Sunday on RadioNation with Laura Flanders Katha Pollitt will be a guest. We plan to listen and hope you as well. Tonight's show? We'll catch it in the archive.
Reasons? Commercials and news breaks, honestly.
To be clear, C.I. intended to note (at The Common Ills) the guests for Saturday's show. (C.I. got caught up in helping a friend realize that a "second act turning point" -- or something -- was actually the "mid-point" and congratulations to you if you grasp that, we don't claim to but will ask about it when the edition winds down.) However, there were serious questions about spotlighting RadioNation with Laura Flanders this week among those participating here.
That had nothing to do with Flanders or her staff or the quality of her show.
What's the problem?
Don't make me come to Vegas
Don't make me pull you out of his bed
-- "Don't Make Me Come To Vegas" written by Tori Amos, off the album Scarlet's Walk
C.I. truly does not read the op-ed pages. Any doubt of that vanished with Saturday's entry commenting on Adam Nagourney's nonsense in the Saturday New York Times. C.I. missed Maureen Dowd's column (which non Times subscribers can read for free by clicking here).
We almost wrote about the nonsense last week when we repeatedly heard the ads. Then Air America Radio began promoting it as a premium service (the network's sought out donations from listeners if you're not up to speed).
We're not that crazy about the network. Randi Rhodes we can support and enjoy because she's an independent voice. Even if you disagree with her, you know the playbook she's reading from is her own. Otherwise? (We would say the same of Mike Malloy, by the way.)
Baby Cries a Lot is the obvious pull down. There's the disappearance of Lizz Winstead. There's the hiring of Jerry Springer. There's been a preponderance of White males.
Flanders show has guests of both gender, of all races. That's not true of all the shows who regularly book guests. We like Janeane Garofalo but we gave up on The Majority Report during her long absence. If we wanted to hear a moderate White Male (Sam Seder) talk to other White Males about issues through a White Male framework, we'd listen. We see no value in that.
We don't enjoy the digs Seder gets in at Garofalo's expense (and never have). The segment with her father always struck us as some sort of Melissa Steadman (thirty-something) reduxe. Single woman trying to talk to Daddy. We doubt it was intended that way but, week after week, hearing Sam chuckle at the foibles of the single woman while he apparently floats on some sort of Rob Petrie cloud didn't engage us.
There's also the nature of Seder's whine which, when he solos, rises and rises until dogs howl and people cover their ears. It's not attractive radio.
But we mainly don't care to hear a bunch of White Males Sitting Around Boasting.
And when Janeane is on, we don't chuckle at the efforts to silence her, efforts (that anyone listening can tell) frustrate her to no end.
They frustrate us too. Were Seder as amusing as he thinks he is, his career might have taken off. Now he's pushing a book which will probably sell more copies than Baby Cries A Lot's recent book but, as Baby's fortunes have fallen, that's not saying a great deal.
We're tired of the weekend "ghetto." Flanders carved out a spot there with a show that should air five days a week. (In a just world.) But largely, it's become the place where Air America Radio, more recently, attempts to prove it's not just the White Male Radio Network. The truth is that if they took the weekend schedule and put it in play during the week, there would be more worth listening to.
When the network started, Marty Kaplan aired between Randi Rhodes and The Majority Report. It was a nice show, one worth listening to and one that eased you from Rhodes' drive time (which she does very well) into the evening. Rhodes' (deserved) success seems to have left the implication that all anyone needed to do was to ape what they thought her style was.
Seder thinks he has it down. He is mistaken. Rhodes knows her facts and can marshall them with ease. She's not stammering and stuttering while her voice soars up many octives as she attempts to remember the article she wanted to discuss. More importantly, she knows radio.
She has a voice that's a natural for radio. It sounds perfect coming over the radio. Seder's not blessed with the same equipment (even when he keeps it in a lower range). But radio's not standup and Seder's still shaping his anger performance as though it is. Between rage fits, he mocks in the superior tone that's a turnoff to most listeners. After ten minutes, you find yourself wishing someone would slip him a Ritalin already.
Baby Cries a Lot enough has been said of already. (In fact the network spent far too much time pushing him, that started before his lousy show even began airing.) So let's move on to Rachel Maddow who wishes the world could be as smart as she thinks she is -- and proves that desire every broadcast.
You can't talk Maddow without talking Lizz Winstead. The two, with Chuck D, co-hosted the cancelled Unfiltered. The show aired for exactly one year. Back when the nonsense of "family" was being pushed. Unfiltered wasn't perfect but we've been challenged by a reader to acknowledge the disappearance of Lizz Winstead. We have Dallas hunting down other links, but we're pretty sure that was addressed here in real time. If not, we know for a fact that C.I. and Rebecca addressed it at their sites.
Shortly before the show went off in March of 2005, Lizz Winstead suddenly vanished. She wasn't on the show. And she wasn't to be mentioned. A LIE was started by some at Air America (behind the scenes people) that Lizz was ill and had left the show for that reason. They showed up (AAR staff) at various websites posting that nonsense.
Winstead left because Jerry Springer was given Unfiltered's time slot and she didn't feel the need to spend the next few weeks chirping like an idiot and lying to the show's fans. On the show's blog, in its final weeks, the question of Lizz refused to go away (no matter how many staffers wrote idiotic things like "Lizz left because she is sick! We need to respect her privacy and drop it!"). Rachel Maddow refused to address the issue. Finally, forced to do so she offered some nonsense. (It was nonsense before the legal actions started.)
On the final show, Lizz was back . . . briefly . . . as a guest. Maddow also didn't announce the show's impending cancellation when she knew of it. Once it was announced, the obvious pressing concern was Rachel with even her own father showing up at the show's blog to insist that fans write Air America Radio to get them to keep Maddow.
(Elaine followed the Unfiltered blog regularly. It no longer exists. Rebecca and C.I. both have some copy and pastes from pages of the Unfiltered blog that Elaine e-mailed them through the life of the show. Elaine also verified the identity of the male who is still offended by the way Lizz was treated -- if it helps, we are as well -- a long term listener and frequent poster on the Unfiltered site.)
Chuck D wasn't going to carry water for the suits. There was a desire for him to be on everyone of the final shows with Rachel but Chuck wasn't going to play that game. (Good for him.) What the disappearance exploded was the myth that there was a "family" at AAR. Probably a good thing but still painful for many listeners.
The explosion of the myth allowed Seder to scream at a caller (we believe it was John Walsh who writes for CounterPunch) that he just does his show and doesn't follow what other people do on their shows. We'll applaud him for being honest. It's too bad so much time was wasted convincing everyone that this was any sort of a family.
Randi Rhodes earlier dispensed with that notion. While she can be supprotive of her co-workers, she can also toss out a line or two about Baby Cries a Lot tired shtick. Her audience has greatly expanded but it was there before the network started and she knows how to keep it real. (She most famously dispensed with the notion on the 2004 election night coverage when her displeasure with the mindlessly chattering of Maddow and the on-air-Patricia-Heaton-of-the-network led to a lot of nonsense while the election was being stolen. Time and again, Rhodes attempted to discuss what was happening in Florida but apparently the NPR crowd brought that mindset with them to Air America.)
Without Lizz Winstead at her side, Maddow revealed how boring she could be. One failed show led to a new one and the only consistents are the fact that she's still boring and that any show she's involved with feels it has ownership of things Lizz Winstead developed for Unfiltered.
That's really surprising considering how the network has fought against honoring Winstead's contract. Winstead wasn't just a voice at a mike, she helped develop the network. She was instrumental in the interview process, in devising the concept and so much more. She also brought her successful comedic experience (The Daily Show) over to Air America Radio. Having decided that a "name" like Jerry Springer could pull in more viewers than an integrated show (two White women, one African-American male), the thing to do was to honor the contractual agreements they had made with Winstead. Instead the result has been legal filings.
That's really sad. Winstead was hired for a reason and lived up to what she was hired to do (and then some). It was a mistake to cancel Unfiltered. Failure to honor Winstead's contract goes beyond "mistake."
What was Unfiltered? A three hour morning show where Arianna Huffington could stop by and speak without Baby Cries a Lot making what he thought was a funny sex joke. It was a place where Amy Goodman could speak, or Medea Benjamin, without being cut off. It was a place where women weren't the token guest. (The way Christy Harvey is squeed in each week on Baby Cries A Lot.) When Chuck D was on (he wasn't on every broadcast), neither Winstead nor Maddow would play TV sitcom wife giving him all the funny lines and tsk-tskining "Oh you" with the implied head shake.
You had three people discussing issues. Lizz wasn't going to throw reproductive rights into the back of the closet now that some "leaders" were pushing it as something to abandon, Maddow wasn't going to play nice while attacks on same-sex couples were launched (Maddow is open lesbian) and Chuck D wouldn't allow the very real issues of rrace to be forgotten. It was a lively mix. Unlike The Majority Report, there was no attempt to prime the online pump by chasing after various (Male) bloggers. It was an interesting mix of comedy and politics that actually informed you.
It wasn't without its faults. For instance, a "peace activist" translated as someone from Op-Truth (an organization supporting the war, only bickering over the how-tos of it). That was a critique often raised on the show's blog. The "rainman" moment when a male who had apparently beat his wife was awared with not one but two appearances on the show (in the same week) was among the more embarrassing moments. The failure to note guest' Nicholas Kristof's attacks on feminists was a mistake. That's really all that comes to mind. (And among all participating, we probably heard every episode of the show.) That's saying a great deal.
There were individual faults. Maddow could usually be counted on to speak of story in "yesterday's" whatever that was in fact from a Saturday paper (a bit of problem when the day in question is a Monday or Tuesday). Maddow often played "big brain" (as Rebecca dubbed it at the time) when there was little evidence that she grapsed what she was speaking of (though we understand she tests well). Winstead could usually bring it back to reality (and no one on air could explain Medicare as well as Winstead).
But you had a pretty interesting mix. "The Pap Attack" got it's start there and was actually funny and informative. ("Pap Smear" sent the man in question into a nervous frenzy.) Ambrosia sang the news, wonderfully, every Friday. And Kent Jones was always humorous. (Maddow's carried him to ever program she's done since. He's not as funny now because the mood is not there to set up his bits. It's like pulling Phyliss out of The Mary Tyler Moore Show where she works perfectly and trying to impose her into Everybody's Bored With Raymond.)
Apparently grasping how deadly dull Pacifca-hater Maddow is solo, they've tired to recreate the magic of Unfiltered by teaming her with another male who is African-American. He's a nice enough personality, he's not Chuck D. It makes for tepid radio at best.
