery to do what Rebecca did which was to be honest. Most people won't have the brains to do what Mike did which is bring on a person of another color, Betty, and actually have a conversation while they write. (That's not meant as an insult to Wally. His site is "jots." If you asked him if he wrote about race today he'd tell you he "jotted." A lot of other people will kid themselves. Kat's thinking up something, trying to, about music. I thought she had some good ideas when we were discussing what we were going to blog on. But I told her, "Kat, if it doesn't come, don't worry about it. You link to women, you linke to people of color, you link to straight and gay. You don't need a day to talk about inclusion because you practice it.")
I don't really see this as anything for African-Americans. I see it as a way for Whites not to feel guilty.
Not all Whites.
But it reminds me of Black History Month. I didn't see that get much attention elsewhere. C.I. spot lighted it each day at The Common Ills and whenever Gina and Krista interview an African-American for their round-robin, they always point that out. It's a plate set at the table. It says, "You are welcome here."
I don't know that one day of essays around the net says much of anything.
I'm not ragging on Leah. I think it's great that she and the guy (I think his name is Chris) wanted to get something started. But my problem is these things tend to be a once a year thing.
And then six months from now, you end up with a Blogger pointing back to it and saying, "See, I'm not racist."
My guess is Leah wouldn't do that. She's a woman. She knows the score which is that she has to write something ten times better than any man (White) just to get a little attention for it.
Tomorrow, some (White) man could blog on a new found bullet that hit JFK and Leah could post the true events of what happened. Leah wouldn't be spotlighted all over the net. Air America wouldn't have her on as a guest.
So when she blogs, it's because something has happened that she wants to comment on. (I'd assume it's the same with all the bloggers at Corrente Wire, but I only know her work and Lambert's.) So I believe she really believes in this and I don't mean to piss all over it.
But for everyone who means it, there are a lot more who don't.
And to me, that's part of the problem.
Someone writing their truth will get the same pat on the back as someone phoning in it just to say, "See, I care about racial issues."
I hope I'm wrong. I hope the excercise starts a really in depth conversation.
In the meantime, the reality is that there is a ceiling and that if you're not in the club, don't look to crack it.
C.I. did a great post yesterday, "Target: the 9th Circuit (The Republican war on the judiciary continues)" and where did you see it? You saw it on BuzzFlash, you saw it at the community sites and that was really it.
That's what I mean when I say Leah has to write something 10 times better than a (White) man just to get any attention for it. I don't know how Leah does it. I don't know how C.I. does it. Unless it's that they've accepted that they're not going to be the most linked on the net.
I assume Leah's built up a following the way C.I. has. Hopefully they are as fiercely loyal as C.I.'s is. But I know The Common Ills, that's my community. And when I see someone "stumble" upon something and I know that it was noted by C.I. days before or that C.I.'s words (usually a joke) are being reassembled and passed off as some blogger's at his site, I know that the net isn't going to be the brave new world Joe Trippie and others claim.
The gatekeepers are already in place. The new Cokie Roberts and Sam Donaldsons. "Cokie Roberts" singular. Apparently that's Wonkette. She's the leading token.
Chris' idea could be huge. If it was, how much you want to bet Leah would be written out of it?
Credit would be given to some male blogger that we've all heard too much about.
I hate to be so negative. I wish I could just tell you about how I first learned of Rosa Parks and act like "It's all good." But that's not reality.
But to end on a positive note, Wally and Mike have pointed out the obvious, C.I. broke through. Not with the gatekeepers (and not with help from them).
So hopefully it's changing. But the change is coming from outside the tight circle and in spite of the tight circle.
The reason C.I.'s turning down interviews is because The Common Ills found an audience. It can happen. But it doesn't happen with help from the gatekeepers, it happens in spite of them.
Hopefully, out there right now there's a blogger of color. I've never heard of him or her because, being of color, they won't get any attention. But hopefully, they are a voice that will break through. If they do, they'll do it the way C.I. did by peer to peer sharing. The way The Common Ills has taken off at colleges (and at the nursing home of Three Cool Old Guys).
To me racism is about closed minds and I just don't see a closed net being able to talk honestly about it. But I wish Leah (and Chris) luck.
corrente
the common ills
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
the daily jot
kats korner
thomas friedman is a great man
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Book discussion
I want to share this from The Third Estate Sunday Review. "Five Books, Five Minutes" is the feature and I'm going to include a section of it here. I think it's worth discussing and thinking about. Read the whole feature because there's a lot to in there. The people who took part were:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and Jim, Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Betty Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review, Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills), Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz and Wally of The Daily Jot.
Here's the excerpt:
Jim: Okay, so we'll move on. We have a book dealing with the media, but I found Cedric's pick to be interesting and I think we can shake things up by selecting it next.
Cedric: I was at the library looking for a book we did last time and saw Time On Two Crosses: The Collected Writings of Bayard Rustin which is edited by Devon W. Carbado and Donald Weise. I didn't know anything about Rustin which is always something we look for when picking out books, going with something other than what's on the top ten list this week. What I learned was that Rustin was part of the civil rights movement, a big part of it, in fact. "Time on Two Crosses" refers to the fact that Rustin was both African-American and gay.
Betty: And so he's got two crosses to bear at a time when Blacks aren't recognized as equals and when gays and lesbians seem as worthy of less than equal rights.Wally: The book included his debate with Malcolm X.
Rebecca: Right, it's not just a collection of writings, but also includes interviews and in that case, a transcription.
C.I.: I'm staying silent for this discussion due to having eaten up so much time being the "defender of TV" before. But it needs to be noted that the discussion was done for WBAI radio which is a Pacifica Radio station.
Mike: I didn't know that.
Elaine: So let me do the plug C.I. wants to do but is biting the tongue on. If you saw the coverage of Rosa Parks on Democracy Now! or heard it on Pacifica stations, you realize that their archives are very rich. That's due to things like airing this discussion between two leaders that the mainstream media wasn't interested in.
Ava: Because years from now when someone like Medea Benjamin or Arundhati Roy or Tariq Ali or anyone like that passes away, a tribute's going to be hard for the mainstream media to put together. They'll have plenty of clips of Tim Russert speaking to John McCain yet again. But people who are truly leaders, not "powerful" because they were elected, are not covered. You saw that with Rosa Park's passing. Mainstream media working overtime to get some sort of tribute together for a woman that they were largely uninterested in hearing from.
Kat: In fact, Amy Goodman issued a challenge or made an offer during their coverage of Rosa Parks on Democracy Now!
Cedric: Right. I think she noted that they were airing excerpts from a Pacifica interview done in the fifties, shortly after Ms. Parks had sparked a movement, and Amy Goodman noted that you wouldn't see footage like that on TV and offered that if any networks wanted to use it for a tribute, they'd allow them to, this wasn't an open offer this was for that time period, free of charge, but it was doubtful anyone would take them up on it. And to the best of my knowledge, no one did.
C.I.: Jumping in again. Dallas can't find the link. Rebecca, do you know what we're talking about?
Rebecca: I know the interview, but not the offer. Maybe I was running to the kitchen for another cup of coffee that morning?
C.I.: The people who've cited that, and I remember it too, listen to the show. The Rosa Parks coverage occurred during the tail end of Pacifica's pledge drive. Something could have been left out of the transcript but Dallas found the link to the interview and I'm thinking that, if the transcript didn't leave something out, this was actually an offer/challenge Amy Goodman made outside of the Democracy Now! broadcast. I know she mentioned it after Democracy Now! the day after the interview had aired. Kat, Cedric and Ava listen. Rebecca watches Democracy Now! on TV. I think, and I could be wrong, you had to be listening to Pacifica during that [pledge drive] to have heard it. She may have made it during Democracy Now!'s airing but if so, it was in what would be the musical breaks between segments if you weren't listening via a Pacifica station.
Cedric: One thing that puzzled me was why the host of the discussion between Malcolm X and Rustin wasn't identified except as "HOST"? I'm also wondering who you found yourself siding with in the discussion?
Jess: For me, it was Malcolm. I know his writing and his story, so I may have been filling in details that I wasn't able to with Rustin but I got the impression that Rustin grew more cautious with age.
Betty: I'd agree with that except for the issue of sexuality. That reads cautious today but for the time period, that is a big deal. And I'll add that he was known within the civil rights movment as gay and, in fact, within the nation since an arrest was used by a White senator to force Rustin out of the movement. But in terms of discussing his sexuality publicly, that's in the eighties. And it was a big deal.
Cedric: And you can say it still is a big deal because Rustin is one of the civil rights pioneer, very essential to the movement, and he's not someone that is stressed when you hear of the civil rights movement.
Betty: I'd agree with that. I'd add that it's part of our community's, I'm speaking of the Black community and directing the "our" to Cedric, refusal or reluctance to address the issue of sexuality and orientation. I think it's embarrassing. Of course some do address it. But we've allowed it to be a something that can turn against each other. Bully Boy's been able to use it with some Black churches, sexual orientation, to turn them against their own interests. In my church we had to deal with it, we had too many members and families of members who were dealing with AIDS. It's one of the healthiest things we've done. With the empahis on family in the Black community, I look skeptical at any Black person that tells me they've never met a gay or lesbian. They are in our families, they are in our churches and it distresses that a White Bully Boy has been allowed by some "Black leaders" to turn us against each other. There's some idiot. and I use that term by choice, Cedric's also heard him, his "sermons" get passed around in e-mails. And for someone so supposedly opposed to gays and lesbians, he sure knows a lot about gay sex and he sure seems to enjoy talking about it in terms that I can't imagine sex being talked about in my church.
Cedric: Yeah, that guy is an idiot. And every month or so, it'll pop up in an e-mail forward to someone in the office and they'll be giggling at it. They say, if you ask them, they're laughing at how stupid he is. Well that doesn't help the race either, flaunting ignorance. I really do not have respect for people who pass that around, either out of their own beliefs or to giggle over.
Ty: And this goes to what erases Rustin for history and how a race whose leaders want to fuss and fret over language don't want to address serious issues. I mean, where is Bill Cosby on this issue? Where his speech on the need for us to embrace one another?
Betty: Exactly, you can list the leaders who've addressed this topic in any form and it's a small list. Coretta Scott King and Julian Bond would be on the list but a lot of other so-called "brave" voices wouldn't be. I like Jesse Jackson but I don't respect his opinions on this issue.
Rebecca: Which is interesting that you cite him when Rustin cites him as one of the people working to turn MLK against him.
Ty: And it's forty years later and he still hasn't changed his tune.Cedric: I don't know if Dona wants to call time or not, I know we've got Betty's pick still to do.
