Wait until the war is over
And we're both a little older
The unknown war resister
Breakfast where the news is read
Television children fed
Unborn living, living, dead
Bullet strikes the helmet's head
And it's all over
For the unknown war resister
It's all over
For the unknown war resister
And we're both a little older
The unknown war resister
Breakfast where the news is read
Television children fed
Unborn living, living, dead
Bullet strikes the helmet's head
And it's all over
For the unknown war resister
It's all over
For the unknown war resister
We've altered Jim Morrison's lyrics ("Unknown Soldier," Waiting For The Sun, The Doors). In "small media," it really does appear "all over" for the war resister. You could easily argue that The Full Brobeck, not the beat, goes on. John A. Rogowskyj Jr. seems like a very likely candidate for The Full Brobeck but, honestly, who doesn't these days?
The US Court of Appeals in DC heard arguments in Agustin Aguayo's civil case last week and ask yourself where you heard or saw about that? Ehren Watada held a press conference last week and no one even had to travel, it was done via phone. The fear is that this might be Watada's last chance to make any sort of public statements before the court-martial begins. His attorney thinks it's likely the US military will impose a gag order.
Court-martial? Oh, yeah, that. The US military decided to court-martial Watada (scheduled for February). That didn't get announced last week, that was the week before. So that's two weeks that you haven't heard about that.
What's that? You're feeling "left in the dark"? You're wondering if anyone in indymedia knows about it? Oh, they all do. They all do and most of them took a pass on covering it.
That's why we have a parody of the three best known print publications in independent media. That's why we're already planning our next parody.
"Surely," you say, "if they had decided to court-martial Watada, I would have heard about it on Democracy Now!"
Well, Amy Goodman did address the subject. On CNN. Not on Democracy Now!, but on CNN. She was on a panel for Paula Zahn Now discussing it, right after Zahn interviewed Watada. Wasn't mentioned on Democracy Now!? No, and let's turn to Ruth for more on that: "That is especially surprising to me considering that the panel that addressed the issue: war resister Joshua Casteel, Mommy's Pantyhose, and Amy Goodman. Ms. Goodman, of course, host Democracy Now! which airs on radio, TV and online Monday through Friday. When Ms. Goodman appeared on Comedy Central, it was noted on the next Democracy Now! So it was something as a surprise that the appearance on CNN was not. While not attempting to be a nudnik or a drag, I do think it is worth noting that a silly interview on a comedy network is somehow "news" but a panel to discuss Lt. Watada is not."
We're reminded of an observation Danny Schechter the News Dissector makes in the book The Death of Media, this may be paraphrase, "Put another way, when an issue is not on TV, it doesn't exist in a media saturated country like the United States." (We believe that's page 114.)
Or as Joni Mitchell once observed, "Looking at them on my T.V. set, Oh the power and the glory" ("For The Roses," For The Roses). There is no power and glory because war resisters really don't exist in independent media, not in the coverage.
Let's go over a list of just some of the war resisters who have gone public with their resistance: Watada, Rogowskyj, Joshua Key, Kyle Snyder, Ivan Brobeck, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Mark Wilkerson, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Joshua Casteel, Clifford Cornell, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, and Kevin Benderman. How many of those names are familiar to you?
Who's covering them? Who's covering the movement of resistance with the attention it warrants or do they all feel, like Mommy's Pantyhose, that it's not a movement?
If you know even a few of those names then you're probably following the work of Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) and Dennis Bernstein & Nora Barrows Friedman (Flashpoints).
And that list is only some of the names of those resisting who have gone public. In addition, over thirty US war resisters are currently in Canada attempting to be legally recognized.
You can contribute to show your support for the work of Goodman or Bernstein & Barrows Friedman (or for all). But what about the things you pay for? What about our independent print media?
Since we're all currently subscribers of two of the magazines (two of the three)* we spoof in our parody this issue, let's note that. like a growing number of subscribers, we're starting to wonder what we're paying for?
You can only dig it out of the mail and flip through with high hopes for so long. After awhile, it becomes a case of, "The new ___ is here. No, they didn't cover the war resisters. Again! No, they didn't cover the peace movement. Again!"
How long do you put up with that before you start to wonder if, by subscribing, you are becoming part of the problem?