At a reader's request, we wrote an article about the state (health) of Air America Radio. We're covering all of this at another reader's request. (And largely at the insistence of Elaine who states Unfiltered had few stronger supporters than this man.)
Scorecard?
Laura Flanders leads the excellence that is the weekend programming. (New shows airing on the weekends.) Randi Rhodes got the national prominence that she was denied but deserved all along. Mike Malloy will never be bought by anyone.
The other shows? The Majority Report lost us when Janeane was doing the West Wing. We can't take coming home to hearing a squeaky voice screaming for three hours (when not being so amused with his own self). If the original balance was restored to the show (and Seder stopped treating Garofalo as a joke), we'd listen and grimace over the fact that so few women in the world do so little in someone's eyes (judging by the guest line up). We'd still miss the days when real conversations took place. (They've been replaced with Seder's rants and monologues.) Jerry Springer? While he has every right to run for office (and should if he wants to), don't kid that his hiring didn't turn the network into a joke and a freak show. Maddow's show? If a stick of Blue Bonnet margarine could speak, this is what it would sound like. Baby Cries a Lot? May he whimper for many years . . . in silence. The man who uses his own children as an example of why we have to stay in Iraq (his children who are not serving in Iraq) knows no shame. But, as he infamously admitted, he's not really that liberal. No, he's not. And since his 'comedy' no longer plays on TV we'll apparently be served the tired routine daily on the radio. (As we write this, his show is being rebroadcast for anyone in a lesiure suit, gold chains and a shirt unbuttoned to the waist to enjoy.)
We have a number of issues with what's going down in Vegas (and think the bed analogy via Tori Amos plays quite well) and weren't in the mood to hear a bunch of commercials about it or possibly news breaks on it. Like most conventions dominated by White Males, we're sure it's a "hoot and holler" and think the setting is quite appropriate for the embedness, the corruption of it all. As C.I. wrote Saturday morning: "So in the city only the foolish want to visit (Las Vegas), where dreams die quickly, Adam Nagourney finds his natural resting place. It's almost poetic."
The morality the city was built upon makes it the perfect setting for the death of the once indepenent blogs. (A rebirth? There's always hope but we don't think hope comes on the wigs of Henry Hyde associates or DLC pushers.)
Endorsements are tricky things. We're glad that some no longer see themselves as citizen journalists or journalists of any sort. (Maureen Dowd covers that in her column.)
And endorsment was actually the issue that had us opt out of listening to Saturday's show. That had nothing to do with Flanders and we're sure it was a show worth listening to. We'll probably note Katha Pollitt's appearance next week. But last week, we had a comical short story based on Laura Flanders up against the world. It was funny and we enjoyed writing it but then, as Dona pointed out after the fact, Flanders' does not "preach love me. Her whole thing is about you empowering yourself."
We have no problem endorsing her program and if she ran for office, we'd all be behind her. If she annouced her candidacy for president tomorrow, C.I. would be break the no-candidate-endorsements-from-me that is in place at The Common Ills.
But we've praised another program. We got a number of e-mails complaining about that endorsement which took place weeks ago. We think a lot of the e-mails resutled from the fact that, although C.I. weighed in on Thursday, C.I. didn't name the program. Here's what happened. Two men pushed the "democracy is taking in hold" lie in Iraq. The host allowed it to be pushed. The issue of the undemocratic nature in the attack on women's rights was not addressed. No guest was present calling for an end to the occupation because we must fix what we broke (that was the message, it's bullshit and we'll say so).
We have no problem providing readers with "coming up" notices. Maybe it will be a good show, maybe it won't. We're not responsible for the content. We don't make the shows. Nor would we ever guest on them -- this weekend has driven home the correctness of C.I.'s repeated refusal to grant interviews as "C.I. the blogger" -- which is how the press requests usually refer to C.I. Even if they got off on the right foot (The Common Ills isn't a blog), C.I. would still turn them down. We dealt with why we would awhile back. This weekend drives home why independent media does not need to court approval from the mainstream. Independent media should not be a launching platform for the next Cokie Roberts (though it's already become that).
In the early days of Jess and Ava helping out with the e-mails at The Common Ills, they'd tell us, "Guess who asked for an interview?" and we'd listen and then reply, "Surely that's one C.I.'s going to do!" Nope they all get turned down. C.I. doesn't even read the e-mails before Jess and Ava (they work the public account more than C.I. does) decline the offer on C.I.'s behalf. [C.I. notes the only decline that resulted ina b it of a quandry came from a woman writing for a serious periodical (not a magazine) due to the nature of the periodical and the fact that it was a female journalist.]
It's each person's decision whether to self-market or not. ('Some' live their life never self-marketing, as Rebecca points out before adding, 'some' never had to which has a reply from C.I. that's unprintable. And, for the record, that has nothing to do with blogs.) As asprining journalists (some of us, Ava's announced that she'll not enter journalism this week as a reporter, she'll be in the "business" thanks to another job -- she was set professionally before her first class as a result of her family -- noted with her permission), we (Jim, Ty, Jess and Dona) wondered where the line was on helping actual journalists and on being the subject. We think we've seen it this weekend and it's rather repuslsive. When Ava and C.I. were asked to help a journalist a with a story focusing on TV a few months back, they went back and forth over the issue and finally decided no because it was likely that they would be the story and not be helping. (C.I. notes that was a request for assistance of some form and not a request for an interview or it would have been turned down outright.)
It's a line that's been blurred as famous for being semi-famous lands you a chat and chew gig or a shouting match invitation. We'll again note that Jon Stewart did not go on Crossfire and criticize Tucker Carlson only. He criticized the entire debased system of posers screaming at one another. Just as some on the left treated Baby Cries a Lot's whimpering to Bill O'Reilly as 'tearing into' O'Reilly, some on the left want to act as though Tucker Carlson was the only host of Crossfire.
So the news that telepunditry classes were being offered in Vegas struck us as really sad. (Okay, we all laughed first. It is laughable to think of a Squeaky Mouse getting ready for his close up.) Those hoping to land that "gig" will, like many before them, find themselves co-opted by a system or shut out from it.
Do you really think that any of them have more to say than Gloria Steinem? (When's the last time Meet the Press had her on? Go back many, many years.) More than Danny Schechter? More than Robert Parry? More than any of the number of people who have something to say worth hearing? We think not as a whole. We think some individuals may have and that those individuals will quickly learn that they either play the game or lose their spotlight.
We don't play a game here. We don't seek access. Or links. Or attempt to kiss ass. We'll endorse the work of Flanders and Amy Goodman because we believe in it.
But while Flanders was on vacation (no offense to her guest host but she makes the show for us and we couldn't take listening in with her gone) we endorsed other programs.
One of those has bit us in the butt with the Iraq coverage. Though some involved are willing to allow for anyone having a bad show, others note that on the next show a Cokie Roberts of this century was praised (the Cokie was not present). This led to a heated debate about one reader's e-mail requesting that we delete the feature. We've never deleted a feature. Our policy? It never came up. We post it and if we look smart, whatever, if we look stupid, whatever. It's there and someone can agree or disagree.
But the reader said the feature was an endorsement. The reader is correct. That was an endorsement. It made us take a look (as did other things) at what we'd done recently. The feature on Flanders last week is bad writing. (That's not withdrawing our endorsement of Flanders. That's noting that we can and often do publish bad writing. We're a weekly online magazine and we piece it together as we go along. Often scrapping something at the last minute -- the Flanders piece did run in the print edition -- and reworking it or quickly grabbing a new issue or topic to write about.)
We can't endorse anyone who presents propaganda about the illegal war and allows it to go unchallenged. It's up there, the endorsement of the show. Short of Naomi Klein being a guest on it, we don't intend to ever mention it again. It was bad radio (we can all agree on that).
But it's up there and we're not going to pull it. If we could all agree that the host is responsible, we'd do an update. (And just writing that sentence led to a huge argument.) We'll stake our on endorsements on the likes of Goodman or Flanders (or Michael Ratner, Dalia Hashad, Heidi Boghosian or Michael Smith) because they're working from a strong place. They're not changing with the wind. Otherwise, we'll just note. We may shake it up and do a highlight of Democracy Now! or of Law and Disorder (no links, Ty's typing this up and advises that the piece may be so long as it is that adding links will slow things down even further -- they're so slow that Ty's several words ahead in typing before anything displays onscreen).
But what happened on Thursday and then on Friday made us agree that we needed to rethink our own notions of endorsement. Since it was highly likely that ads or news breaks would cover a convention that we find repugnant we all (except C.I. who was not around a radio and announces would have listened if it were possible to). That's probably not fair to Flanders (and we agree she deserves better). But the show is archived at The Nation. and, as we were having this conversation late Saturday afternoon, Dona read an e-mail from a reader asking the same questions that we were asking.
We don't endorse Air America. We don't have a "war" with it (before that e-mail comes in). We just think most of it is useless as anything other than fundamental politics (we almost typed "intro" but then someone pointed out there was a class lower than that). We've noted the exceptions. We've explained our problems with it. (And hopefully where we stand.) We'll take a look at future coverage and attempt to avoid cheerleading (even for the left) when we write about radio. We're not deleting the entry but, as a group, we are withdrawing the endorsement of the program we covered while Flanders was on vacation. We do not and will not support any program that presents lies about the illegal occupation. The fact that one of the guests is a (pampered) Iraqi (Male, naturally) doesn't excuse not challenging the guest's lies. Some of us would add or booking two guests who are known ahead of time to be liars.
No matter who you are, an endorsement has weight. Whether you're giving it to your friends or online or in print. We will try to be much more selective in the future and we all (as a group) regret the endorsement that has bothered so many. (And to the one who asked that we delete it, two of the core Third Estate Sunday Review -- tow of six agree with you and say this issue s not dead.)
Sunday, June 11, 2006
Radio (online and over the airwaves) highlights
An interesting mix on the radio today (all programs can be listened to online with no charge and no registration -- three e-mails came in last week complaining about a form you were requested to fill out to listen to Laura Flanders, if you come across that form -- asking for year of birth, etc. -- click "back" and try to enter again -- we're told it was popping up at random). You have writer and feminist Katha Pollitt discussing her new book, you have a discussion of Leonardo da Vinci, music, post-traumatic stress disorders and more.
Coming up on WBAI today:
11:00-noon: The Next Hour
Author/actor/raconteur and Green Party person Malachy McCourt holds forth on this pre-Bloomsday edition.