Dona: No, this has been an interesting discussion and we can extend. We actually have two more books.
Cedric: Well I'll make my comment and try to be brief about it. Some African-Americans are offended when sexual orientation is likened to race. And it's not just that. You heard some nonsense about "Cindy Sheehan is no Rosa Parks!" As though allowing someone else to build on a very powerful movement will erase Ms. Parks. It won't. It will only extend her reach and future generations' knowlege of her. I hear, everyone hears, modern day comparisons to George Washington or Thomas Jefferson or whomever. They become points of reference. I can understand the fear here because any minority group risks being stripped of whatever place in history they've earned. But while realizing that, we should realize that part of what makes Whites such a point of history, besides who got to draw it up, is that it is a short hand. Most people couldn't tell you where Thomas Jefferson was born. But they can use him as a point of reference. When the civil rights movement is used as a point of reference, I think it extends the movement, keeps it alive in history and increases knowledge. Otherwise it's going to be confined to one time, one period, one group and it will be ghetto-ized in terms of how history is taught. I'm thrilled that we have our African-American heroes but I want to see them be heroes for all. They fought as hard as anyone else and they are a part of American history. I was thrilled to hear some people calling Cindy Sheehan the Rosa Parks of the peace movement. I see it as a huge improvement over years of someone being "the Black __" who ever. We have heroic figures and their struggles are heroic. If they inspire people that's a great thing, regardless of race. The point of teaching Black History is to get it back into our understanding of history. It's a part of American history and hopefully it will be worked into American history more and more with each generation. I'm done.
Ty: I'll add that I agree with Cedric. I've attended predominately African-American schools and predominatley White ones. And I've seen a "Oh, it's Black history" type collective groan at some of the White schools. In standing up for her race, Rosa Parks stood up for a better nation.I didn't always hear that point in made in school.
the common ills
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
like maria said paz
the third estate sunday review
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
the daily jot
kats korner
thomas friedman is a great man
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and Jim, Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Betty Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review, Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills), Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz and Wally of The Daily Jot.
Here's the excerpt:
Jim: Okay, so we'll move on. We have a book dealing with the media, but I found Cedric's pick to be interesting and I think we can shake things up by selecting it next.
Cedric: I was at the library looking for a book we did last time and saw Time On Two Crosses: The Collected Writings of Bayard Rustin which is edited by Devon W. Carbado and Donald Weise. I didn't know anything about Rustin which is always something we look for when picking out books, going with something other than what's on the top ten list this week. What I learned was that Rustin was part of the civil rights movement, a big part of it, in fact. "Time on Two Crosses" refers to the fact that Rustin was both African-American and gay.
Betty: And so he's got two crosses to bear at a time when Blacks aren't recognized as equals and when gays and lesbians seem as worthy of less than equal rights.Wally: The book included his debate with Malcolm X.
Rebecca: Right, it's not just a collection of writings, but also includes interviews and in that case, a transcription.
C.I.: I'm staying silent for this discussion due to having eaten up so much time being the "defender of TV" before. But it needs to be noted that the discussion was done for WBAI radio which is a Pacifica Radio station.
Mike: I didn't know that.
Elaine: So let me do the plug C.I. wants to do but is biting the tongue on. If you saw the coverage of Rosa Parks on Democracy Now! or heard it on Pacifica stations, you realize that their archives are very rich. That's due to things like airing this discussion between two leaders that the mainstream media wasn't interested in.
Ava: Because years from now when someone like Medea Benjamin or Arundhati Roy or Tariq Ali or anyone like that passes away, a tribute's going to be hard for the mainstream media to put together. They'll have plenty of clips of Tim Russert speaking to John McCain yet again. But people who are truly leaders, not "powerful" because they were elected, are not covered. You saw that with Rosa Park's passing. Mainstream media working overtime to get some sort of tribute together for a woman that they were largely uninterested in hearing from.
Kat: In fact, Amy Goodman issued a challenge or made an offer during their coverage of Rosa Parks on Democracy Now!
Cedric: Right. I think she noted that they were airing excerpts from a Pacifica interview done in the fifties, shortly after Ms. Parks had sparked a movement, and Amy Goodman noted that you wouldn't see footage like that on TV and offered that if any networks wanted to use it for a tribute, they'd allow them to, this wasn't an open offer this was for that time period, free of charge, but it was doubtful anyone would take them up on it. And to the best of my knowledge, no one did.
C.I.: Jumping in again. Dallas can't find the link. Rebecca, do you know what we're talking about?
Rebecca: I know the interview, but not the offer. Maybe I was running to the kitchen for another cup of coffee that morning?
C.I.: The people who've cited that, and I remember it too, listen to the show. The Rosa Parks coverage occurred during the tail end of Pacifica's pledge drive. Something could have been left out of the transcript but Dallas found the link to the interview and I'm thinking that, if the transcript didn't leave something out, this was actually an offer/challenge Amy Goodman made outside of the Democracy Now! broadcast. I know she mentioned it after Democracy Now! the day after the interview had aired. Kat, Cedric and Ava listen. Rebecca watches Democracy Now! on TV. I think, and I could be wrong, you had to be listening to Pacifica during that [pledge drive] to have heard it. She may have made it during Democracy Now!'s airing but if so, it was in what would be the musical breaks between segments if you weren't listening via a Pacifica station.
Cedric: One thing that puzzled me was why the host of the discussion between Malcolm X and Rustin wasn't identified except as "HOST"? I'm also wondering who you found yourself siding with in the discussion?
Jess: For me, it was Malcolm. I know his writing and his story, so I may have been filling in details that I wasn't able to with Rustin but I got the impression that Rustin grew more cautious with age.
Betty: I'd agree with that except for the issue of sexuality. That reads cautious today but for the time period, that is a big deal. And I'll add that he was known within the civil rights movment as gay and, in fact, within the nation since an arrest was used by a White senator to force Rustin out of the movement. But in terms of discussing his sexuality publicly, that's in the eighties. And it was a big deal.
Cedric: And you can say it still is a big deal because Rustin is one of the civil rights pioneer, very essential to the movement, and he's not someone that is stressed when you hear of the civil rights movement.
Betty: I'd agree with that. I'd add that it's part of our community's, I'm speaking of the Black community and directing the "our" to Cedric, refusal or reluctance to address the issue of sexuality and orientation. I think it's embarrassing. Of course some do address it. But we've allowed it to be a something that can turn against each other. Bully Boy's been able to use it with some Black churches, sexual orientation, to turn them against their own interests. In my church we had to deal with it, we had too many members and families of members who were dealing with AIDS. It's one of the healthiest things we've done. With the empahis on family in the Black community, I look skeptical at any Black person that tells me they've never met a gay or lesbian. They are in our families, they are in our churches and it distresses that a White Bully Boy has been allowed by some "Black leaders" to turn us against each other. There's some idiot. and I use that term by choice, Cedric's also heard him, his "sermons" get passed around in e-mails. And for someone so supposedly opposed to gays and lesbians, he sure knows a lot about gay sex and he sure seems to enjoy talking about it in terms that I can't imagine sex being talked about in my church.
Cedric: Yeah, that guy is an idiot. And every month or so, it'll pop up in an e-mail forward to someone in the office and they'll be giggling at it. They say, if you ask them, they're laughing at how stupid he is. Well that doesn't help the race either, flaunting ignorance. I really do not have respect for people who pass that around, either out of their own beliefs or to giggle over.
Ty: And this goes to what erases Rustin for history and how a race whose leaders want to fuss and fret over language don't want to address serious issues. I mean, where is Bill Cosby on this issue? Where his speech on the need for us to embrace one another?
Betty: Exactly, you can list the leaders who've addressed this topic in any form and it's a small list. Coretta Scott King and Julian Bond would be on the list but a lot of other so-called "brave" voices wouldn't be. I like Jesse Jackson but I don't respect his opinions on this issue.
Rebecca: Which is interesting that you cite him when Rustin cites him as one of the people working to turn MLK against him.
Ty: And it's forty years later and he still hasn't changed his tune.Cedric: I don't know if Dona wants to call time or not, I know we've got Betty's pick still to do.
Dona: No, this has been an interesting discussion and we can extend. We actually have two more books.
Cedric: Well I'll make my comment and try to be brief about it. Some African-Americans are offended when sexual orientation is likened to race. And it's not just that. You heard some nonsense about "Cindy Sheehan is no Rosa Parks!" As though allowing someone else to build on a very powerful movement will erase Ms. Parks. It won't. It will only extend her reach and future generations' knowlege of her. I hear, everyone hears, modern day comparisons to George Washington or Thomas Jefferson or whomever. They become points of reference. I can understand the fear here because any minority group risks being stripped of whatever place in history they've earned. But while realizing that, we should realize that part of what makes Whites such a point of history, besides who got to draw it up, is that it is a short hand. Most people couldn't tell you where Thomas Jefferson was born. But they can use him as a point of reference. When the civil rights movement is used as a point of reference, I think it extends the movement, keeps it alive in history and increases knowledge. Otherwise it's going to be confined to one time, one period, one group and it will be ghetto-ized in terms of how history is taught. I'm thrilled that we have our African-American heroes but I want to see them be heroes for all. They fought as hard as anyone else and they are a part of American history. I was thrilled to hear some people calling Cindy Sheehan the Rosa Parks of the peace movement. I see it as a huge improvement over years of someone being "the Black __" who ever. We have heroic figures and their struggles are heroic. If they inspire people that's a great thing, regardless of race. The point of teaching Black History is to get it back into our understanding of history. It's a part of American history and hopefully it will be worked into American history more and more with each generation. I'm done.
Ty: I'll add that I agree with Cedric. I've attended predominately African-American schools and predominatley White ones. And I've seen a "Oh, it's Black history" type collective groan at some of the White schools. In standing up for her race, Rosa Parks stood up for a better nation.I didn't always hear that point in made in school.
the common ills
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
like maria said paz
the third estate sunday review
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
the daily jot
kats korner
thomas friedman is a great man
Friday, November 25, 2005
12 Headlines
We've composed the following twelve headlines dealing with Iraq, peace, global warming, reproductive rights,Bob Woodward, Judith Miller, prisons, the Patriot Act, the media, fatalities and other topics.
1) From Dahr Jamail's MidEast Wire (Iraq Dispatches):
Monday in Iraq, US troops fired on a car in Ba'qubah, killing five, two adults and three children. The US military states that they feared the car "booby-trapped." The family had been returning from visiting relatives when a US convoy approached. The car was fired on from the front and the back. One Iraqi was quoted as saying, "The ones who brought in the Americans are at fault. Those who support them are at fault. All of them are at fault. Look at these. They are all children. All of them of are children. They killed them. They killed my entire family."
