Sunday, May 02, 2010

Rebuttal to a Butthead

Doug Henwood can be on the money. He can also be an ass and he's doing a lot of mooning lately.

On the most recent Behind The News with Doug Henwood, he decried a proposal that hasn't even been introduced to the Pacifica board. (Click here to read that commentary -- it's the third item. We're not linking to KPFA or WBAI for the show because they only archive temporarily.)

He didn't just decry it, he distorted it by insisting it "essentially require programmers to take 9-11 conspiracies seriously, it would increase airtime for truthers and deem those of us who don't buy this paranoid nonsense seriously in violation of the Pacifica mission.

That's a pretty big distortion of the motion. And Henwood knows that because he's posted the actual resolution at his own website.

1. This conflict is not in the interest of the Pacifica Foundation, programmers, staff, or governance. Management, staff, and programmers throughout the Pacifica network must explore ways of providing redress for these grievances of 911 Truth and allegations of censorship, and to initiate outreach strategies to reach those former listener/sponsors whom this conflict has alienated. This should include increasing support and air time for those programs which deal with this issue, and developing new programming for the specific purpose. 2. Programming which consistently and unquestioningly advances the “official story” of 911, by commission or omission, is not consistent with the Pacifica Mission and may be a breach of both the letter and spirit of the Mission. 3. The radio network of the Pacifica Foundation is an appropriate and important media for thorough examination of the 911 controversy. We must encourage good radio coverage by exploring comprehensively the many aspects of 911 with on-air voices expressing all sides (amendment by the late Don White).
Doug, why don't you grow the f**k up. The only reason anyone would have to mention other threads on 9-11 would be if they were bringing up the topic. You know, like you did, and using terms like "nuttery" to describe those who don't believe as you do.

In fact, while you're claiming that Condon is attempting to impose a party line, Condon's responding to a party line people such as yourself (and Norman Solomon and the freaks at FAIR) imposed. It was Norman Solomon who had a bitch-fest at Philip Maldari over the fact that KPFA was offering 9-11 Truth videos as pledge gifts. Pledge gifts, Doug.

nationisle

That means a listener called in a pledge and decide he or she wanted to receive that gift.

That was too much for all of you. That anyone could choose to receive such a thing was just too damn much for you.

The only "nuttery" has been all the attacks you and your kind have launched on 9-11 Truth Movement. They have and will go on just fine without you. You could choose to ignore them.

But you've never done that and that's why the proposal has you so upset. The proposal would mean that if you trashed the 9-11 Truth Movement (as you so often do) on your show, you'd be required to give them a say on a future show. There's nothing wrong with that. We support that amendment.

We're pretty much disgusted with all the trashing and distortion on the left. We're sick of it and we're sick of people who are doing it. We're giving you a pass right now Doug, but it's not a permanent pass.

If you didn't have that pass, we'd go into great detail of how hypocritical your 'concern' that the proposal would "further isolate" the left and Pacifica was considering recent remarks (attacks) on your show that drive away listeners and are not, in fact, fact based facts, just bitchy little thoughts from your increasingly bitter mind.

And, Dougie, the melting point of steel? That's not debatable. That's physics. Physics is a true science, a hard science, not a pseudo one like economics.

You tar and feather in a way that disgusts us. And Doug, we're not a part of the 9-11 Truth Movement. We will advocate and support their right to speak as much as anyone else. Your attempts to tar and feather them, comparing the man who has made the proposal to an assassin? Does that pass for factual in your pseudo-science world? Claiming that they might be doing the work of the Pentagon because of some 1998 consulting group recommendation?

Something smells and it's not the adult diaper you're wearing.