6:30-7:00 pm: Equal Time for Freethought
The Da Vinci Fraud: Why the Truth is Stranger than Fiction. Was Leonardo Da Vinci a member of the "Priory of Sion," a secret society reaching all the way back to the Crusades? Does his famous painting, "The Last Supper," contain a hidden code about this society's most precious secret?
9:00-11:00 pm: Everything Old is New Again
Jazz and the Broadway songbook. Some of the perfomers who will be part of the mix: Oscar Peterson, Jessica Molaskey, Andy Bey, Dee Dee Bridgewater, Peter Cincotti, Ella Fitzgerald, Ralph Brande, Annie Ross, Jimmy Scott and many more.
Coming up on KPFA:
Sunday Salon
Sunday, June 11th, 09:00a.m.
Hour 1:
The controversial California High School Exit Exam;
Hour 2:
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and the ongoing conflict in the Middle East
Act One Radio Drama
Sunday, June 11th, 7:30p.m.
Aliens in America, written by contemporary satirist Sandra Tsing Loh.
Against the Grain
Monday, June 12th, 12:00p.m.
Aaron Glantz, author of "How America Lost Iraq," talks about the massacre by US troops of Iraqi civilians in Haditha.
[C.I. adds that Jeff Chester is scheduled to be on KPFA's The Morning Show Monday.]
Coming up on Air America Radio's RadioNation with Laura Flanders:
Sunday:
On Sunday: The America is Purple tour turns to Oregon with:
ERIK STEN, Portland City Commissioner. MARCY WESTERLING of the Rural Organizing Project. JOANN BOWMAN of The Money in Politics Research Action Project. JEFFERSON SMITH of The Bus Project.And KATHA POLLITT, the Nation columnist on her new book, "Virginity or Death!"
Coming up on WBAI today:
11:00-noon: The Next Hour
Author/actor/raconteur and Green Party person Malachy McCourt holds forth on this pre-Bloomsday edition.
6:30-7:00 pm: Equal Time for Freethought
The Da Vinci Fraud: Why the Truth is Stranger than Fiction. Was Leonardo Da Vinci a member of the "Priory of Sion," a secret society reaching all the way back to the Crusades? Does his famous painting, "The Last Supper," contain a hidden code about this society's most precious secret?
9:00-11:00 pm: Everything Old is New Again
Jazz and the Broadway songbook. Some of the perfomers who will be part of the mix: Oscar Peterson, Jessica Molaskey, Andy Bey, Dee Dee Bridgewater, Peter Cincotti, Ella Fitzgerald, Ralph Brande, Annie Ross, Jimmy Scott and many more.
Coming up on KPFA:
Sunday Salon
Sunday, June 11th, 09:00a.m.
Hour 1:
The controversial California High School Exit Exam;
Hour 2:
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and the ongoing conflict in the Middle East
Act One Radio Drama
Sunday, June 11th, 7:30p.m.
Aliens in America, written by contemporary satirist Sandra Tsing Loh.
Against the Grain
Monday, June 12th, 12:00p.m.
Aaron Glantz, author of "How America Lost Iraq," talks about the massacre by US troops of Iraqi civilians in Haditha.
[C.I. adds that Jeff Chester is scheduled to be on KPFA's The Morning Show Monday.]
Coming up on Air America Radio's RadioNation with Laura Flanders:
Sunday:
On Sunday: The America is Purple tour turns to Oregon with:
ERIK STEN, Portland City Commissioner. MARCY WESTERLING of the Rural Organizing Project. JOANN BOWMAN of The Money in Politics Research Action Project. JEFFERSON SMITH of The Bus Project.And KATHA POLLITT, the Nation columnist on her new book, "Virginity or Death!"
Music Spotlight: Kat reviews Free Design's Kites Are Fun
Kat: If you're one of the small number dedicated to the belief that Free Design's first album Kites Are Fun is a masterpiece of artistic achievement, you can stop reading now. It's not and nothing I have to say will please you.
"Small number?"
Free Design was a group that emerged in 1967. They had some local success but were largely undermined by a lack of strong distribution. For the first album, that was far from the only problem.
I actually enjoy Kites Are Fun. I enjoy it the same way as I do the closing songs in those big studio films of the late sixties where some guy has had a coming of age experience or a some mismatched couple is playing us against the world. The song is pure vocal and it's lah-lah-lah as the credits roll and maybe someone runs across an empty beach or up a hill. It's the sound that Simon & Garfunkel should have demolished with their more complex work on the soundtrack to The Graduate -- yet somehow the earlier sound managed to hang around for a few more years.
On a shady, lazy day, I enjoy putting on this album, the vinyl version. I wasn't even aware the album had been released on CD until an e-mail came in asking if I had any thoughts on it?
The good news first. Wonderful remastering by Light Sound Attic. There's a booklet that will please the dedicated but probably not many others.
At this point in time, Free Design was three people: Bruce, Chris and Sandy Dedrick. Sandy, the sister, is easy to pick out in the photos. If you don't know the group, you may look at any of the four photos inside the booklet (there are also reproductions of album covers) and wonder, "Wait, which one is Chris? Which one is Bruce?"
1967 was the year Lou Adler, Michelle & John Phillips and others staged the Monterey International Pop Music Festival. Janis Joplin, the Jefferson Airplane and Jimi Hendrix would be among the ones who would rip apart the stage and capture the fascination of America's record buying public. That's important to remember when trying to figure out why Free Design never made it to the ranks of hitmakers -- let alone super groups.
The original cover (also used as the cover for the remaster) shows you the three siblings wearing what might have been considered "with it" clothes in the early sixties. By 1965, forget 1967, the only word for the look was "square." (The group would change their look on later albums.) Looking like the last refugees from the folk coffee house circuit, the boys sport turtle necks and Sandy, in a striped shirt, wears her long hair as if she'd just had her photo taken for the 1963 yearbook.
1967 was a year when image mattered. When cues were sent via image. Janis was letting it all hang out and adorned in feathers and fringes. The Mamas and the Papas had long since smashed the cookie cutter mold with their outfits. Here's a vocal group where the men are wearing turtlenecks and chinos with hair cuts that Mike Love would term "conservative." The times, the hair was flowing. Along comes Free Design with a look that no one was wearing. It hurt their credibility.
Another minus was Sandy being surrounded by her brothers. Free Design was going for an intelligent crowd -- read "older" than those who might spin the Archies. Just as, in the seventies, Donny & Marie were dubbed "sexy" only by the young; those actually having sex were kind of grossed out by the closeness factor of the squeaky clean Free Design. You better believe that hurt.
Know what else hurt? The new liner notes tell you how artistic and talented Free Design was.
It wasn't that talented. They could hit notes. There's no question of that. But mechanics doesn't mean great singer.
A great singer doesn't sing "kites are fuuNNNNNNN . . . kites are fuuNNNNN" because a great singers knows that vowels sing, consonants don't. But there's Free Design on the closest thing they had to a hit singing "NNNNs" over and over.
If you're confused, the Beach Boys sang "fUn, fUn, fun, 'till her daddy . . ." They didn't sing "fuNNNN, fuNNN, fuNNNN, 'till her daddy . . ."
For all the praise heaped on the group's debut album, all the talk of how talented they were, how trained, how their background is strongly in music, they didn't know the first thing about singing. That's a problem when you're a vocal group.
At a time when Hendrix and Pete Townsend were about to change the landscape with the guitar work, the da-da-da, crisp, quick, stacatto vocals backed up with a gentle acoustic/chamber music sound were as retro as Tiny Tim. (But he had a visual which helped carry him to fame.)
Songwriting? "When Love Is Young," credited to "S. Zynczak & S. Dedrick," is the strongest original composition. Not, as we're led to believe "Kites Are Fun." The latter track is supposed to now be seen as the sort of thing Brian Wilson could have written. Possibly . . . on a really, really bad day.
If the only thing amazing about Wilson's growth as a songwriter had been that he had started writing about childhood, he wouldn't be remembered today. It was how he wrote about it.
I like flying
Flying kites
Flying kiiiiites
Flying kiiiiiiiites
Kites are fuNNN
Kites are fuNNN
See my kite is fuNNN
See my kite is green and white
Laughing at it's distant flight
All that's between us is a little yellow string
That's not a song, it's a commercial for a hobby. The apparent 'rebellion' comes in one line, repeated throughout, of how, tragedy, "Mom and Dad and Uncle Bill don't realize" that, of course, kites are fuNNN.
It's a piece of fluff, fun fluff, but it's not even a distant family relation of the songs of Brian Wilson.
With few exceptions, that's the entire album. Along with "When Love Is Young," the song "Make the Madness Stop" is evidence of songwriting talent. "Kites Are Fun"? It may have made Alex Wilder, writing many years later in the New York Times, "weep," but it will more likely lead you to roll your eyes or burst out laughing.
"Corneilus (Keigo Oyamada)," writing in 2003, tries to group them in with the Beach Boys and the Carpenters. That may be the first comparison of the Beach Boys and the Carpenters I'm aware of. The comparison is ill suited on every level; the Beach Boys were aiming for the kids, the Carpenters (a favorite band of Tricky Dick's) were parent-pleasing.
So is Free Design. You can picture a mother picking up a vinyl copy while taking the Singer in for repairs and saying to her teenage son (who carried the sewing machine into the store), "Why can't you be more like these kids? Look at them. They bathe, they have short hair. They're so clean cut!" And you know what, it was probably those moments more than sorry distribution (the album actually was distributed at Singer sewing machine stores) that killed any chances of success for this album.
"So you're saying avoid at all costs?"
No. It's a nice piece of fluff. They'd change up on later albums (adding a sister and losing a brother). I might try to note one or more of those albums in the future (maybe the pyschadelic children's album they did). In terms of this album, if you get the giddy rush you're supposed to when some big-budget, youth-geared film rolls the credits, you'll get a rush from this album.
My brother gave me this album. He'd just turned 13 and was being picked on for having it in his collection. I'll never forget his face as he handed it over and asked me to take good care of it. Reminded me of the face of my sister when she decided she was too old for Barbies. Kites Are Fun is a wonderful toy. You can have fun with it. It's just not art. No matter how hard the liner notes try to convince you otherwise.
In fact, dropping back to the general time period these notes were written in, what it reminds me of is all the children of stars that were attempting to become famous. Most didn't have the goods to (and faded into other work) but since they couldn't do anything but hype the supposed talent, the press would tell you about their "pedigree." The liner notes for the CD attempt to do the same. They try to convince you that this was just too good, too wonderful, too classically trained for success.