2) In the United States the Associated Press reports that Cindy Sheehan returned to Crawford, Texas Thursday and joined what some estimates say were 100 protestors and other estimates say as many as 200.Cindy Sheehan stated, "I feel happy to be back here with all my friends ... but I'm heartbroken that we have to be here again," said Sheehan, who hoped to arrive earlier in the week, but was delayed by a family emergency. "We will keep pressing and we won't give up until our troops are brought home."
3) Since Sheehan and others last gathered at Camp Casey I and Camp Casey II, laws have been passed to prevent further gatherings in Crawford -- "local bans on roadside camping and parking." As protestors returned this week, they were advised they could be arrested. Among those arrested Wednesday were Daniel Ellsberg and US diplomat Ann Wright. Democratic Underground has a report from Carl who was also arrested Wendesday. Carl reports that "The entire [arrest & booking] process took 3.5 hours." Carl advises that the vigils will also take place on Christmas and New Year's Eve as well as that "Donations to the Crawford Veterans For Peace can be mailed to P. O. Box 252, Crawford, Texas, 76638-9998."
4) As the participation of psychologists and psychiatrists in the "BISQUIT" program and other 'interrogation' work raises ethical and professional questions today, CounterPunch is reporting that in WWII, United States anthropologists participated with the Office of Strategic Services in attempts to determine means to destroy the Japanese. David Price reports, in what is a clear betrayal of the profession, anthropologists were instructed "to try to conceive ways that any detectable differences could be used in the development of weapons, but they were cautioned to consider this issue 'in a-moral and non-ethical terms'." Price notes "Ralph Linton and Harry Shapiro, objected to even considering the OSS' request but they were the exceptions."
5) In legal news, as the prison industry has switched to a profit making business, prisoners have found themselves located far from relatives. The distance has proved profitable for long distance companies. The Center for Constitutional Rights argued in court Monday on behalf of "New York family members who pay a grossly inflated rate to receive a phone call from their loved ones in state prisons." CCR notes:
The lawsuit, Walton v. NYSDOCS and MCI, seeks an order prohibiting the State and MCI from charging exorbitant rates to the family members of prisoners to finance a 57.5% kickback to the State. MCI charges these family members a 630% markup over regular consumer rates to receive a collect call from their loved ones, the only way possible to speak with them. Judge George Ceresia of the Supreme Court of New York, Albany County, dismissed the suit last fall, citing issues of timeliness.
6) In other legal news, Cynthia L. Cooper reports for Women's enews that November 30th the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. At issue in this case, is whether or not bans on reproductive freedom enacted by state legislatures must take effect before they can be legally challenged or whether they can be challenged as soon as they are passed. The standard up to now has been that laws can be challenged as soon as they are passed. Cooper notes:
By changing the legal standard for when an abortion restriction can be challenged in court, anti-abortion laws could quickly entangle women across the country, without directly overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court case that held that states could not criminalize abortion in all circumstances.
7) The Guardian of London reports on a Rutgers University study that has found "[g]lobal warming is doubling the rate of sea level rise around the world, but attempts to stop it by cutting back on greenhouse gas emissions are likely to be futile." Professor Kenneth Miller tells The Guardian's Ashraf Khalil, "This is going to cause more beach erosion. Beaches are going to move back and houses will be destroyed." This comes as the Climate Conference is gearing up to take place in Montreal from November 28th to December 9th. United for Peace and Justiceis issuing a call for action:
This fall let's mobilize a nationwide, grassroots education and action campaign leading up to mass demonstrations in Montreal and throughout the U.S. on Saturday, December 3rd. Help gather signatures for the Peoples Ratification of the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty (http://www.unitedforpeace.org/www.kyotoandbeyond.org), which will be presented in Montreal. Join Climate Crisis: USA Join the World! (http://www.unitedforpeace.org/www.climatecrisis.us) as we call for:
USA Join the World by Ratifying the Kyoto Protocol
Support and Export Clean, Safe, Non-Nuclear Energy Alternatives
End Government Subsidies for Oil and Coal Corporations
Dramatically Strengthen Energy Conservation and Fuel Efficiency Standards
A Just Transition for Workers, Indigenous and Other Communities Affected by a Change to Clean Energy
Defend the World's Forests; Support Community-Run Tree Planting Campaigns
8) With Congress out of session due to the holidays, a number of organizations are attempting to inform the public of pending legislation. The Bill of Rights Defense Center warns to "[e]xpect a vote [on the renewal of the Patriot Act]after Congress returns on December 12th." Of the bill, Lisa Graves of the ACLU states:
The Patriot Act was bad in 2001, and despite bipartisan calls for reform, it's still bad in 2005. Instead of addressing the real concerns that millions of Americans have about the Patriot Act, the Republican majority in Congress buckled to White House pressure, stripping the bill of modest yet meaningful reforms. Congress must reject this bill.
Both the ACLU and the Bill of Rights of Defense Center are calling for grass roots action.
Also asking for action is NOW. Congress failed to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act.You can make your voice heard via NOW's take action page. On their page, you have the option of e-mailing your representatives and/or signing a petition that NOW will present to Congress on December 5th.
9) Meanwhile, as November winds down, American military fatalities have reached 76 for the month, with the Department of Defense reporting 50 Americans wounded thus far this month. The total number of American military killed in Iraq, official count, has reached 2105. Scripps Howard News Service reports that, "U.S. commanders on the ground have already launched plans to close bases and withdraw troops in the coming year, according to two congressmen who returned from Iraq this week." The two congress members are John Kline and Mark Kennedy (Republicans, Minn.).
10) In other Congressional news, Ari Berman reports for The Nation that John McCain is in the midst of makeover. Meeting with The Arizona Republican Assembly in August, McCain slapped some new war paint on as McCain supported the teaching of so-called "intelligent design" side by side with evolution, the state's "ban on gay marriage that denies government benefits to any unmarried couple," hailed Ronald Reagan as "my hero" and was observed "strenuously defending . . . Bush's Iraq policy."
For those who have forgotten, McCain attended Mark Bingham's funeral. Bingham was one of the passengers of Flight 93 on 9/11 in immediate media reports. As the days wore on, Bingham appeared to disappear from many reports. Mark Bingham was gay. Whether that resulted in a "downgrading" by some in the media has been a source of speculation for some time.
11) Focusing on the media, at The Black Commentator, Margaret Kimberly addresses the issue of Bob Woodward, tying him and his editor to the journalistic behaviors of Judith Miller and her editors:
Miller, Sulzberger, Woodward and Bradlee are at the top of the corporate media food chain, and their behavior tells us why Americans aren't being told anything they ought to be told. Woodward uses his access to make a fortune writing about the Supreme Court or various presidential administrations. If a journalist's priority is writing best selling books based on the amount of access gained with the powerful, then truth telling goes out the window.
12) Also addressing the very similar behaviors of Miller and Woodward are Steven C. Day at Pop Politics, Ron Brynaert at Why Are We Back In Iraq?, and Arianna Huffington at The Huffington Post. Though still vocal on Judith Miller and weighing in with the "latest," CJR Daily still can't find a connection between the "journalistic" styles of Judith Miller and Bob Woodward. In their most recent 'Judy report', CJR Daily ponders the question of why did Miller go to jail when Scooter Libby and his people maintain that they released her from confidentiality claims. Covering old news and working themselves into another lather over Miller, CJR Daily wonders"Why did Ms. Miller go to jail?" and maintains the question "has never been fully answered." The question has indeed been answered.
Whether CJR Daily approves of or believes the argument of Miller, Floyd Abrams, et al, is beside the point. For the record, the answer has been given many times. The argument was that Miller needed more than a form signed possibly under duress. Abrams and others have long been on the record explaining that they sought a release other than the form. In the front page report, Sunday October 16, 2005, Don Van Natta Jr., Adam Liptak and Clifford J. Levy reported:
She said she began thinking about whether she should reach out to Mr. Libby for "a personal, voluntary waiver."
[. . .]
While she mulled over over her options, Mr. Bennett was urging her to allow him to approach Mr. Tate, Mr. Libby's lawyer, to try to negotiate a deal that would get her out of jail. Mr. Bennet wanted to revive the question of the waivers that Mr. Libby and other administration officials signed the previous year authorizing reporters to disclose their confidential discussions.
The other reporters subpoenaed in the case said such waivers were coerced. They said administration officials signed them only because they feared retribution from the prosecutor or the White House. Reporters for at least three news organizations had then gone back to their sources and obtained additional assurances thatconvinced them the waivers were genunie.But Ms. Miller said she had not gotten an assurance that she felt would allow her to testify.
Again, from the front page New York Times story on . . . October 16, 2005. Though this was not the first reporting on Miller's position, this front page story of the Times was commented in great detail including at CJR Daily here and here. The latter time by the same writer who now wonders "Why did Ms. Miller go to jail?" Repeatedly hitting the designated pinata with articles focusing on her conduct while reducing the conduct of Bob Woodward to asides (whispered asides?) doesn't appear to make for brave "watchdoggery."
Democracy Now! has a special presentation today. The headlines above were composed by The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and Jim, Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review, Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills), Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz, Betty Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, Wally of The Daily Jot and Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix. Thanks to Dallas for his help with links and tags. The above will be reposted at The Third Estate Sunday Review and may also be reposted at the sites of members participating.
1) From Dahr Jamail's MidEast Wire (Iraq Dispatches):
Monday in Iraq, US troops fired on a car in Ba'qubah, killing five, two adults and three children. The US military states that they feared the car "booby-trapped." The family had been returning from visiting relatives when a US convoy approached. The car was fired on from the front and the back. One Iraqi was quoted as saying, "The ones who brought in the Americans are at fault. Those who support them are at fault. All of them are at fault. Look at these. They are all children. All of them of are children. They killed them. They killed my entire family."
2) In the United States the Associated Press reports that Cindy Sheehan returned to Crawford, Texas Thursday and joined what some estimates say were 100 protestors and other estimates say as many as 200.Cindy Sheehan stated, "I feel happy to be back here with all my friends ... but I'm heartbroken that we have to be here again," said Sheehan, who hoped to arrive earlier in the week, but was delayed by a family emergency. "We will keep pressing and we won't give up until our troops are brought home."