There was actually a piece recently. Our joke was, "Hey, they finally covered someone protesting the war." The completely unfunny punchline was that they "covered" it via the letters page by printing JoAnn Sohl's letter. (Sohl's son is serving in Iraq. She is a member of Military Families Speak Out.) It reminded us of the sad fact that Gail Greer has to attempt to drum up coverage for her husband (Darrell Anderson).
What do you think would happen if some of the protests outside CNN in recent times instead targeted our leading independent magazines which can't seem to find the time to cover war resisters or the peace movement?
Are they all, like "Truth," living in neighborhoods untouched by the war? If so, are they unfamiliar with what goes on in the world?
In the lead up to Jimmy Carter's election, there was a magazine, a publisher in fact, who made the decision to put all his weight behind getting Carter elected. If you asked him, he'd tell you he assumed the amnesty Carter did offer would be more "inclusive." He'd tell you that he would not have guessed that Carter would be the one to bring back registration with Selective Service.
On a good day, he'd laugh about how he thought he would have 'influence' as a result of all the magazine did to pimp Carter.
We think about that as we read one Eureka! story after another about the 2006 elections. We think about that and we think about how a search engine query on "Iraq" will probably produce many results but, for the most part, the results from our independent print publications would be heavily weighted with election stories that mentioned Iraq in passing.
It's not cutting it and as contributors take their stories on war resisters, movements and Iraq elsewhere, we're getting the message that our independent magazines really aren't interested in addressing Iraq in any way beyond elections.
It's not cutting it.
For information on war resistance within the military: the Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. In addition, Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.
John A. Rogowskyj Jr.? He was deployed to Iraq this month, despite a Marine captain and a major agreeing that he was a C.O. They were overruled by D.V. Odell Jr. who felt that Rogowskyj was "theologically confused" and that his belief did "not reflect any officially recognized faith." Recognized faith? Is Odell not familiar with the "Selective Service System: Fast Facts"? "Beliefs which qualify a registrant for CO status may be religious in nature, but don't have to be. Beliefs may be moral or ethical; however, a man's reasons for not wanting to participate in a war must not be based on politics, expediency, or self-interest." That is the policy regarding Conscientious Objectors. Maybe if the likes of Odell had to worry about being called out for their decisions, they'd feel compelled to study policy?
What gets covered matters. And what doesn't get covered says a great deal in its silence.
[Note: *Elaine doesn't subscribe to anything other than journals. She does purchase one of the three each week, a second she purchases only when Howard Zinn has an essay in the magazine.
The US Court of Appeals in DC heard arguments in Agustin Aguayo's civil case last week and ask yourself where you heard or saw about that? Ehren Watada held a press conference last week and no one even had to travel, it was done via phone. The fear is that this might be Watada's last chance to make any sort of public statements before the court-martial begins. His attorney thinks it's likely the US military will impose a gag order.
Court-martial? Oh, yeah, that. The US military decided to court-martial Watada (scheduled for February). That didn't get announced last week, that was the week before. So that's two weeks that you haven't heard about that.
What's that? You're feeling "left in the dark"? You're wondering if anyone in indymedia knows about it? Oh, they all do. They all do and most of them took a pass on covering it.
That's why we have a parody of the three best known print publications in independent media. That's why we're already planning our next parody.
"Surely," you say, "if they had decided to court-martial Watada, I would have heard about it on Democracy Now!"
Well, Amy Goodman did address the subject. On CNN. Not on Democracy Now!, but on CNN. She was on a panel for Paula Zahn Now discussing it, right after Zahn interviewed Watada. Wasn't mentioned on Democracy Now!? No, and let's turn to Ruth for more on that: "That is especially surprising to me considering that the panel that addressed the issue: war resister Joshua Casteel, Mommy's Pantyhose, and Amy Goodman. Ms. Goodman, of course, host Democracy Now! which airs on radio, TV and online Monday through Friday. When Ms. Goodman appeared on Comedy Central, it was noted on the next Democracy Now! So it was something as a surprise that the appearance on CNN was not. While not attempting to be a nudnik or a drag, I do think it is worth noting that a silly interview on a comedy network is somehow "news" but a panel to discuss Lt. Watada is not."
We're reminded of an observation Danny Schechter the News Dissector makes in the book The Death of Media, this may be paraphrase, "Put another way, when an issue is not on TV, it doesn't exist in a media saturated country like the United States." (We believe that's page 114.)