That's not reality. Which, if you think about it, makes the liner notes perfect for this CD release.
the free design
kites are fun
janis joplin
jimi hendrix
the mamas and the papas
kats korner
the common ills
"Small number?"
Free Design was a group that emerged in 1967. They had some local success but were largely undermined by a lack of strong distribution. For the first album, that was far from the only problem.
I actually enjoy Kites Are Fun. I enjoy it the same way as I do the closing songs in those big studio films of the late sixties where some guy has had a coming of age experience or a some mismatched couple is playing us against the world. The song is pure vocal and it's lah-lah-lah as the credits roll and maybe someone runs across an empty beach or up a hill. It's the sound that Simon & Garfunkel should have demolished with their more complex work on the soundtrack to The Graduate -- yet somehow the earlier sound managed to hang around for a few more years.
On a shady, lazy day, I enjoy putting on this album, the vinyl version. I wasn't even aware the album had been released on CD until an e-mail came in asking if I had any thoughts on it?
The good news first. Wonderful remastering by Light Sound Attic. There's a booklet that will please the dedicated but probably not many others.
At this point in time, Free Design was three people: Bruce, Chris and Sandy Dedrick. Sandy, the sister, is easy to pick out in the photos. If you don't know the group, you may look at any of the four photos inside the booklet (there are also reproductions of album covers) and wonder, "Wait, which one is Chris? Which one is Bruce?"
1967 was the year Lou Adler, Michelle & John Phillips and others staged the Monterey International Pop Music Festival. Janis Joplin, the Jefferson Airplane and Jimi Hendrix would be among the ones who would rip apart the stage and capture the fascination of America's record buying public. That's important to remember when trying to figure out why Free Design never made it to the ranks of hitmakers -- let alone super groups.
The original cover (also used as the cover for the remaster) shows you the three siblings wearing what might have been considered "with it" clothes in the early sixties. By 1965, forget 1967, the only word for the look was "square." (The group would change their look on later albums.) Looking like the last refugees from the folk coffee house circuit, the boys sport turtle necks and Sandy, in a striped shirt, wears her long hair as if she'd just had her photo taken for the 1963 yearbook.
1967 was a year when image mattered. When cues were sent via image. Janis was letting it all hang out and adorned in feathers and fringes. The Mamas and the Papas had long since smashed the cookie cutter mold with their outfits. Here's a vocal group where the men are wearing turtlenecks and chinos with hair cuts that Mike Love would term "conservative." The times, the hair was flowing. Along comes Free Design with a look that no one was wearing. It hurt their credibility.
Another minus was Sandy being surrounded by her brothers. Free Design was going for an intelligent crowd -- read "older" than those who might spin the Archies. Just as, in the seventies, Donny & Marie were dubbed "sexy" only by the young; those actually having sex were kind of grossed out by the closeness factor of the squeaky clean Free Design. You better believe that hurt.
Know what else hurt? The new liner notes tell you how artistic and talented Free Design was.
It wasn't that talented. They could hit notes. There's no question of that. But mechanics doesn't mean great singer.
A great singer doesn't sing "kites are fuuNNNNNNN . . . kites are fuuNNNNN" because a great singers knows that vowels sing, consonants don't. But there's Free Design on the closest thing they had to a hit singing "NNNNs" over and over.
If you're confused, the Beach Boys sang "fUn, fUn, fun, 'till her daddy . . ." They didn't sing "fuNNNN, fuNNN, fuNNNN, 'till her daddy . . ."
For all the praise heaped on the group's debut album, all the talk of how talented they were, how trained, how their background is strongly in music, they didn't know the first thing about singing. That's a problem when you're a vocal group.
At a time when Hendrix and Pete Townsend were about to change the landscape with the guitar work, the da-da-da, crisp, quick, stacatto vocals backed up with a gentle acoustic/chamber music sound were as retro as Tiny Tim. (But he had a visual which helped carry him to fame.)
Songwriting? "When Love Is Young," credited to "S. Zynczak & S. Dedrick," is the strongest original composition. Not, as we're led to believe "Kites Are Fun." The latter track is supposed to now be seen as the sort of thing Brian Wilson could have written. Possibly . . . on a really, really bad day.
If the only thing amazing about Wilson's growth as a songwriter had been that he had started writing about childhood, he wouldn't be remembered today. It was how he wrote about it.
I like flying
Flying kites
Flying kiiiiites
Flying kiiiiiiiites
Kites are fuNNN
Kites are fuNNN
See my kite is fuNNN
See my kite is green and white
Laughing at it's distant flight
All that's between us is a little yellow string
That's not a song, it's a commercial for a hobby. The apparent 'rebellion' comes in one line, repeated throughout, of how, tragedy, "Mom and Dad and Uncle Bill don't realize" that, of course, kites are fuNNN.
It's a piece of fluff, fun fluff, but it's not even a distant family relation of the songs of Brian Wilson.
With few exceptions, that's the entire album. Along with "When Love Is Young," the song "Make the Madness Stop" is evidence of songwriting talent. "Kites Are Fun"? It may have made Alex Wilder, writing many years later in the New York Times, "weep," but it will more likely lead you to roll your eyes or burst out laughing.
"Corneilus (Keigo Oyamada)," writing in 2003, tries to group them in with the Beach Boys and the Carpenters. That may be the first comparison of the Beach Boys and the Carpenters I'm aware of. The comparison is ill suited on every level; the Beach Boys were aiming for the kids, the Carpenters (a favorite band of Tricky Dick's) were parent-pleasing.
So is Free Design. You can picture a mother picking up a vinyl copy while taking the Singer in for repairs and saying to her teenage son (who carried the sewing machine into the store), "Why can't you be more like these kids? Look at them. They bathe, they have short hair. They're so clean cut!" And you know what, it was probably those moments more than sorry distribution (the album actually was distributed at Singer sewing machine stores) that killed any chances of success for this album.
"So you're saying avoid at all costs?"
No. It's a nice piece of fluff. They'd change up on later albums (adding a sister and losing a brother). I might try to note one or more of those albums in the future (maybe the pyschadelic children's album they did). In terms of this album, if you get the giddy rush you're supposed to when some big-budget, youth-geared film rolls the credits, you'll get a rush from this album.
My brother gave me this album. He'd just turned 13 and was being picked on for having it in his collection. I'll never forget his face as he handed it over and asked me to take good care of it. Reminded me of the face of my sister when she decided she was too old for Barbies. Kites Are Fun is a wonderful toy. You can have fun with it. It's just not art. No matter how hard the liner notes try to convince you otherwise.
In fact, dropping back to the general time period these notes were written in, what it reminds me of is all the children of stars that were attempting to become famous. Most didn't have the goods to (and faded into other work) but since they couldn't do anything but hype the supposed talent, the press would tell you about their "pedigree." The liner notes for the CD attempt to do the same. They try to convince you that this was just too good, too wonderful, too classically trained for success.
That's not reality. Which, if you think about it, makes the liner notes perfect for this CD release.
the free design
kites are fun
janis joplin
jimi hendrix
the mamas and the papas
kats korner
the common ills
Teniente del Ejército se niega a ser trasladado a Irak
Teniente del Ejército se niega a ser trasladado a Irak
Francisco: Hola mi amigos y amigas. Aqui estan 10 noticias de "Democracy Now!". Buen fin de semana.
Teniente del Ejército se niega a ser trasladado a Irak
Mientras tanto, un oficial del Ejército estadounidense anunció que se niega a ser trasladado a Irak, lo que estaba programado para fines de este mes. El oficial, primer teniente Ehren Watada, dice que primero pidió autorización para renunciar a su cargo en enero. En dicha ocasión, Watada escribió: "Me opongo por completo a la permanente guerra en Irak, al engaño utilizado para librar esta guerra, y a la ilegitimidad que ha invadido todos los aspectos de nuestro liderazgo civil". Se cree que el teniente Watada es el primer oficial en actividad en negarse a ser trasladado a Irak desde que comenzó la invasión. Se espera que quienes lo apoyan lleven a cabo hoy conferencias de prensa simultáneas en su estado de origen, Hawai, y en Olimpia, Washington. Funcionarios militares le dijeron a Watada que no puede asistir a la conferencia de prensa porque tiene prohibido hablar en público sobre su caso mientras esté cumpliendo servicio en la base.
Estados Unidos muestra fotos del cadáver de Zarqawi
Las Fuerzas Armadas estadounidenses mostraron el jueves imágenes del cadáver de Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, el hombre más buscado de Irak, poco después de anunciar que había sido asesinado en una ataque aéreo. Las fotos mostraban a Zarqawi con cortes y moretones visibles en su cara. Los gobiernos iraquí y estadounidense dicen que fue asesinado cuando aviones de combate estadounidenses arrojaron un par de bombas de 227 kilogramos en un refugio en las afueras de la localidad de Baquba. Para muchas personas, Zarqawi era la cara de la resistencia iraquí; fue acusado de llevar a cabo innumerables bombardeos, asesinatos y otros actos de violencia, incluyendo la decapitación de rehenes en Irak.
Mueren 31 personas por violencia; se prohíbe el tránsito de vehículos en Bagdad
Mientras tanto, al menos 31 personas murieron el jueves en tres atentados con bombas en Irak. En el peor ataque del día, trece personas murieron en un ataque contra un mercado de frutas de Bagdad. El gobierno iraquí impuso una prohibición de vehículos de un día en Bagdad, para prevenir represalias violentas por la muerte de Zarqawi.
Líderes del Senado y de la Cámara de Representantes acuerdan destinar 65.800 millones de dólares a las guerras en Irak y Afganistán
Mientras tanto, los legisladores culminaron un acuerdo presupuestario que destinará 65.800 millones de dólares para las operaciones militares en Irak y Afganistán. El acuerdo presupuestario surge mientras una nueva encuesta muestra que el 59% de los ciudadanos estadounidenses creen que comenzar la guerra contra Irak fue "un error".
Soldados estadounidenses acusados de nuevas matanzas de civiles
Mientras tanto en Irak, soldados estadounidenses son acusados de un nueva serie de asesinatos a civiles iraquíes. El miércoles, el Partido Islámico Iraquí -el principal grupo sunita de Irak- dijo que tenía pruebas de que soldados estadounidenses mataron a más de dos docenas de iraquíes en incidentes ocurridos el mes pasado. Según el grupo, el ataque en el que se registraron más muertes ocurrió en una casa en Yusifiyah, al sur de Bagdad, y dejó un saldo de trece muertos, hombres y mujeres.