3) Since Sheehan and others last gathered at Camp Casey I and Camp Casey II, laws have been passed to prevent further gatherings in Crawford -- "local bans on roadside camping and parking." As protestors returned this week, they were advised they could be arrested. Among those arrested Wednesday were Daniel Ellsberg and US diplomat Ann Wright. Democratic Underground has a report from Carl who was also arrested Wendesday. Carl reports that "The entire [arrest & booking] process took 3.5 hours." Carl advises that the vigils will also take place on Christmas and New Year's Eve as well as that "Donations to the Crawford Veterans For Peace can be mailed to P. O. Box 252, Crawford, Texas, 76638-9998."
4) As the participation of psychologists and psychiatrists in the "BISQUIT" program and other 'interrogation' work raises ethical and professional questions today, CounterPunch is reporting that in WWII, United States anthropologists participated with the Office of Strategic Services in attempts to determine means to destroy the Japanese. David Price reports, in what is a clear betrayal of the profession, anthropologists were instructed "to try to conceive ways that any detectable differences could be used in the development of weapons, but they were cautioned to consider this issue 'in a-moral and non-ethical terms'." Price notes "Ralph Linton and Harry Shapiro, objected to even considering the OSS' request but they were the exceptions."
5) In legal news, as the prison industry has switched to a profit making business, prisoners have found themselves located far from relatives. The distance has proved profitable for long distance companies. The Center for Constitutional Rights argued in court Monday on behalf of "New York family members who pay a grossly inflated rate to receive a phone call from their loved ones in state prisons." CCR notes:
The lawsuit, Walton v. NYSDOCS and MCI, seeks an order prohibiting the State and MCI from charging exorbitant rates to the family members of prisoners to finance a 57.5% kickback to the State. MCI charges these family members a 630% markup over regular consumer rates to receive a collect call from their loved ones, the only way possible to speak with them. Judge George Ceresia of the Supreme Court of New York, Albany County, dismissed the suit last fall, citing issues of timeliness.
6) In other legal news, Cynthia L. Cooper reports for Women's enews that November 30th the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. At issue in this case, is whether or not bans on reproductive freedom enacted by state legislatures must take effect before they can be legally challenged or whether they can be challenged as soon as they are passed. The standard up to now has been that laws can be challenged as soon as they are passed. Cooper notes:
By changing the legal standard for when an abortion restriction can be challenged in court, anti-abortion laws could quickly entangle women across the country, without directly overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court case that held that states could not criminalize abortion in all circumstances.
7) The Guardian of London reports on a Rutgers University study that has found "[g]lobal warming is doubling the rate of sea level rise around the world, but attempts to stop it by cutting back on greenhouse gas emissions are likely to be futile." Professor Kenneth Miller tells The Guardian's Ashraf Khalil, "This is going to cause more beach erosion. Beaches are going to move back and houses will be destroyed." This comes as the Climate Conference is gearing up to take place in Montreal from November 28th to December 9th. United for Peace and Justiceis issuing a call for action:
This fall let's mobilize a nationwide, grassroots education and action campaign leading up to mass demonstrations in Montreal and throughout the U.S. on Saturday, December 3rd. Help gather signatures for the Peoples Ratification of the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty (http://www.unitedforpeace.org/www.kyotoandbeyond.org), which will be presented in Montreal. Join Climate Crisis: USA Join the World! (http://www.unitedforpeace.org/www.climatecrisis.us) as we call for:
USA Join the World by Ratifying the Kyoto Protocol
Support and Export Clean, Safe, Non-Nuclear Energy Alternatives
End Government Subsidies for Oil and Coal Corporations
Dramatically Strengthen Energy Conservation and Fuel Efficiency Standards
A Just Transition for Workers, Indigenous and Other Communities Affected by a Change to Clean Energy
Defend the World's Forests; Support Community-Run Tree Planting Campaigns
8) With Congress out of session due to the holidays, a number of organizations are attempting to inform the public of pending legislation. The Bill of Rights Defense Center warns to "[e]xpect a vote [on the renewal of the Patriot Act]after Congress returns on December 12th." Of the bill, Lisa Graves of the ACLU states:
The Patriot Act was bad in 2001, and despite bipartisan calls for reform, it's still bad in 2005. Instead of addressing the real concerns that millions of Americans have about the Patriot Act, the Republican majority in Congress buckled to White House pressure, stripping the bill of modest yet meaningful reforms. Congress must reject this bill.
Both the ACLU and the Bill of Rights of Defense Center are calling for grass roots action.
Also asking for action is NOW. Congress failed to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act.You can make your voice heard via NOW's take action page. On their page, you have the option of e-mailing your representatives and/or signing a petition that NOW will present to Congress on December 5th.
9) Meanwhile, as November winds down, American military fatalities have reached 76 for the month, with the Department of Defense reporting 50 Americans wounded thus far this month. The total number of American military killed in Iraq, official count, has reached 2105. Scripps Howard News Service reports that, "U.S. commanders on the ground have already launched plans to close bases and withdraw troops in the coming year, according to two congressmen who returned from Iraq this week." The two congress members are John Kline and Mark Kennedy (Republicans, Minn.).
10) In other Congressional news, Ari Berman reports for The Nation that John McCain is in the midst of makeover. Meeting with The Arizona Republican Assembly in August, McCain slapped some new war paint on as McCain supported the teaching of so-called "intelligent design" side by side with evolution, the state's "ban on gay marriage that denies government benefits to any unmarried couple," hailed Ronald Reagan as "my hero" and was observed "strenuously defending . . . Bush's Iraq policy."
For those who have forgotten, McCain attended Mark Bingham's funeral. Bingham was one of the passengers of Flight 93 on 9/11 in immediate media reports. As the days wore on, Bingham appeared to disappear from many reports. Mark Bingham was gay. Whether that resulted in a "downgrading" by some in the media has been a source of speculation for some time.
11) Focusing on the media, at The Black Commentator, Margaret Kimberly addresses the issue of Bob Woodward, tying him and his editor to the journalistic behaviors of Judith Miller and her editors:
Miller, Sulzberger, Woodward and Bradlee are at the top of the corporate media food chain, and their behavior tells us why Americans aren't being told anything they ought to be told. Woodward uses his access to make a fortune writing about the Supreme Court or various presidential administrations. If a journalist's priority is writing best selling books based on the amount of access gained with the powerful, then truth telling goes out the window.
12) Also addressing the very similar behaviors of Miller and Woodward are Steven C. Day at Pop Politics, Ron Brynaert at Why Are We Back In Iraq?, and Arianna Huffington at The Huffington Post. Though still vocal on Judith Miller and weighing in with the "latest," CJR Daily still can't find a connection between the "journalistic" styles of Judith Miller and Bob Woodward. In their most recent 'Judy report', CJR Daily ponders the question of why did Miller go to jail when Scooter Libby and his people maintain that they released her from confidentiality claims. Covering old news and working themselves into another lather over Miller, CJR Daily wonders"Why did Ms. Miller go to jail?" and maintains the question "has never been fully answered." The question has indeed been answered.
Whether CJR Daily approves of or believes the argument of Miller, Floyd Abrams, et al, is beside the point. For the record, the answer has been given many times. The argument was that Miller needed more than a form signed possibly under duress. Abrams and others have long been on the record explaining that they sought a release other than the form. In the front page report, Sunday October 16, 2005, Don Van Natta Jr., Adam Liptak and Clifford J. Levy reported:
She said she began thinking about whether she should reach out to Mr. Libby for "a personal, voluntary waiver."
[. . .]
While she mulled over over her options, Mr. Bennett was urging her to allow him to approach Mr. Tate, Mr. Libby's lawyer, to try to negotiate a deal that would get her out of jail. Mr. Bennet wanted to revive the question of the waivers that Mr. Libby and other administration officials signed the previous year authorizing reporters to disclose their confidential discussions.
The other reporters subpoenaed in the case said such waivers were coerced. They said administration officials signed them only because they feared retribution from the prosecutor or the White House. Reporters for at least three news organizations had then gone back to their sources and obtained additional assurances thatconvinced them the waivers were genunie.But Ms. Miller said she had not gotten an assurance that she felt would allow her to testify.
Again, from the front page New York Times story on . . . October 16, 2005. Though this was not the first reporting on Miller's position, this front page story of the Times was commented in great detail including at CJR Daily here and here. The latter time by the same writer who now wonders "Why did Ms. Miller go to jail?" Repeatedly hitting the designated pinata with articles focusing on her conduct while reducing the conduct of Bob Woodward to asides (whispered asides?) doesn't appear to make for brave "watchdoggery."
Democracy Now! has a special presentation today. The headlines above were composed by The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and Jim, Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review, Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills), Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz, Betty Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man, Wally of The Daily Jot and Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix. Thanks to Dallas for his help with links and tags. The above will be reposted at The Third Estate Sunday Review and may also be reposted at the sites of members participating.
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
Happy Thanksgiving
I've been trying to think of something to write about Thanksgiving and not coming up with much beyond the importance of giving thanks.
So I'll say that it's important to be thankful for what we have. Even as bad as things may seem, there is hope. You see a world that's gotten wise to Bully Boy, that's hopeful. You see people becoming active, that's hopeful. And when you look around the dinner table tomorrow, if you're with people, you've got something to be thankful for.
So take a moment to give thanks.
That can be a prayer. But it doesn't have to be. It can be just a reflection to yourself that you've got things to be grateful for.
I'll note something by The Third Estate Sunday Review because I'm just not coming up with anything tonight. Here's "Let's Do The Turkey Trot" which will hopefully capture Thanksgiving better than I can tonight:
"Let's Do The Turkey Trot" is the title of a song recorded by Little Eva (famous for singing the original hit version of "The Locomotion"). We're going with that title because we have an e-mail from a reader who asked to be unnamed but will not be home for Thanksgiving and asked us to write about our favorite Thanksgiving foods.
Betty: Chess pie. There are a ton of things I enjoy, but the holidays always mean chess pie. My mother makes the best one in the world. She's taught me how but, honestly, I'm too lazy to make one. Even if I cut corners and used ready made pie crust, I still wouldn't have the time or energy. But at Thanksgiving I have the time and energy to grab as many slices as I can. She makes one pumpkin pie but she makes several chess pies because we all love that pie. It wouldn't be a Thanksgiving in my family without my mother's chess pie.
Ava: I'll go with the cranberries. I don't care if it's out of can or if it's cooked. My mother makes a big production out of cooking it from scratch and, to me, it tastes pretty much the same either way. But when I think of Thanksgiving, that's what I think of. I'll usually grab a roll, put a little bit of turkey in it, put a little bit of cranberry sauce in it and that's Thanksgiving. My mother will be saying, "Eat something else" but that's really all I need.