Or as Joni Mitchell once observed, "Looking at them on my T.V. set, Oh the power and the glory" ("For The Roses," For The Roses). There is no power and glory because war resisters really don't exist in independent media, not in the coverage.
Let's go over a list of just some of the war resisters who have gone public with their resistance: Watada, Rogowskyj, Joshua Key, Kyle Snyder, Ivan Brobeck, Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Mark Wilkerson, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Joshua Casteel, Clifford Cornell, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, and Kevin Benderman. How many of those names are familiar to you?
Who's covering them? Who's covering the movement of resistance with the attention it warrants or do they all feel, like Mommy's Pantyhose, that it's not a movement?
If you know even a few of those names then you're probably following the work of Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) and Dennis Bernstein & Nora Barrows Friedman (Flashpoints).
And that list is only some of the names of those resisting who have gone public. In addition, over thirty US war resisters are currently in Canada attempting to be legally recognized.
You can contribute to show your support for the work of Goodman or Bernstein & Barrows Friedman (or for all). But what about the things you pay for? What about our independent print media?
Since we're all currently subscribers of two of the magazines (two of the three)* we spoof in our parody this issue, let's note that. like a growing number of subscribers, we're starting to wonder what we're paying for?
You can only dig it out of the mail and flip through with high hopes for so long. After awhile, it becomes a case of, "The new ___ is here. No, they didn't cover the war resisters. Again! No, they didn't cover the peace movement. Again!"
How long do you put up with that before you start to wonder if, by subscribing, you are becoming part of the problem?
There was actually a piece recently. Our joke was, "Hey, they finally covered someone protesting the war." The completely unfunny punchline was that they "covered" it via the letters page by printing JoAnn Sohl's letter. (Sohl's son is serving in Iraq. She is a member of Military Families Speak Out.) It reminded us of the sad fact that Gail Greer has to attempt to drum up coverage for her husband (Darrell Anderson).
What do you think would happen if some of the protests outside CNN in recent times instead targeted our leading independent magazines which can't seem to find the time to cover war resisters or the peace movement?
Are they all, like "Truth," living in neighborhoods untouched by the war? If so, are they unfamiliar with what goes on in the world?
In the lead up to Jimmy Carter's election, there was a magazine, a publisher in fact, who made the decision to put all his weight behind getting Carter elected. If you asked him, he'd tell you he assumed the amnesty Carter did offer would be more "inclusive." He'd tell you that he would not have guessed that Carter would be the one to bring back registration with Selective Service.
On a good day, he'd laugh about how he thought he would have 'influence' as a result of all the magazine did to pimp Carter.
We think about that as we read one Eureka! story after another about the 2006 elections. We think about that and we think about how a search engine query on "Iraq" will probably produce many results but, for the most part, the results from our independent print publications would be heavily weighted with election stories that mentioned Iraq in passing.
It's not cutting it and as contributors take their stories on war resisters, movements and Iraq elsewhere, we're getting the message that our independent magazines really aren't interested in addressing Iraq in any way beyond elections.
It's not cutting it.
For information on war resistance within the military: the Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. In addition, Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.
John A. Rogowskyj Jr.? He was deployed to Iraq this month, despite a Marine captain and a major agreeing that he was a C.O. They were overruled by D.V. Odell Jr. who felt that Rogowskyj was "theologically confused" and that his belief did "not reflect any officially recognized faith." Recognized faith? Is Odell not familiar with the "Selective Service System: Fast Facts"? "Beliefs which qualify a registrant for CO status may be religious in nature, but don't have to be. Beliefs may be moral or ethical; however, a man's reasons for not wanting to participate in a war must not be based on politics, expediency, or self-interest." That is the policy regarding Conscientious Objectors. Maybe if the likes of Odell had to worry about being called out for their decisions, they'd feel compelled to study policy?
What gets covered matters. And what doesn't get covered says a great deal in its silence.
[Note: *Elaine doesn't subscribe to anything other than journals. She does purchase one of the three each week, a second she purchases only when Howard Zinn has an essay in the magazine.
Note: The paraphrase because everyone's loaned out their copies of the book. C.I.'s is "72% certain" that is a quote and "64% certain" that is the correct page number.]