Investigación indica que catorce países europeos están involucrados en operaciones de la CIA
El principal organismo de vigilancia de los derechos humanos de Europa determinó que catorce países europeos estuvieron implicados o fueron cómplices en las operaciones secretas que realizó la CIA desde los atentados del 11 de septiembre. Dick Marty, presidente del Comité de Asuntos Legales y Derechos Humanos del Consejo de Europa, acusó al gobierno de Bush de adoptar un enfoque jurídico que es "completamente ajeno a la tradición europea". La investigación de Marty se centró en la práctica de Estados Unidos de rendiciones extraordinarias en la que funcionarios de la CIA secuestran a individuos y luego los trasladan a otros países para interrogarlos. Según el informe, España, Turquía, Alemania y Chipre proporcionaron lugares para las operaciones de traslado. Italia, Suecia, Bosnia y Macedonia permitieron el traslado de residentes desde su territorio. Gran Bretaña, Irlanda, Portugal y Grecia, proporcionaron aeropuertos utilizados por la CIA, mientras que Rumania y Polonia permitieron que la CIA operara prisiones secretas dentro de su territorio.
Activistas por la paz de Vermont interrumpen discurso de Negroponte
En Vermont, dos activistas por la paz fueron arrestados el lunes por interrumpir el discurso inaugural del Director Nacional de Inteligencia, John Negroponte, en la Academia St Johnsbury. Momentos después de que Negroponte comenzara su discurso, un manifestante se puso de pie y exclamó: "En nombre de la democracia me opongo a que hable este hombre. Tiene las manos manchadas con sangre por su trabajo en América Central e Irak. No debería estar en el estrado, debería estar en prisión. Es un criminal de guerra". Mientras el manifestante era escoltado hacia la salida, Negroponte dijo: "Ahora es mi turno". Pero antes de que pudiera continuar, otro manifestante se puso de pie y lo acusó de supervisar la tortura, los asesinatos y las violaciones en Honduras.
Estados Unidos se niega a ayudar a víctimas vietnamitas del Agente Naranja
El Secretario de Defensa, Donald Rumsfeld, está viajando por Asia esta semana. Durante su visita a Vietnam, oficiales militares estadounidenses reconocieron que Washington no indemnizará a millones de vietnamitas que sufren los efectos del Agente Naranja, utilizado por las Fuerzas Armadas estadounidenses durante la Guerra de Vietnam. Mientras tanto, Rumsfeld viajó a Indonesia para conmemorar el reestablecimiento de los vínculos de Washington con el gobierno de ese país.
Censo en Nueva Orleáns indica que población negra disminuyó 15%
En Nueva Orleáns, un nuevo censo de los cuatro meses siguientes al huracán Katrina concluyó que la población de la ciudad se volvió mayoritariamente blanca, envejeció y se empobreció. La población del área metropolitana de Nueva Orleáns disminuyó en más de la mitad. La población negra se redujo de 37 a 22 por ciento, mientras que el porcentaje de personas blancas aumentó de 60 a 73 por ciento.
Billy Preston murió a los 59 añosBilly Preston, el prolífico tecladista conocido como el "quinto Beatle", murió el martes a los 59 años. Preston tocó en varios éxitos número uno para los Beatles y los Rolling Stones, y tenía tres simples número uno de su autoría. Tocó en lo que terminó siendo el último recital de los Beatles, la famosa actuación en el techo de un edificio en 1969.
Francisco: Hello friends. Here are ten headlines from this week's Democracy Now!
Army Lt. Refuses Iraq Deployment
Meanwhile, a US army officer has announced he's refusing his deployment to Iraq slated for later this month. The officer, First Lt. Ehren Watada, says he first asked for permission to resign his position in January. He says he wrote: "I am whole-heartedly opposed to the continued war in Iraq, the deception used to wage this war, and the lawlessness that has pervaded every aspect of our civilian leadership." Lt. Watada is believed to be the first commissioned officer to refuse deployment to Iraq since the invasion. Simultaneous news conferences by his supporters are expected to be held today in his home state of Hawaii and in Olympia, Washington. Military officials told Watada he cannot attend the news conference because he is barred from speaking publicly about his case while on duty at the base.
US Shows Images of Zarqawi's Body
Shortly after announcing he had been killed in an air strike, the US military displayed images Thursday of the body of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- Iraq's most wanted man. The pictures showed Zarqawi with visible cuts and bruises to his face. The Iraqi and U.S. governments say Zarqawi was killed when U.S. fighter planes dropped a pair of 500 pound bombs on a safehouse outside of the town of Baquba. To many Zarqawi was the face of the Iraqi resistance. He was accused of carrying out countless bombings, murders and other acts of violence including the beheading of hostages in Iraq.
31 Killed in Violence; Vehicle Traffic Banned in Baghdad
Meanwhile, at least 31 people were killed Thursday in three separate bombings across Iraq. In the day’s worst violence, 13 people were killed in an attack at a Baghdad fruit market. The Iraqi government has imposed a daytime vehicle ban in Baghdad in anticipation of violent retaliation for Zarqawi's death.
Senate, House Leaders Agree on $65B for Iraq, Afghanistan Wars
Meanwhile, lawmakers have finalized a budget agreement that will provide $65.8 billion dollars for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The budget agreement comes as a new poll shows a record 59 percent of Americans believe going to war against Iraq was a "mistake."
US Troops Accused of New Civilian Killings
Meanwhile in Iraq, US troops are being accused of a new round of killings of Iraqi civilians. On Wednesday, the Iraqi Islamic Party, Iraq’s main Sunni group, said it had evidence US troops killed more than two dozen Iraqis in incidents last month. According to the group, the most deadly attack occurred in a house in Yusifiyah south of Baghdad -- killing 13 people, including women and children.
Probe Says 14 European Countries Involved in CIA Operations
Europe's leading human rights watchdog has determined that 14 European countries have been involved in or complicit in secret CIA operations since the Sept. 11th attacks. Dick Marty, chairman of the Council of Europe's committee on legal affairs and human rights, accused the Bush administration of adopting a legal approach which is "utterly alien to the European tradition." Marty's investigation focused on the U.S. practice of extraordinary rendition where CIA officials kidnap individuals and then transport them to other countries for interrogation. According to the report, Spain, Turkey, Germany and Cyprus provided staging posts for rendition operations. Italy, Sweden, Bosnia, and Macedonia all allowed the rendition of residents from their soil. Britain, Ireland, Portugal, and Greece all provided airports used by the CIA. And Romania and Poland allowed the CIA to operate secret prisons on their soil.
Vermont Peace Activists Disrupt Negroponte Speech
In Vermont, two peace activists were arrested on Monday for disrupting a commencement address given by National Intelligence Director John Negroponte at St Johnsbury Academy. Moments after Negroponte began his address, a protester stood up and yelled: "In the name of democracy I object to this man speaking. He has blood on his hands from his work in Central America and Iraq. He shouldn't be at the podium, he should be in jail. He is a war criminal." As the protester was being escorted away, Negroponte said "Now it's my turn." But before he could continue, another protester stood up and accused Negroponte of overseeing torture, killings and rape in Honduras, where he served as ambassador in the 1980s.
U.S. Refuses to Help Vietnamese Agent Orange Victims
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is traveling to Asia this week. During his stop in Vietnam, U.S. military officials admitted that Washington will not compensate the millions of Vietnamese suffering from the affects of Agent Orange, used by the U.S. military during the Vietnam War. Meanwhile Rumsfeld traveled to Indonesia to mark the restoration of Washington’s military ties to the Indonesian government.
New Orleans Census Shows 15% Drop in Black Residents
In New Orleans, a new census covering the fourth months following Hurricane Katrina has found the city has become considerably whiter, older and less poor. New Orleans' metropolitan area has shrunk to more than half its size. The black population has dropped from 37 from 22 percent, while the percentage of whites has increased from 60 to 73 percent.
Billy Preston Dies at 59
And Billy Preston, the prolific keyboardist known as the "Fifth Beatle", died Tuesday at the age of 59. Preston played on several number one hits for the Beatles and Rolling Stones, and had three number one pop singles of his own. He played at what turned out to be the Beatles' last concert, the famous rooftop performance in 1969.
democracy now
news
iraq
irak
noticias
the common ills
Francisco: Hola mi amigos y amigas. Aqui estan 10 noticias de "Democracy Now!". Buen fin de semana.
Teniente del Ejército se niega a ser trasladado a Irak
Mientras tanto, un oficial del Ejército estadounidense anunció que se niega a ser trasladado a Irak, lo que estaba programado para fines de este mes. El oficial, primer teniente Ehren Watada, dice que primero pidió autorización para renunciar a su cargo en enero. En dicha ocasión, Watada escribió: "Me opongo por completo a la permanente guerra en Irak, al engaño utilizado para librar esta guerra, y a la ilegitimidad que ha invadido todos los aspectos de nuestro liderazgo civil". Se cree que el teniente Watada es el primer oficial en actividad en negarse a ser trasladado a Irak desde que comenzó la invasión. Se espera que quienes lo apoyan lleven a cabo hoy conferencias de prensa simultáneas en su estado de origen, Hawai, y en Olimpia, Washington. Funcionarios militares le dijeron a Watada que no puede asistir a la conferencia de prensa porque tiene prohibido hablar en público sobre su caso mientras esté cumpliendo servicio en la base.
Estados Unidos muestra fotos del cadáver de Zarqawi
Las Fuerzas Armadas estadounidenses mostraron el jueves imágenes del cadáver de Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, el hombre más buscado de Irak, poco después de anunciar que había sido asesinado en una ataque aéreo. Las fotos mostraban a Zarqawi con cortes y moretones visibles en su cara. Los gobiernos iraquí y estadounidense dicen que fue asesinado cuando aviones de combate estadounidenses arrojaron un par de bombas de 227 kilogramos en un refugio en las afueras de la localidad de Baquba. Para muchas personas, Zarqawi era la cara de la resistencia iraquí; fue acusado de llevar a cabo innumerables bombardeos, asesinatos y otros actos de violencia, incluyendo la decapitación de rehenes en Irak.
Mueren 31 personas por violencia; se prohíbe el tránsito de vehículos en Bagdad
Mientras tanto, al menos 31 personas murieron el jueves en tres atentados con bombas en Irak. En el peor ataque del día, trece personas murieron en un ataque contra un mercado de frutas de Bagdad. El gobierno iraquí impuso una prohibición de vehículos de un día en Bagdad, para prevenir represalias violentas por la muerte de Zarqawi.