Jess: I'm not sure what to pick. There's a green bean casserole that I really like and there's also a squash dish that my mom makes. The food's always nice but it's really just that we're all around the table together that stands out to me.
Cedric: My favorite thing isn't lunch. Lunch is good and the food's all warm and all that. But my favorite thing is a few hours later. When you're hungry again and you go back in the kitchen and everyone makes their own plate. People are more relaxed then. Usually some weirdo that someone's brought over as their date has left and a beer or two has quieted down one uncle who's always too loud, plus no one's worrying about how their dish tastes because everyone's already sampled it. You make your plate, you head back to the living room and it's just a quieter version of the lunch.
Ty: Mashed potatoes and gravy. My favorite food all year round and at Thanksgiving, there's so much you can have thirds and fourths and there's still plenty left over. It's from real potatoes and not the instant stuff. And the gravy has some of the turkey drippings so it's really good. That's what I'll be thinking about when we all grab our plates and start piling the food on.
Jim: For me the big thing is that my dad and I go out with my grandfather to the trees in his yard and pick up some of the pecans that have fallen off them. We go inside and crack them open, enough for grandma to make a pecan pie for Christmas, but I don't think they last for that because my granddad eats them all the time but that's what he says we're doing it for, and we just crack them open and snack on a few as we go and talk about whatever. That's what really makes it Thanksgiving for me.
Rebecca: I'm going to go with pie, like Betty. My favorite pie is apple pie and my grandmother makes them from scratch. Slices the apples, rolls her own dough, all of that. For years, I was always one of those people saying, "Well, how about colas? I could bring colas. Ice?" Everyone in my family is an outstanding cook. I'm an okay cook, I'm not outstanding. But male or female, everyone in my family, except me, has a dish they can make that's amazing. So, hat tip to C.I., I mentioned this one year as Thanksgiving was approaching and C.I. said, "Rebecca, I'm going to teach you to make a Key Lime pie." I didn't think so. C.I. asked if anyone else brought a Key Lime pie and I said no. So I get told, by C.I., that this is going to be my signature dish and everyone's going to love it, that on holidays when I don't make it, I'll hear, "Rebecca, why didn't you make that pie?" I didn't believe it. But I played along and it is now my signature dish. And everyone loves it. "Rebecca, you're bringing the Key Lime pie, right?" I always get asked that. Now here's the secret, I never eat it. I really don't like Key Lime pie. So I'll grab some of my grandmother's pie.
C.I.: The turkey. Because it's a nightmare to cook and because it means using the giblets to make the gravy and it's just a nightmare all around.
Elaine: I'm going to add to C.I.'s story because I've observed the cooking process. C.I.'s turkeys can be photographed. They're golden. They look like something you'd see Martha Stewart pull out of the oven. How does that happen? By putting the turkey in at midnight and basting, basting, basting and more basting. Where does C.I. sleep through the night on the night before Thanksgiving? On the floor in front of the oven. I'm not joking. The turkey's cooked with green apples and I have no idea what else, onions and some other things, for flavor. One Thanksgiving, I actually attempted to cook a turkey and it was a nightmare. It looked ruined. C.I. brought it back to life with a ton of butter and a ton of chicken stock. But that's the only time I've ever cooked. My brother and I get together if he's in the country but if not, I go visit a friend or else just eat a turkey TV dinner.
Dona: Holidays can be rough. I feel like, and I'm not trying to bring up anything painful, that we should note that Elaine and her brother lost their parents when Elaine was very young. Geez. I'm not sure, I guess I'd say the stuffing. I love all kinds of stuffing provided it doesn't have raisins in it. I can't stand raising in the stuffing. I also prefer that it look like stuffing with bumps and all as opposed to losing like a sheet cake. My father's always in charge of the stuffing we make. Other relatives usually bring some with them, but the one that's made in our house is made by my father. He puts in celery and onions and I don't know what else. But no raisins. It's just the right blend of everything, whatever he uses and just thinking about it right now is making me hungry.
Elaine: I'll add that it didn't bother me what Dona added. I probably should have added it myself because the holidays can be difficult for a lot of people. I'll also add, to lighten things up, that C.I. can't fry worth ___. And C.I. can't make gravy. Except giblet gravy. In a pan, C.I. can make it. In a skillet, forget it.
C.I.: That's true. I can fry an egg and that's about it. I can't fry chicken or make gravy in a skillet. If I make "fried" potatoes, they're really baked because I can't fry. Which is now a good thing because fried foods are bad for us.
Wally: They may be bad for you, but I eat a ton of french fries. And wouldn't dream of calling them "freedom fries." Whether the electricity is back on or not, Grandpa knows we're going to Mom's. She has electricity. She keeps begging him to come up and stay with her but he's convinced that they'll get the electricity on at any minute. C.I. and Elaine were talking about giblet gravy and my mom uses all that in her gravy. I think that's the best gravy and wish we had more than just on the holidays. I'll put it on my mashed potatoes and on my dressing and on my turkey. I like the chunks of meat in the gravy. Guess I'm like the dork in the Sonic commercial talking about the "meat dressing."
Mike: I know everyone thinks turkey when they think Thanksgiving but I'm not rushing for the turkey. It's nice and I'll have a slice but what I always grab for is the ham. My mother makes this really great glazed ham. It's juicy and it's the thing I want. Day after when everyone else is making turkey sandwiches, I'm reaching for the ham. On our birthdays, Ma always lets us pick what we want and fixes it. I always ask for her Thanksgiving ham. One year, my brother broke his arm and we all had to go to the emergency room. When we got back, the ham was almost done and Ma was hurrying trying to fix some stuff to go with it and I told her all I really wanted was the ham. I meant it too. I wasn't trying to be nice. Just cut me off some ham, slap it on a plate and I'm happy.
Kat: Fudge. Fudge brownies are not the same thing as fudge. The only time I ever had fudge growing up was on Thanksgiving and Christmas. I'd ask for it during the year and would usually get "fudge brownies." They're not fudge. I have one aunt who makes it each year. I do her like people do Rebecca about her Key Lime pie, "Aunt Paulina, you're going to bring the fudge this year, right? You are bringing the fudge?" I've pestered her every year since I was eight according to my father. But he says she loves it and is just thrilled that I ask for it. Everyone eats it and there's never any left to take home, but apparently I'm the only one who will request it. I think everyone else just expects her to bring it. And they should because she always does. (Laughing) But I have to check and make sure.
I hope everyone has a great Thanksgiving.
Remember Mike's motto:
The Common Ills community is important and the Common Ills community is important to me. So I'll do my part for the Common Ills community.
the common ills
like maria said paz
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the third estate sunday review
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
the daily jot
kats korner
thomas friedman is a great man
thanksgiving
So I'll say that it's important to be thankful for what we have. Even as bad as things may seem, there is hope. You see a world that's gotten wise to Bully Boy, that's hopeful. You see people becoming active, that's hopeful. And when you look around the dinner table tomorrow, if you're with people, you've got something to be thankful for.
So take a moment to give thanks.
That can be a prayer. But it doesn't have to be. It can be just a reflection to yourself that you've got things to be grateful for.
I'll note something by The Third Estate Sunday Review because I'm just not coming up with anything tonight. Here's "Let's Do The Turkey Trot" which will hopefully capture Thanksgiving better than I can tonight:
"Let's Do The Turkey Trot" is the title of a song recorded by Little Eva (famous for singing the original hit version of "The Locomotion"). We're going with that title because we have an e-mail from a reader who asked to be unnamed but will not be home for Thanksgiving and asked us to write about our favorite Thanksgiving foods.
Betty: Chess pie. There are a ton of things I enjoy, but the holidays always mean chess pie. My mother makes the best one in the world. She's taught me how but, honestly, I'm too lazy to make one. Even if I cut corners and used ready made pie crust, I still wouldn't have the time or energy. But at Thanksgiving I have the time and energy to grab as many slices as I can. She makes one pumpkin pie but she makes several chess pies because we all love that pie. It wouldn't be a Thanksgiving in my family without my mother's chess pie.
Ava: I'll go with the cranberries. I don't care if it's out of can or if it's cooked. My mother makes a big production out of cooking it from scratch and, to me, it tastes pretty much the same either way. But when I think of Thanksgiving, that's what I think of. I'll usually grab a roll, put a little bit of turkey in it, put a little bit of cranberry sauce in it and that's Thanksgiving. My mother will be saying, "Eat something else" but that's really all I need.
Jess: I'm not sure what to pick. There's a green bean casserole that I really like and there's also a squash dish that my mom makes. The food's always nice but it's really just that we're all around the table together that stands out to me.
Cedric: My favorite thing isn't lunch. Lunch is good and the food's all warm and all that. But my favorite thing is a few hours later. When you're hungry again and you go back in the kitchen and everyone makes their own plate. People are more relaxed then. Usually some weirdo that someone's brought over as their date has left and a beer or two has quieted down one uncle who's always too loud, plus no one's worrying about how their dish tastes because everyone's already sampled it. You make your plate, you head back to the living room and it's just a quieter version of the lunch.
Ty: Mashed potatoes and gravy. My favorite food all year round and at Thanksgiving, there's so much you can have thirds and fourths and there's still plenty left over. It's from real potatoes and not the instant stuff. And the gravy has some of the turkey drippings so it's really good. That's what I'll be thinking about when we all grab our plates and start piling the food on.
Jim: For me the big thing is that my dad and I go out with my grandfather to the trees in his yard and pick up some of the pecans that have fallen off them. We go inside and crack them open, enough for grandma to make a pecan pie for Christmas, but I don't think they last for that because my granddad eats them all the time but that's what he says we're doing it for, and we just crack them open and snack on a few as we go and talk about whatever. That's what really makes it Thanksgiving for me.
Rebecca: I'm going to go with pie, like Betty. My favorite pie is apple pie and my grandmother makes them from scratch. Slices the apples, rolls her own dough, all of that. For years, I was always one of those people saying, "Well, how about colas? I could bring colas. Ice?" Everyone in my family is an outstanding cook. I'm an okay cook, I'm not outstanding. But male or female, everyone in my family, except me, has a dish they can make that's amazing. So, hat tip to C.I., I mentioned this one year as Thanksgiving was approaching and C.I. said, "Rebecca, I'm going to teach you to make a Key Lime pie." I didn't think so. C.I. asked if anyone else brought a Key Lime pie and I said no. So I get told, by C.I., that this is going to be my signature dish and everyone's going to love it, that on holidays when I don't make it, I'll hear, "Rebecca, why didn't you make that pie?" I didn't believe it. But I played along and it is now my signature dish. And everyone loves it. "Rebecca, you're bringing the Key Lime pie, right?" I always get asked that. Now here's the secret, I never eat it. I really don't like Key Lime pie. So I'll grab some of my grandmother's pie.
C.I.: The turkey. Because it's a nightmare to cook and because it means using the giblets to make the gravy and it's just a nightmare all around.
Elaine: I'm going to add to C.I.'s story because I've observed the cooking process. C.I.'s turkeys can be photographed. They're golden. They look like something you'd see Martha Stewart pull out of the oven. How does that happen? By putting the turkey in at midnight and basting, basting, basting and more basting. Where does C.I. sleep through the night on the night before Thanksgiving? On the floor in front of the oven. I'm not joking. The turkey's cooked with green apples and I have no idea what else, onions and some other things, for flavor. One Thanksgiving, I actually attempted to cook a turkey and it was a nightmare. It looked ruined. C.I. brought it back to life with a ton of butter and a ton of chicken stock. But that's the only time I've ever cooked. My brother and I get together if he's in the country but if not, I go visit a friend or else just eat a turkey TV dinner.
Dona: Holidays can be rough. I feel like, and I'm not trying to bring up anything painful, that we should note that Elaine and her brother lost their parents when Elaine was very young. Geez. I'm not sure, I guess I'd say the stuffing. I love all kinds of stuffing provided it doesn't have raisins in it. I can't stand raising in the stuffing. I also prefer that it look like stuffing with bumps and all as opposed to losing like a sheet cake. My father's always in charge of the stuffing we make. Other relatives usually bring some with them, but the one that's made in our house is made by my father. He puts in celery and onions and I don't know what else. But no raisins. It's just the right blend of everything, whatever he uses and just thinking about it right now is making me hungry.
Elaine: I'll add that it didn't bother me what Dona added. I probably should have added it myself because the holidays can be difficult for a lot of people. I'll also add, to lighten things up, that C.I. can't fry worth ___. And C.I. can't make gravy. Except giblet gravy. In a pan, C.I. can make it. In a skillet, forget it.
C.I.: That's true. I can fry an egg and that's about it. I can't fry chicken or make gravy in a skillet. If I make "fried" potatoes, they're really baked because I can't fry. Which is now a good thing because fried foods are bad for us.
Wally: They may be bad for you, but I eat a ton of french fries. And wouldn't dream of calling them "freedom fries." Whether the electricity is back on or not, Grandpa knows we're going to Mom's. She has electricity. She keeps begging him to come up and stay with her but he's convinced that they'll get the electricity on at any minute. C.I. and Elaine were talking about giblet gravy and my mom uses all that in her gravy. I think that's the best gravy and wish we had more than just on the holidays. I'll put it on my mashed potatoes and on my dressing and on my turkey. I like the chunks of meat in the gravy. Guess I'm like the dork in the Sonic commercial talking about the "meat dressing."
Mike: I know everyone thinks turkey when they think Thanksgiving but I'm not rushing for the turkey. It's nice and I'll have a slice but what I always grab for is the ham. My mother makes this really great glazed ham. It's juicy and it's the thing I want. Day after when everyone else is making turkey sandwiches, I'm reaching for the ham. On our birthdays, Ma always lets us pick what we want and fixes it. I always ask for her Thanksgiving ham. One year, my brother broke his arm and we all had to go to the emergency room. When we got back, the ham was almost done and Ma was hurrying trying to fix some stuff to go with it and I told her all I really wanted was the ham. I meant it too. I wasn't trying to be nice. Just cut me off some ham, slap it on a plate and I'm happy.
Kat: Fudge. Fudge brownies are not the same thing as fudge. The only time I ever had fudge growing up was on Thanksgiving and Christmas. I'd ask for it during the year and would usually get "fudge brownies." They're not fudge. I have one aunt who makes it each year. I do her like people do Rebecca about her Key Lime pie, "Aunt Paulina, you're going to bring the fudge this year, right? You are bringing the fudge?" I've pestered her every year since I was eight according to my father. But he says she loves it and is just thrilled that I ask for it. Everyone eats it and there's never any left to take home, but apparently I'm the only one who will request it. I think everyone else just expects her to bring it. And they should because she always does. (Laughing) But I have to check and make sure.
I hope everyone has a great Thanksgiving.
Remember Mike's motto:
The Common Ills community is important and the Common Ills community is important to me. So I'll do my part for the Common Ills community.
the common ills
like maria said paz
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
the third estate sunday review
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
the daily jot
kats korner
thomas friedman is a great man
thanksgiving
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
The Big Mix
Tonight, I'm just going to do this the way I'd figured I'd do Cedric's Big Mix when it first started.
It was just going to be a mix of things online that you might miss but needed to check out.
Hope you already found all the items but if you missed something, maybe this will steer you to an important report.
From Democracy Now!:
AMY GOODMAN: This issue of torture goes back, even before the pictures that we saw in April of 2004 of the prisoners that were tortured at Abu Ghraib. You were there when the discussions were taking place. What was your position? What exactly did you hear?
COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Well, it's not so much discussions as the fact that just prior to those photographs going public, the photographs of Abu Ghraib, the Secretary of State walked through my door into my office and said, -- we had adjoining offices -- and he said, "I want you to get all of the paperwork you can, get everything together, establish an audit trail and a chronology and so forth. I want to know how we got to where we are." And over the course of the next few months, I got my hands on every piece of paper that I could, open source, classified, sensitive and otherwise, and I built for myself a chronology, an audit trail, and gained profound insights into how we got to where we were.
And what I found was that the statutory process, that is, the process in which the principals and the President meet to make national security decisions, worked. And that process produced a compromise, a compromise reflected in the President's memorandum which said although he recognized we were in a new situation, fighting al-Qaeda terrorists, for example, nonetheless, the spirit of Geneva would be adhered to by our armed forces in the field, consistent with military necessity. Now, my critics have said that phrase gave the President an out. I don't agree. It did not say "consistent with national security demands." It did not say "consistent with the demands of the war on terror." It said "consistent with military needs." Now, military needs are very simple and clear to a man like me who spent 31 years in the military. It means that if one of my buddy's life is threatened or my life is threatened, I can take drastic action. I can even shoot a detainee. And I can expect not to be punished under Geneva, or at least if I am court-martialed, I have a defense.
It doesn't mean that I can take a detainee in a cold, dark cell in Bagram, Afghanistan, for example, in December 2002, shackled to the wall, and pour cold water on him at intervals when the outside temperature is 50 degrees anyway, and eventually kill him, which is what happened. And the first thing I came across in my research was two deaths in Bagram, Afghanistan, in December 2002. And now we know after the army has finally, two years, conducted its investigations, we now know that one of those individuals who was murdered at Bagram was very likely innocent.
AMY GOODMAN: Explain these discs that you found. You found them in December 2002?
COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON: No, this is what I discovered was the first occasion -- this was available to me in open source information, too, because The New York Times had done a really fine job of beginning an investigation of this. And what I found was these two deaths, and the suspicion was aroused in me, because at the time the Army coroner had declared the deaths homicides, and the Army had declared the deaths as a result of natural causes. And so, as I began to investigate, and as others began to investigate and began to talk to me and to feed me information, and as I began to look at the documents that were official and otherwise, I began to construct a case that showed that the Army had obfuscated, it had blocked at every level of command, trying to get to the bottom of these two killings.
And let me just add, when I left the State Department and had to turn over my papers, the deaths were up to over 70. And I have sources inside the government now that tell me the deaths may be up to 90. Now, this is people detained by the United States, either the armed forces, the Central Intelligence Agency or others, and these are people who have died in detention. Now, all of these cases, I hope, are not murder. But many of these cases still need to be investigated, and something needs to be done in the way of accountability.
AMY GOODMAN: And these are deaths in Afghanistan?
COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON: These are in all of our facilities.
AMY GOODMAN: In Iraq.
COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON: In Iraq, at Guantanamo Bay and in Afghanistan.
AMY GOODMAN: And what do you know about the secret detention facilities?
COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON: I can’t give you any insights into that. I did not know anything about that when I was in government. Those things, presidential findings, if they exist, are usually kept very close hold. Only very few people know about them. I have my suspicions. I suspect that if the Vice President is lobbying the Congress of the United States on behalf of torture, that we must have some kind of clandestine operation going on, but I can’t offer you any insights into that. Let me just make one other point. You're probably aware that recently the Minister of the Interior in Iraq was discovered to have a prison where principally Shia were being abused, being abused rather drastically, as I understand it. Imagine, if you will, General George Casey, our commander in Iraq and our ambassador in Baghdad, Khalilzad, imagine them having to go to Hakeem, the Minister of the Interior, and speaking to him in strong words about this abuse. Imagine Hakeem looking at them and laughing, because he could cite Abu Ghraib, he could cite Guantanamo, he could cite Bagram, and this position that we have assumed has just hurt our credibility and our image all around the world. Pardon me, my cell phone is ringing.
From News Dissector:
The forces behind the JFK murder are still being debated with a majority of Americans still convinced there was some kind of conspiracy. If you have never seen the famous Zapruder film that was said to have captured the killing, you now do so on line:
John-F-Kennedy.net
(Bear in mind that there are charges by assassinologists that it was doctored.)
That assassination marked a shift of interests as well that led us into the jungles of Vietnam and an economic crisis which has been papered over for years with other people’s money.
PAPER TIGER
President Bush’s failed visit to China this past weekend marks another shift as the United States proves itself to be the paper tiger that Mao laughed at. With a federal deficit over $300 billion, with China gaining the upper economic hand, the "American" century seems long over.
Not only is Iraq facing the same outcome as Vietnam, but US leverage is slip slip-sliding away No wonder that the the man responsible for auditing US government budgets compared the US to ancient Rome before its decline. He says its fiscal condition is "worse than advertised."
Here’s the kind of fact I would rather not contend with before breakfast: "By 2010, the US debt is likely to rise to $ 11.2 trillion, or $ 38,000 for each man,is projected at $ 561 billion annually."
From The Common Ills:
Absolutely. Koppel may have passed the interview onto Forest Sawyer, but he didn't stand in the way of corporate synergy when it was decided his show would address the most pressing issue as 1990 drew to a close. Which is why December 3, 1990's episode dealt with the world shattering "news" topic: MTV's banning of Madonna's "Justify My Love" video. (No offense to Madonna, if "news" shows are stupid enough to offer, take the free promotion.)