Líderes del Senado y de la Cámara de Representantes acuerdan destinar 65.800 millones de dólares a las guerras en Irak y Afganistán
Mientras tanto, los legisladores culminaron un acuerdo presupuestario que destinará 65.800 millones de dólares para las operaciones militares en Irak y Afganistán. El acuerdo presupuestario surge mientras una nueva encuesta muestra que el 59% de los ciudadanos estadounidenses creen que comenzar la guerra contra Irak fue "un error".
Soldados estadounidenses acusados de nuevas matanzas de civiles
Mientras tanto en Irak, soldados estadounidenses son acusados de un nueva serie de asesinatos a civiles iraquíes. El miércoles, el Partido Islámico Iraquí -el principal grupo sunita de Irak- dijo que tenía pruebas de que soldados estadounidenses mataron a más de dos docenas de iraquíes en incidentes ocurridos el mes pasado. Según el grupo, el ataque en el que se registraron más muertes ocurrió en una casa en Yusifiyah, al sur de Bagdad, y dejó un saldo de trece muertos, hombres y mujeres.
Investigación indica que catorce países europeos están involucrados en operaciones de la CIA
El principal organismo de vigilancia de los derechos humanos de Europa determinó que catorce países europeos estuvieron implicados o fueron cómplices en las operaciones secretas que realizó la CIA desde los atentados del 11 de septiembre. Dick Marty, presidente del Comité de Asuntos Legales y Derechos Humanos del Consejo de Europa, acusó al gobierno de Bush de adoptar un enfoque jurídico que es "completamente ajeno a la tradición europea". La investigación de Marty se centró en la práctica de Estados Unidos de rendiciones extraordinarias en la que funcionarios de la CIA secuestran a individuos y luego los trasladan a otros países para interrogarlos. Según el informe, España, Turquía, Alemania y Chipre proporcionaron lugares para las operaciones de traslado. Italia, Suecia, Bosnia y Macedonia permitieron el traslado de residentes desde su territorio. Gran Bretaña, Irlanda, Portugal y Grecia, proporcionaron aeropuertos utilizados por la CIA, mientras que Rumania y Polonia permitieron que la CIA operara prisiones secretas dentro de su territorio.
Activistas por la paz de Vermont interrumpen discurso de Negroponte
En Vermont, dos activistas por la paz fueron arrestados el lunes por interrumpir el discurso inaugural del Director Nacional de Inteligencia, John Negroponte, en la Academia St Johnsbury. Momentos después de que Negroponte comenzara su discurso, un manifestante se puso de pie y exclamó: "En nombre de la democracia me opongo a que hable este hombre. Tiene las manos manchadas con sangre por su trabajo en América Central e Irak. No debería estar en el estrado, debería estar en prisión. Es un criminal de guerra". Mientras el manifestante era escoltado hacia la salida, Negroponte dijo: "Ahora es mi turno". Pero antes de que pudiera continuar, otro manifestante se puso de pie y lo acusó de supervisar la tortura, los asesinatos y las violaciones en Honduras.
Estados Unidos se niega a ayudar a víctimas vietnamitas del Agente Naranja
El Secretario de Defensa, Donald Rumsfeld, está viajando por Asia esta semana. Durante su visita a Vietnam, oficiales militares estadounidenses reconocieron que Washington no indemnizará a millones de vietnamitas que sufren los efectos del Agente Naranja, utilizado por las Fuerzas Armadas estadounidenses durante la Guerra de Vietnam. Mientras tanto, Rumsfeld viajó a Indonesia para conmemorar el reestablecimiento de los vínculos de Washington con el gobierno de ese país.
Censo en Nueva Orleáns indica que población negra disminuyó 15%
En Nueva Orleáns, un nuevo censo de los cuatro meses siguientes al huracán Katrina concluyó que la población de la ciudad se volvió mayoritariamente blanca, envejeció y se empobreció. La población del área metropolitana de Nueva Orleáns disminuyó en más de la mitad. La población negra se redujo de 37 a 22 por ciento, mientras que el porcentaje de personas blancas aumentó de 60 a 73 por ciento.
Billy Preston murió a los 59 añosBilly Preston, el prolífico tecladista conocido como el "quinto Beatle", murió el martes a los 59 años. Preston tocó en varios éxitos número uno para los Beatles y los Rolling Stones, y tenía tres simples número uno de su autoría. Tocó en lo que terminó siendo el último recital de los Beatles, la famosa actuación en el techo de un edificio en 1969.
Francisco: Hello friends. Here are ten headlines from this week's Democracy Now!
Army Lt. Refuses Iraq Deployment
Meanwhile, a US army officer has announced he's refusing his deployment to Iraq slated for later this month. The officer, First Lt. Ehren Watada, says he first asked for permission to resign his position in January. He says he wrote: "I am whole-heartedly opposed to the continued war in Iraq, the deception used to wage this war, and the lawlessness that has pervaded every aspect of our civilian leadership." Lt. Watada is believed to be the first commissioned officer to refuse deployment to Iraq since the invasion. Simultaneous news conferences by his supporters are expected to be held today in his home state of Hawaii and in Olympia, Washington. Military officials told Watada he cannot attend the news conference because he is barred from speaking publicly about his case while on duty at the base.
US Shows Images of Zarqawi's Body
Shortly after announcing he had been killed in an air strike, the US military displayed images Thursday of the body of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- Iraq's most wanted man. The pictures showed Zarqawi with visible cuts and bruises to his face. The Iraqi and U.S. governments say Zarqawi was killed when U.S. fighter planes dropped a pair of 500 pound bombs on a safehouse outside of the town of Baquba. To many Zarqawi was the face of the Iraqi resistance. He was accused of carrying out countless bombings, murders and other acts of violence including the beheading of hostages in Iraq.
31 Killed in Violence; Vehicle Traffic Banned in Baghdad
Meanwhile, at least 31 people were killed Thursday in three separate bombings across Iraq. In the day’s worst violence, 13 people were killed in an attack at a Baghdad fruit market. The Iraqi government has imposed a daytime vehicle ban in Baghdad in anticipation of violent retaliation for Zarqawi's death.
Senate, House Leaders Agree on $65B for Iraq, Afghanistan Wars
Meanwhile, lawmakers have finalized a budget agreement that will provide $65.8 billion dollars for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The budget agreement comes as a new poll shows a record 59 percent of Americans believe going to war against Iraq was a "mistake."
US Troops Accused of New Civilian Killings
Meanwhile in Iraq, US troops are being accused of a new round of killings of Iraqi civilians. On Wednesday, the Iraqi Islamic Party, Iraq’s main Sunni group, said it had evidence US troops killed more than two dozen Iraqis in incidents last month. According to the group, the most deadly attack occurred in a house in Yusifiyah south of Baghdad -- killing 13 people, including women and children.
Probe Says 14 European Countries Involved in CIA Operations
Europe's leading human rights watchdog has determined that 14 European countries have been involved in or complicit in secret CIA operations since the Sept. 11th attacks. Dick Marty, chairman of the Council of Europe's committee on legal affairs and human rights, accused the Bush administration of adopting a legal approach which is "utterly alien to the European tradition." Marty's investigation focused on the U.S. practice of extraordinary rendition where CIA officials kidnap individuals and then transport them to other countries for interrogation. According to the report, Spain, Turkey, Germany and Cyprus provided staging posts for rendition operations. Italy, Sweden, Bosnia, and Macedonia all allowed the rendition of residents from their soil. Britain, Ireland, Portugal, and Greece all provided airports used by the CIA. And Romania and Poland allowed the CIA to operate secret prisons on their soil.
Vermont Peace Activists Disrupt Negroponte Speech
In Vermont, two peace activists were arrested on Monday for disrupting a commencement address given by National Intelligence Director John Negroponte at St Johnsbury Academy. Moments after Negroponte began his address, a protester stood up and yelled: "In the name of democracy I object to this man speaking. He has blood on his hands from his work in Central America and Iraq. He shouldn't be at the podium, he should be in jail. He is a war criminal." As the protester was being escorted away, Negroponte said "Now it's my turn." But before he could continue, another protester stood up and accused Negroponte of overseeing torture, killings and rape in Honduras, where he served as ambassador in the 1980s.
U.S. Refuses to Help Vietnamese Agent Orange Victims
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is traveling to Asia this week. During his stop in Vietnam, U.S. military officials admitted that Washington will not compensate the millions of Vietnamese suffering from the affects of Agent Orange, used by the U.S. military during the Vietnam War. Meanwhile Rumsfeld traveled to Indonesia to mark the restoration of Washington’s military ties to the Indonesian government.
New Orleans Census Shows 15% Drop in Black Residents
In New Orleans, a new census covering the fourth months following Hurricane Katrina has found the city has become considerably whiter, older and less poor. New Orleans' metropolitan area has shrunk to more than half its size. The black population has dropped from 37 from 22 percent, while the percentage of whites has increased from 60 to 73 percent.
Billy Preston Dies at 59
And Billy Preston, the prolific keyboardist known as the "Fifth Beatle", died Tuesday at the age of 59. Preston played on several number one hits for the Beatles and Rolling Stones, and had three number one pop singles of his own. He played at what turned out to be the Beatles' last concert, the famous rooftop performance in 1969.
democracy now
news
iraq
irak
noticias
the common ills
Blog Spotlight: Rebecca covering Dahr Jamail and more on Flashpoints
Rebecca covering an important episode of Flashpoints.
flashpoints (dahr jamail was a guest)
i'm covering flashpoints tonight and that's it. it's actually past the time i had said i would forget about blogging if blogger/blogspot wasn't up. but mike called and said it was up. i'll keep it short in case it goes down again.
flashpoints. bradley wrote and he's a huge fan of flashpoints. i am too. but i'm not going to cover every minute of the show. i write about what stands out to me and what i'm in the mood to write about. i don't do requests.
so here's what stood out to me on flashpoints.
the knight report. i really enjoy that feature. it covers a ton of material and it's too much for me to cover. here's what robert knight covered tonight: zarqawi and how's he's been 'dead' before.
robert knight ran it all down regarding 'the latest in a series of death reports' about the 'bruised but remarkably preserved corpse' since the house was 'vaporized' in 'the u.s. strike.'
he noted that 'almost exactly a year ago . .. june 2, 2005,' it was announced 'he was killed and buried in falluja.' 'before that death . . . in march of 2004 [it was] reported that he was killed . . .' 'a year later, in may of 2005 . . . claimed that zarqawi was killed yet again . . . during . . . operation matador' 'In september of last year, yet another death report . . .' 'but in november . . . november 20, 2005 . . . was killed . . .'
nora (who may be norah, i'm still learning names) made a point that few in the media had when she addressed the issue: 'alleged al Quada leader.'
she spoke with the one & only dahr jamail and asked him about the timing of this "news"?
the timing?