Just to provide a little context, on December 2, 1990 Germany had their first "all German" (no longer partioned into "East" and "West") elections in fifty-eight years. December 3, 1990 Mary Robinson is elected the first woman president of Ireland. Also on December 3, 1990, you have a plane crash in Detroit that kills twelve. On the fourth of December, Saddam Hussein will release hostages. So it makes perfect sense that Nightline will instead honor it's corporate parent(s?) by promoting Madonna and her banned video (which Nightline played in full). Koppel's farming that interview out to Forest Sawyer doesn't alter the fact that Nightline "covered" it.
And more recently, they were there for the earth shattering anniversary of the release of the film Animal House. Animal House & Nightline? At first, it doesn't seem like they go together but think it through.
These and other "important" stories have oft been covered on Nightline. Take the 'pressing' issue of violence in figure skating. As FAIR noted, Nightline was there for "the Tonya Harding/Nancy Kerrigan saga. In about seven weeks (Jan. 24 to March 16), Nightline devoted five entire broadcasts to the figure skaters -- over 13 percent of total air time. During that period, Nightline offered no programs on such issues as unemployment, declining U.S. wages, world hunger or nuclear proliferation." (Multiple episodes are really important to Koppel, Katha Pollitt's noted his 1993 two-parter to explore whether or not the First Lady, Hillary Clinton, had too much power.)
From Liberal Oasis:
The mainstream media has yet to delve deep into the question: what would really happen if we left sooner, if we left later, or if we never left?
Most people in DC are still comfortable simply asserting that civil war would break out, and terrorists would run rampant, if ground troops left relatively soon.
And most interviewers still aren’t forcing anyone to back up their assertions (they’re content just covering the politics of the Murtha move, and glossing over the substance).
From Mikey Likes It!:
White phosphorus was used as a weapon and Monday the New York Times did a white wash, screw with the facts report, trying to act like it wasn't. Will they do a "correction" now. Hell no. They're the New York Times and they write whatever they want, when they want. Right now they want to carry water for the military using an illegal chemical weapon. Maybe someday they'll be brought down by what Amy Goodman's called "the lies of the Times." If it happens, let's hope people aren't acting like it's a sad thing. The way some are acting like the end of Ted Koppel's Nightline is a boo-hoo situation. C.I.'s got a great thing on that today called "The end of a (Bad) era." Hopefully, there will be brave voices if and when the might New York Times crumbles.
Reproducing the front page of the New York Times, A Scrivener's Lament wonders:
Is The New York Times Trying To Seduce Me?
Nice try, NYT.But whoring for readers after sneaking out of George W.'s bed isn't exactly my idea of true love. Get back to the street corner, where you belong, NYT!
From The Common Ills:
Scott Shane has an article in the paper today. "They said" is the hallmark of the piece. It's on Falluja (which the Times has an interest, a self-interest, in since their "award winning" Dexter Filkins -- aka "Put me on the jet with Chalabi!" -- was present). It's on white phosphorus. Shane's discussing the Italian documentary, one that he apparently hasn't seen due to the use of "they said" (or "they say").
From Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude:
the above is from murray waas' 'Key Bush Intelligence Briefing Kept From Hill Panel ' in the national journal. i think the article should be called 'further proof that bully boy lied us into war.'
get it? they knew they're case for a war was a lie. they knew ten days after 9/11.the lie that cheney and bully boy have been pushing this week and last loudly is that every 1 saw the same intelligence. but that's not true. the administration saw this, not congress.and don't think this is the only intelligence that the administration kept from congress.
bully boy wanted this war and he got it.
we never should have gone to war but he wanted it.
now that it's turned to shit, like everything he touches, he wants to bluff his way out of it and spread the blame. the blame is the administration's.
From Tom Hayden at The Huffington Post:
Congress should call for a peace envoy to begin immediate peace talks with the Iraqi opposition after this week’s historic Cairo summit. The three-day meeting was the first attended by leading Iraqi political parties as well as a delegation linked to the insurgents, organized by former minister Ayham al-Sammarae.
Overcoming the initial opposition of Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari, the conference ended with a call for American withdrawal and an endorsement of "nationalist resistance" to foreign occupation.
The conference will resume in Baghdad in February, where a stronger call for US withdrawal is likely. The February date is consistent with the four-month period that has been established to re-negotiate the Iraqi constitution to accommodate Sunni demands.
From Why Are We Back In Iraq?:
Speaking of air and hot, Bob Woodward paid a visit to Larry King's CNN show the other night (transcript) and as other bloggers point out Mr. "I was scared of being indicted" is now claiming that he didn't tell his editor about being tipped about Plame early on in the game because he was "focused" on getting his book done.
From the Larry King interview last night:
"The evidence I had first-hand, a small piece of the puzzle acknowledge, is that that was not the case. So I'm trying to find out and focus on immense questions about, are we going to go to war in Iraq? How are we going to do it? What is the nature of Powell's position? What did Cheney do? What was the CIA's role? How good was the intelligence on all of this?"
Huh?
The interview in question with the "casual and off-hand" comment about Valerie Plame being a CIA analyst, supposedly took place in mid-June of 2003 after we already went to war in Iraq.
Bob Woodward can't keep his "facts" straight.
From Like Maria Said Paz:
I find it poetic that one of the loudest dismissers of Plamegate, a journalistic "pro" and "institution," has no added to the fire and brought it back into the news -- but not by choice, by covering up. It's an interesting book end to his career. Thirty years ago he was one half of a team leading the way for what journalism could do and these days he's part of a team that seems more concerned with covering than informing the public.
His reputation was made as a voice for the public and he's killed it. A ritualistic slaying that he committed upon himself as a result of his desire to be "in the loop" but not to inform the public, just to be another sycophant.
From The Third Estate Sunday Review:
We bounced ideas for this review off a number of feminist friends. The only trace of "feminism" anyone could find in Commander-in-Chief was one woman who noted that the episode that aired Tuesday featured Mac telling her teenage daughter that she wasn't a virgin when she married.
So feminism is now defined by when you lost your cherry? Our culture's back to pimping Hugh Hefner as a voice of "liberation"?
While it's true that Bully Boy has lowered the expectations for the nation, we're not willing to drop our principles and then limbo beneath them. It's depressing to realize how quickly we've gone from The Ya Ya Sisterhood to The Nah Nah Sisterhood.
From Joseph C. Phillips at The Chicago Defender:
The last thing I am concerned about is the meal. I can roast a turkey in my sleep. My stuffing is sublime. I will put my mac and cheese up against any in the world and my cranberry relish has received standing ovations! I am not worried about the meal. I am, however, having anxiety over the blessing.
The dinner blessing is the transformative element of the occasion. Through prayer, we transcend the narrow confines of ego and give the credit for our bounty where it is properly due. However, the Thanksgiving prayer is not solely an acknowledgment that the good things in life are gifts given through God's grace. We are also beseeching God to give us more than we have. We offer the benediction in order to open our homes, and our hearts to the continued presence of the divine. It is the conduit through which the occasion moves from the purely sensual to the sacred. It puts the Holy in the Holi-day.
From The Daily Jot:
This morning, we were cracking wallnuts for a bread my mom's making and pecans for some pies she's making. That was me and my grandfather. We also took the turkey out of the freezer to defrost and we just bought it yesterday so that didn't make a lot of sense. Why put it in the freezer in the first place?
We didn't put the ham in there?
Is it bird flu? Something else?
I don't know. I don't cook.
ted koppel
nightline
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
amy goodman
democracy now
the common ills
the daily jot
danny schechter
why are we back in iraq
falluja
white phosphorus
iraq
mikey likes it
like maria said paz
a scriverners lament
liberal oasis
the chicago defender
tom hayden
It was just going to be a mix of things online that you might miss but needed to check out.
Hope you already found all the items but if you missed something, maybe this will steer you to an important report.
From Democracy Now!:
AMY GOODMAN: This issue of torture goes back, even before the pictures that we saw in April of 2004 of the prisoners that were tortured at Abu Ghraib. You were there when the discussions were taking place. What was your position? What exactly did you hear?
COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Well, it's not so much discussions as the fact that just prior to those photographs going public, the photographs of Abu Ghraib, the Secretary of State walked through my door into my office and said, -- we had adjoining offices -- and he said, "I want you to get all of the paperwork you can, get everything together, establish an audit trail and a chronology and so forth. I want to know how we got to where we are." And over the course of the next few months, I got my hands on every piece of paper that I could, open source, classified, sensitive and otherwise, and I built for myself a chronology, an audit trail, and gained profound insights into how we got to where we were.
And what I found was that the statutory process, that is, the process in which the principals and the President meet to make national security decisions, worked. And that process produced a compromise, a compromise reflected in the President's memorandum which said although he recognized we were in a new situation, fighting al-Qaeda terrorists, for example, nonetheless, the spirit of Geneva would be adhered to by our armed forces in the field, consistent with military necessity. Now, my critics have said that phrase gave the President an out. I don't agree. It did not say "consistent with national security demands." It did not say "consistent with the demands of the war on terror." It said "consistent with military needs." Now, military needs are very simple and clear to a man like me who spent 31 years in the military. It means that if one of my buddy's life is threatened or my life is threatened, I can take drastic action. I can even shoot a detainee. And I can expect not to be punished under Geneva, or at least if I am court-martialed, I have a defense.
It doesn't mean that I can take a detainee in a cold, dark cell in Bagram, Afghanistan, for example, in December 2002, shackled to the wall, and pour cold water on him at intervals when the outside temperature is 50 degrees anyway, and eventually kill him, which is what happened. And the first thing I came across in my research was two deaths in Bagram, Afghanistan, in December 2002. And now we know after the army has finally, two years, conducted its investigations, we now know that one of those individuals who was murdered at Bagram was very likely innocent.
AMY GOODMAN: Explain these discs that you found. You found them in December 2002?
COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON: No, this is what I discovered was the first occasion -- this was available to me in open source information, too, because The New York Times had done a really fine job of beginning an investigation of this. And what I found was these two deaths, and the suspicion was aroused in me, because at the time the Army coroner had declared the deaths homicides, and the Army had declared the deaths as a result of natural causes. And so, as I began to investigate, and as others began to investigate and began to talk to me and to feed me information, and as I began to look at the documents that were official and otherwise, I began to construct a case that showed that the Army had obfuscated, it had blocked at every level of command, trying to get to the bottom of these two killings.
And let me just add, when I left the State Department and had to turn over my papers, the deaths were up to over 70. And I have sources inside the government now that tell me the deaths may be up to 90. Now, this is people detained by the United States, either the armed forces, the Central Intelligence Agency or others, and these are people who have died in detention. Now, all of these cases, I hope, are not murder. But many of these cases still need to be investigated, and something needs to be done in the way of accountability.
AMY GOODMAN: And these are deaths in Afghanistan?
COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON: These are in all of our facilities.
AMY GOODMAN: In Iraq.
COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON: In Iraq, at Guantanamo Bay and in Afghanistan.
AMY GOODMAN: And what do you know about the secret detention facilities?
COL. LAWRENCE WILKERSON: I can’t give you any insights into that. I did not know anything about that when I was in government. Those things, presidential findings, if they exist, are usually kept very close hold. Only very few people know about them. I have my suspicions. I suspect that if the Vice President is lobbying the Congress of the United States on behalf of torture, that we must have some kind of clandestine operation going on, but I can’t offer you any insights into that. Let me just make one other point. You're probably aware that recently the Minister of the Interior in Iraq was discovered to have a prison where principally Shia were being abused, being abused rather drastically, as I understand it. Imagine, if you will, General George Casey, our commander in Iraq and our ambassador in Baghdad, Khalilzad, imagine them having to go to Hakeem, the Minister of the Interior, and speaking to him in strong words about this abuse. Imagine Hakeem looking at them and laughing, because he could cite Abu Ghraib, he could cite Guantanamo, he could cite Bagram, and this position that we have assumed has just hurt our credibility and our image all around the world. Pardon me, my cell phone is ringing.
From News Dissector:
The forces behind the JFK murder are still being debated with a majority of Americans still convinced there was some kind of conspiracy. If you have never seen the famous Zapruder film that was said to have captured the killing, you now do so on line:
John-F-Kennedy.net
(Bear in mind that there are charges by assassinologists that it was doctored.)
That assassination marked a shift of interests as well that led us into the jungles of Vietnam and an economic crisis which has been papered over for years with other people’s money.
PAPER TIGER
President Bush’s failed visit to China this past weekend marks another shift as the United States proves itself to be the paper tiger that Mao laughed at. With a federal deficit over $300 billion, with China gaining the upper economic hand, the "American" century seems long over.
Not only is Iraq facing the same outcome as Vietnam, but US leverage is slip slip-sliding away No wonder that the the man responsible for auditing US government budgets compared the US to ancient Rome before its decline. He says its fiscal condition is "worse than advertised."
Here’s the kind of fact I would rather not contend with before breakfast: "By 2010, the US debt is likely to rise to $ 11.2 trillion, or $ 38,000 for each man,is projected at $ 561 billion annually."
From The Common Ills:
Absolutely. Koppel may have passed the interview onto Forest Sawyer, but he didn't stand in the way of corporate synergy when it was decided his show would address the most pressing issue as 1990 drew to a close. Which is why December 3, 1990's episode dealt with the world shattering "news" topic: MTV's banning of Madonna's "Justify My Love" video. (No offense to Madonna, if "news" shows are stupid enough to offer, take the free promotion.)
Just to provide a little context, on December 2, 1990 Germany had their first "all German" (no longer partioned into "East" and "West") elections in fifty-eight years. December 3, 1990 Mary Robinson is elected the first woman president of Ireland. Also on December 3, 1990, you have a plane crash in Detroit that kills twelve. On the fourth of December, Saddam Hussein will release hostages. So it makes perfect sense that Nightline will instead honor it's corporate parent(s?) by promoting Madonna and her banned video (which Nightline played in full). Koppel's farming that interview out to Forest Sawyer doesn't alter the fact that Nightline "covered" it.
And more recently, they were there for the earth shattering anniversary of the release of the film Animal House. Animal House & Nightline? At first, it doesn't seem like they go together but think it through.
These and other "important" stories have oft been covered on Nightline. Take the 'pressing' issue of violence in figure skating. As FAIR noted, Nightline was there for "the Tonya Harding/Nancy Kerrigan saga. In about seven weeks (Jan. 24 to March 16), Nightline devoted five entire broadcasts to the figure skaters -- over 13 percent of total air time. During that period, Nightline offered no programs on such issues as unemployment, declining U.S. wages, world hunger or nuclear proliferation." (Multiple episodes are really important to Koppel, Katha Pollitt's noted his 1993 two-parter to explore whether or not the First Lady, Hillary Clinton, had too much power.)
From Liberal Oasis:
The mainstream media has yet to delve deep into the question: what would really happen if we left sooner, if we left later, or if we never left?
Most people in DC are still comfortable simply asserting that civil war would break out, and terrorists would run rampant, if ground troops left relatively soon.
And most interviewers still aren’t forcing anyone to back up their assertions (they’re content just covering the politics of the Murtha move, and glossing over the substance).
From Mikey Likes It!:
White phosphorus was used as a weapon and Monday the New York Times did a white wash, screw with the facts report, trying to act like it wasn't. Will they do a "correction" now. Hell no. They're the New York Times and they write whatever they want, when they want. Right now they want to carry water for the military using an illegal chemical weapon. Maybe someday they'll be brought down by what Amy Goodman's called "the lies of the Times." If it happens, let's hope people aren't acting like it's a sad thing. The way some are acting like the end of Ted Koppel's Nightline is a boo-hoo situation. C.I.'s got a great thing on that today called "The end of a (Bad) era." Hopefully, there will be brave voices if and when the might New York Times crumbles.
Reproducing the front page of the New York Times, A Scrivener's Lament wonders:
Is The New York Times Trying To Seduce Me?
Nice try, NYT.But whoring for readers after sneaking out of George W.'s bed isn't exactly my idea of true love. Get back to the street corner, where you belong, NYT!
From The Common Ills:
Scott Shane has an article in the paper today. "They said" is the hallmark of the piece. It's on Falluja (which the Times has an interest, a self-interest, in since their "award winning" Dexter Filkins -- aka "Put me on the jet with Chalabi!" -- was present). It's on white phosphorus. Shane's discussing the Italian documentary, one that he apparently hasn't seen due to the use of "they said" (or "they say").
From Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude:
the above is from murray waas' 'Key Bush Intelligence Briefing Kept From Hill Panel ' in the national journal. i think the article should be called 'further proof that bully boy lied us into war.'
get it? they knew they're case for a war was a lie. they knew ten days after 9/11.the lie that cheney and bully boy have been pushing this week and last loudly is that every 1 saw the same intelligence. but that's not true. the administration saw this, not congress.and don't think this is the only intelligence that the administration kept from congress.
bully boy wanted this war and he got it.
we never should have gone to war but he wanted it.
now that it's turned to shit, like everything he touches, he wants to bluff his way out of it and spread the blame. the blame is the administration's.
From Tom Hayden at The Huffington Post:
Congress should call for a peace envoy to begin immediate peace talks with the Iraqi opposition after this week’s historic Cairo summit. The three-day meeting was the first attended by leading Iraqi political parties as well as a delegation linked to the insurgents, organized by former minister Ayham al-Sammarae.
Overcoming the initial opposition of Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari, the conference ended with a call for American withdrawal and an endorsement of "nationalist resistance" to foreign occupation.
The conference will resume in Baghdad in February, where a stronger call for US withdrawal is likely. The February date is consistent with the four-month period that has been established to re-negotiate the Iraqi constitution to accommodate Sunni demands.
From Why Are We Back In Iraq?:
Speaking of air and hot, Bob Woodward paid a visit to Larry King's CNN show the other night (transcript) and as other bloggers point out Mr. "I was scared of being indicted" is now claiming that he didn't tell his editor about being tipped about Plame early on in the game because he was "focused" on getting his book done.
From the Larry King interview last night:
"The evidence I had first-hand, a small piece of the puzzle acknowledge, is that that was not the case. So I'm trying to find out and focus on immense questions about, are we going to go to war in Iraq? How are we going to do it? What is the nature of Powell's position? What did Cheney do? What was the CIA's role? How good was the intelligence on all of this?"
Huh?
The interview in question with the "casual and off-hand" comment about Valerie Plame being a CIA analyst, supposedly took place in mid-June of 2003 after we already went to war in Iraq.
Bob Woodward can't keep his "facts" straight.
From Like Maria Said Paz:
I find it poetic that one of the loudest dismissers of Plamegate, a journalistic "pro" and "institution," has no added to the fire and brought it back into the news -- but not by choice, by covering up. It's an interesting book end to his career. Thirty years ago he was one half of a team leading the way for what journalism could do and these days he's part of a team that seems more concerned with covering than informing the public.
His reputation was made as a voice for the public and he's killed it. A ritualistic slaying that he committed upon himself as a result of his desire to be "in the loop" but not to inform the public, just to be another sycophant.
From The Third Estate Sunday Review:
We bounced ideas for this review off a number of feminist friends. The only trace of "feminism" anyone could find in Commander-in-Chief was one woman who noted that the episode that aired Tuesday featured Mac telling her teenage daughter that she wasn't a virgin when she married.
So feminism is now defined by when you lost your cherry? Our culture's back to pimping Hugh Hefner as a voice of "liberation"?
While it's true that Bully Boy has lowered the expectations for the nation, we're not willing to drop our principles and then limbo beneath them. It's depressing to realize how quickly we've gone from The Ya Ya Sisterhood to The Nah Nah Sisterhood.
From Joseph C. Phillips at The Chicago Defender:
The last thing I am concerned about is the meal. I can roast a turkey in my sleep. My stuffing is sublime. I will put my mac and cheese up against any in the world and my cranberry relish has received standing ovations! I am not worried about the meal. I am, however, having anxiety over the blessing.
The dinner blessing is the transformative element of the occasion. Through prayer, we transcend the narrow confines of ego and give the credit for our bounty where it is properly due. However, the Thanksgiving prayer is not solely an acknowledgment that the good things in life are gifts given through God's grace. We are also beseeching God to give us more than we have. We offer the benediction in order to open our homes, and our hearts to the continued presence of the divine. It is the conduit through which the occasion moves from the purely sensual to the sacred. It puts the Holy in the Holi-day.
From The Daily Jot:
This morning, we were cracking wallnuts for a bread my mom's making and pecans for some pies she's making. That was me and my grandfather. We also took the turkey out of the freezer to defrost and we just bought it yesterday so that didn't make a lot of sense. Why put it in the freezer in the first place?
We didn't put the ham in there?
Is it bird flu? Something else?
I don't know. I don't cook.
ted koppel
nightline
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
amy goodman
democracy now
the common ills
the daily jot
danny schechter
why are we back in iraq
falluja
white phosphorus
iraq
mikey likes it
like maria said paz
a scriverners lament
liberal oasis
the chicago defender
tom hayden
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)