'i think that is really the most important of the issues. the fact that haditha was getting the attention it fianlly deserved . . . more and more was coming out . . . the damn had finally broke . ..' but now it's out the window. It 'couldn't have come at more convenient time for' the american administration. dahr pointed out that it was knocking everything else out of the news cycle.
on the subject of rumsfeld naming number of dead that zarqawi is allegedly responsible for, dahr said 'in my opinion over 250, 000 Iraqis have died as a result of this illegal invasion/occupation.'
the displaying of zarqawi's photos reminded him of the person put up on the screen (in 1984) for the 'hate time.' he wondered, 'who will we blame the catastrophe of iraq on now?'
then he spoke of when saddam hussein was arrested and the reaction he heard from iraqis,
'well is capturing saddam going to get me more electricty . . . is it going to get me a job' - a long list.
what's next?
'the level or propaganda I think will only continue to increase . . . . i think we should continue to expect more propaganda . . .'
he noted that the way "reporters" are "reporting" 'they're leaving the door open to that path' of connecting iraq to al qaeda to osama.
nora wondered what was happening that they wouldn't hear about and dahr said that truth would be the victim.
he noted that we'd probably not here about a lot of things: 'women's right in Iraq . . they've gone back at least a 100 years. . . . when are we going to start hearing about collective punishment' by the u.s. military.
he noted ramadi and called it 'the key event' comparing it to falluja in april of 2004 and noting that the city was already surrounded, snipers in place, etc.
he and nora then discussed the 2 500-pound bombs and who was killed by them. he noted he hadn't heard a thing about civilian casulities. he noted that it was 'the equivalent of a small car bomb. . . . without a doubt there were civilian casulities'
dennis then conducted an interview with a guest who pointed out that zarqawi was brought to iraq by the occupation, a product of the occupation. this isn't a victory for freedom, it's a symptom of the occupation.
he saw the announcement on tv at midnight and saw the prime minister surrounded by americans to make the announcement. he wondered of the puppet government, 'what kind of a government is that? . . . he's surrounded by the americans on the right and on the left . . . this is a puppet government.'
so that was flashpoints. i hope you listened. if you missed it, you can hear it at kpfa or at flashpoints - both archive.
i'm going to throw in c.i.'s iraq snapshot but i also want to note that c.i. was all over this zarqawi nonsense from the first thing this morning.
Iraq snapshot.
al-Zarqawi is dead. Maybe. As **Sandra Lupien noted**, this is the second "death" of al-Zarqawi, according to the US government ("Earlier this year the military thought it had killed Zarqawi in another operation but later announced it had been mistaken."). Also noted by Goodman was Thomas E. Ricks "Military Plays Up Role of Zarqawi: Jordian Painted As Foreign Threat To Iraq's Stability" (Washington Post). In that article, Ricks wrote of "a propaganda campaign" run by the US military "to magnify the role of the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq." Andrew Marshall (Reuters) notes that "the Zarqawi myth" was fed by "U.S. forces" despite the fact that "[m]ost experts believe his foreign fighters make up only a fraction of the insurgency". The Financial Times of London is calling it "one of the biggest propaganda coup's for the US since the capture of Saddam Hussein in 2003."
Brian Whitaker (Guardian of London) notes the build up "by the US and sections of the media . . . [to turn al-Zarqawi] into the main bogeyman, but the war, or civil war as it is increaingly regarded, has a momentum of its own." Whitaker goes on to note the daily deaths of "[d]ozens of ordinary people" in Iraq including the targeting of ice vendors. Jonathan Wright (Reuters) reports that news of the death has resulted "in deep splits on Thursday" among Arabs outside of Iraq and quotes Arab analysts including Diaa Rashwan ("expert on Islamist groups at the al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo") saying, "Zarqawi in recent times did not represent an important element in violent operations on the ground in Iraq. Other groups which are not extreme, resistance groups not terrorist groups, have grown in strength."
The military strike which may or may not have killed al-Zarqawi involved "[t]wo F-16 warplanes [which] dropped two 500-pound bombs" on the area (China's People Daily). Reuters' Hilmy Kamal reports from that area and is told by a teenager there, "The Americans have a habit of bombing places and then claiming Zarqawi or others were there." Kamal notes that residents are "sceptical" of the claim that al-Zarqawi was there. On KPFA's The Morning Show, Sandra Lupien noted that the US military "called the operation a precision airstrike," that a woman and child died in the attack and that among the rubble/ruins of the attack were "a child's sandal" and "a backpack with a teddy bear on it." The Financial Times notes that "Television pictures of the site of the raid on the village of Hibhib showed an extensive area of destruction and a US Centcom official confirmed to al-Jazeera television that not all the casualties inflicted during the raid were inside the house targetted." KUNA reports that UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan was asked about the reported killing in terms of whether or not it would be a violation of the Geneva Convention and he responded he didn't think so, "if indeed he is the one who has been killed, has been at war, in a fight. I don't think you can equate it to targeted assassinations of the kind we have seen elsewhere."
Brian Conley notes that Al Jazeera was attempting to interview Zarqawi's brother in law Abu Qudama but the interview was stopped, Abu Qudama "was arrested by Jordanian police. Just before he was arrested he was denouncing members of the press for not always speaking truth about his brother-in-law, making him into an evil man, and not just a fighter for god." Conley notes that "at least one Al-Jazeera correspondent" was arrested as well.
Meanwhile the BBC reports that two posts have been filled in occupation puppet and Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki. Actually, three posts were (finally) filled as the Guardian reports: "General Abdul-Qadre Mohammed Jassim, a Sunni Arab, . . . named as the new defence minister . . . Jawad al-Bolani named as the interior minister and Sherwan al-Waili as national security minister" (both al-Bolani and al-Waili are "Shia Muslims"). This comes after many missed deadlines that al-Maliki set for himself as well as seventeen days after the constitutional deadline of May 22nd.
The Associated Press reports on the bombs in the Baghadad that killed "at least 19 people . . . wounding more than 40." The bombs went off at in a section known as New Baghdad. Ignoring this and other realities allows Sally Buzbee (Associated Press) to declare Thursday "good news Thursday" indicating that possibly she's auditioning for a TV chat gig since such a statement has little resemblance to reporting. (In one of her most non-reporting remarks, she concludes of al-Maliki: "Thursday's events just made clear he's bound and determined to jump in and try." Well Yippee-ki-yay, Cowgirl!)
What Iraq was she speaking of? Along with the bombing noted already, Reuters reports thirteen were wounded from a bomb "planted inside a building" in Baghdad, that four corpses were discovered, that police announced today that (yesterday) Ahmed Kurdi ("judge of Dujail court") had been kidnapped . . . Fredrik Dahl (Reuters) reports that: "Gunmen shot and seriously wounded a senior Defence Ministry official . . . General Khalil al-Ibadi, in charge of food supplies for the armed forces, and his driver . . ."
This as the BBC reports that the British Ministry of Defence is investigating the death of a thirteen-year-old boy. As noted yesterday, "The Associated Press reports that British soldiers fired on civilians and did so because 100 people (presumably adults) were stoning them, Iraqi police say that the "people" were children and that a thirteen-year-old boy was killed and a twelve-year-old girl was wounded." A spokesman acknowledges to the BBC that they "are aware of reports that a 13-year-old has been killed" and states that British troops "reported that two teenage boys had been hit."
Finally, Terri Judd reports on the continued deterioration for women in Iraq. Noting that Iraq was "once the envy of women across the Middle East," Judd offers a look at the new realities which include women's heads being forcibly shaved after they refuse to "refuse to wear a scarf," being "stoned in the street for wearing make-up," being nothing but tokens who make up "25 per cent of Iraq's Provincial Council" . . . On the last item, Judd notes that women's faces are "blacked out" with the slogan "No women in politics" on "[p]osters around the city" and that women serving on the council have been told "you don't know anything" so "they just agreed to sign whatever they were told."
democracy now
amy goodman
the common ills
iraq
kpfa
the morning show
sandra lupien
the washington post
thomas e. rick
brian conley
dahr jamail
mikey likes it
flashpoints
flashpoints. bradley wrote and he's a huge fan of flashpoints. i am too. but i'm not going to cover every minute of the show. i write about what stands out to me and what i'm in the mood to write about. i don't do requests.
so here's what stood out to me on flashpoints.
the knight report. i really enjoy that feature. it covers a ton of material and it's too much for me to cover. here's what robert knight covered tonight: zarqawi and how's he's been 'dead' before.
robert knight ran it all down regarding 'the latest in a series of death reports' about the 'bruised but remarkably preserved corpse' since the house was 'vaporized' in 'the u.s. strike.'
he noted that 'almost exactly a year ago . .. june 2, 2005,' it was announced 'he was killed and buried in falluja.' 'before that death . . . in march of 2004 [it was] reported that he was killed . . .' 'a year later, in may of 2005 . . . claimed that zarqawi was killed yet again . . . during . . . operation matador' 'In september of last year, yet another death report . . .' 'but in november . . . november 20, 2005 . . . was killed . . .'
nora (who may be norah, i'm still learning names) made a point that few in the media had when she addressed the issue: 'alleged al Quada leader.'
she spoke with the one & only dahr jamail and asked him about the timing of this "news"?
the timing?
'i think that is really the most important of the issues. the fact that haditha was getting the attention it fianlly deserved . . . more and more was coming out . . . the damn had finally broke . ..' but now it's out the window. It 'couldn't have come at more convenient time for' the american administration. dahr pointed out that it was knocking everything else out of the news cycle.
on the subject of rumsfeld naming number of dead that zarqawi is allegedly responsible for, dahr said 'in my opinion over 250, 000 Iraqis have died as a result of this illegal invasion/occupation.'
the displaying of zarqawi's photos reminded him of the person put up on the screen (in 1984) for the 'hate time.' he wondered, 'who will we blame the catastrophe of iraq on now?'
then he spoke of when saddam hussein was arrested and the reaction he heard from iraqis,
'well is capturing saddam going to get me more electricty . . . is it going to get me a job' - a long list.
what's next?
'the level or propaganda I think will only continue to increase . . . . i think we should continue to expect more propaganda . . .'
he noted that the way "reporters" are "reporting" 'they're leaving the door open to that path' of connecting iraq to al qaeda to osama.
nora wondered what was happening that they wouldn't hear about and dahr said that truth would be the victim.
he noted that we'd probably not here about a lot of things: 'women's right in Iraq . . they've gone back at least a 100 years. . . . when are we going to start hearing about collective punishment' by the u.s. military.
he noted ramadi and called it 'the key event' comparing it to falluja in april of 2004 and noting that the city was already surrounded, snipers in place, etc.
he and nora then discussed the 2 500-pound bombs and who was killed by them. he noted he hadn't heard a thing about civilian casulities. he noted that it was 'the equivalent of a small car bomb. . . . without a doubt there were civilian casulities'
dennis then conducted an interview with a guest who pointed out that zarqawi was brought to iraq by the occupation, a product of the occupation. this isn't a victory for freedom, it's a symptom of the occupation.
he saw the announcement on tv at midnight and saw the prime minister surrounded by americans to make the announcement. he wondered of the puppet government, 'what kind of a government is that? . . . he's surrounded by the americans on the right and on the left . . . this is a puppet government.'
so that was flashpoints. i hope you listened. if you missed it, you can hear it at kpfa or at flashpoints - both archive.
i'm going to throw in c.i.'s iraq snapshot but i also want to note that c.i. was all over this zarqawi nonsense from the first thing this morning.
Iraq snapshot.
al-Zarqawi is dead. Maybe. As **Sandra Lupien noted**, this is the second "death" of al-Zarqawi, according to the US government ("Earlier this year the military thought it had killed Zarqawi in another operation but later announced it had been mistaken."). Also noted by Goodman was Thomas E. Ricks "Military Plays Up Role of Zarqawi: Jordian Painted As Foreign Threat To Iraq's Stability" (Washington Post). In that article, Ricks wrote of "a propaganda campaign" run by the US military "to magnify the role of the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq." Andrew Marshall (Reuters) notes that "the Zarqawi myth" was fed by "U.S. forces" despite the fact that "[m]ost experts believe his foreign fighters make up only a fraction of the insurgency". The Financial Times of London is calling it "one of the biggest propaganda coup's for the US since the capture of Saddam Hussein in 2003."
Brian Whitaker (Guardian of London) notes the build up "by the US and sections of the media . . . [to turn al-Zarqawi] into the main bogeyman, but the war, or civil war as it is increaingly regarded, has a momentum of its own." Whitaker goes on to note the daily deaths of "[d]ozens of ordinary people" in Iraq including the targeting of ice vendors. Jonathan Wright (Reuters) reports that news of the death has resulted "in deep splits on Thursday" among Arabs outside of Iraq and quotes Arab analysts including Diaa Rashwan ("expert on Islamist groups at the al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo") saying, "Zarqawi in recent times did not represent an important element in violent operations on the ground in Iraq. Other groups which are not extreme, resistance groups not terrorist groups, have grown in strength."
The military strike which may or may not have killed al-Zarqawi involved "[t]wo F-16 warplanes [which] dropped two 500-pound bombs" on the area (China's People Daily). Reuters' Hilmy Kamal reports from that area and is told by a teenager there, "The Americans have a habit of bombing places and then claiming Zarqawi or others were there." Kamal notes that residents are "sceptical" of the claim that al-Zarqawi was there. On KPFA's The Morning Show, Sandra Lupien noted that the US military "called the operation a precision airstrike," that a woman and child died in the attack and that among the rubble/ruins of the attack were "a child's sandal" and "a backpack with a teddy bear on it." The Financial Times notes that "Television pictures of the site of the raid on the village of Hibhib showed an extensive area of destruction and a US Centcom official confirmed to al-Jazeera television that not all the casualties inflicted during the raid were inside the house targetted." KUNA reports that UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan was asked about the reported killing in terms of whether or not it would be a violation of the Geneva Convention and he responded he didn't think so, "if indeed he is the one who has been killed, has been at war, in a fight. I don't think you can equate it to targeted assassinations of the kind we have seen elsewhere."
Brian Conley notes that Al Jazeera was attempting to interview Zarqawi's brother in law Abu Qudama but the interview was stopped, Abu Qudama "was arrested by Jordanian police. Just before he was arrested he was denouncing members of the press for not always speaking truth about his brother-in-law, making him into an evil man, and not just a fighter for god." Conley notes that "at least one Al-Jazeera correspondent" was arrested as well.
Meanwhile the BBC reports that two posts have been filled in occupation puppet and Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki. Actually, three posts were (finally) filled as the Guardian reports: "General Abdul-Qadre Mohammed Jassim, a Sunni Arab, . . . named as the new defence minister . . . Jawad al-Bolani named as the interior minister and Sherwan al-Waili as national security minister" (both al-Bolani and al-Waili are "Shia Muslims"). This comes after many missed deadlines that al-Maliki set for himself as well as seventeen days after the constitutional deadline of May 22nd.
The Associated Press reports on the bombs in the Baghadad that killed "at least 19 people . . . wounding more than 40." The bombs went off at in a section known as New Baghdad. Ignoring this and other realities allows Sally Buzbee (Associated Press) to declare Thursday "good news Thursday" indicating that possibly she's auditioning for a TV chat gig since such a statement has little resemblance to reporting. (In one of her most non-reporting remarks, she concludes of al-Maliki: "Thursday's events just made clear he's bound and determined to jump in and try." Well Yippee-ki-yay, Cowgirl!)
What Iraq was she speaking of? Along with the bombing noted already, Reuters reports thirteen were wounded from a bomb "planted inside a building" in Baghdad, that four corpses were discovered, that police announced today that (yesterday) Ahmed Kurdi ("judge of Dujail court") had been kidnapped . . . Fredrik Dahl (Reuters) reports that: "Gunmen shot and seriously wounded a senior Defence Ministry official . . . General Khalil al-Ibadi, in charge of food supplies for the armed forces, and his driver . . ."
This as the BBC reports that the British Ministry of Defence is investigating the death of a thirteen-year-old boy. As noted yesterday, "The Associated Press reports that British soldiers fired on civilians and did so because 100 people (presumably adults) were stoning them, Iraqi police say that the "people" were children and that a thirteen-year-old boy was killed and a twelve-year-old girl was wounded." A spokesman acknowledges to the BBC that they "are aware of reports that a 13-year-old has been killed" and states that British troops "reported that two teenage boys had been hit."
Finally, Terri Judd reports on the continued deterioration for women in Iraq. Noting that Iraq was "once the envy of women across the Middle East," Judd offers a look at the new realities which include women's heads being forcibly shaved after they refuse to "refuse to wear a scarf," being "stoned in the street for wearing make-up," being nothing but tokens who make up "25 per cent of Iraq's Provincial Council" . . . On the last item, Judd notes that women's faces are "blacked out" with the slogan "No women in politics" on "[p]osters around the city" and that women serving on the council have been told "you don't know anything" so "they just agreed to sign whatever they were told."
democracy now
amy goodman
the common ills
iraq
kpfa
the morning show
sandra lupien
the washington post
thomas e. rick
brian conley
dahr jamail
mikey likes it
flashpoints
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Ruth's Public Radio Report
Ruth's Public Radio Report
Ruth: During my vacation, I spent a great deal of time thinking about the public radio report. That included weighing the advice from Rebecca and others. So there are a few changes. Iraq has always been an issue at this site and I will probably be focusing more on it when noting programming.
Rebecca's post that spoke of her grandmother's scrapbook of clippings from the local paper about WWII, while it was ongoing, reminded me of how little news we are getting on Iraq when you consider that this is an ongoing war that has now lasted three years, is headed for the fourth, possibly the fifth, the sixth . . . The press is not treating it seriously.
In future reports, I will probably be far more likely to highlight discussions of the war than anything else.
For this report, Iraq is a topic I will be noting; however, I am also going to note the issue of female guests. As a longterm feminist, I remember the joys of finally seeing women break through in many fields. It mattered then and it still matters today.
But some make themselves useless. For feminism, that is not a bad thing. It serves to remind us all that a woman can be everything a man can be. Commanding, on top of their game, brilliant to be sure. But the list also includes "useless."
Ruth Conniff cast herself in that role Friday. Ms. Conniff appeared on Kris Welch's Living Room on KPFA Friday. Ms. Welch specifically asked Ms. Conniff about the 2004 election results. Ms. Conniff did not to respond to the question. I have no use for that. I have no use for people who cannot speak up. If Ms. Conniff feels the election was not stolen, that is her right and I would have listened to her reasoning. Instead, she spoke of everything but the 2004 election results. Possibly she misheard the question?
With too much too cover, I will not waste my time, or any member's time, by recording lengthy statements from those who, for whatever reason, cannot address an issue put to them.
On Iraq, Robert Parry, another guest, spoke of what he was saw around the country, what he heard. Ms. Conniff spoke in generalities about the war ("professionalized military . . ."). It was as though it was being spit out by a machine. Our time is too valuable to waste with robotics.
The question was about the war and how it had not made the top ten of MoveOn.org's poll. There is a reason for that. It has been covered most recently in John Walsh's "MoveOn Rigs Its Own Vote; Betrays Its Membership" (CounterPunch). . MoveOn.org has a history of silencing the war issue. That includes the March 2005 protests, the second anniversary of the illegal invasion, where, under pressure, they suddenly hooked up at the last minute with Sojouner's to do something, anything.
Mr. Parry spoke of what he saw in this country and how it was innaccurate to claim that the war was not an issue to people. Ms. Conniff's answer would not offend MoveOn.org since it gave them every excuse and plenty of cover to hide behind. It had nothing to do with reality or people (represented as "the people," far removed). Ms. Conniff mentioned only one actual person, a neighbor. Goddess of the hearth at this late date? Sounding like a cross between a Bronte shut-in and June Cleaver, Ms. Conniff, after dispensing with her coffee clatch, went on to provide dull remarks. If that is what I enjoyed hearing, I would be doing Ruth's Meet the Press Report.
I have no time or interest in noting her superficial remarks on Al Gore (with giggles) that did not address the press attacks on him in 2000 but did endorse them. She honestly struck me as the sort of pundit that Bob Somerby rails against regularly.
Former Vice-President Gore is not above criticism. But silly giggles and remarks that follow what Mr. Somerby has dubbed the "script" are of no use to me. Being a woman, and a Ruth, I was sad to find that Ruth Conniff was of no use to me. That was, however, the reality.
I made a million excuses as I listened. Possibly if Andrea Lewis was interviewing her one on one . . .? If the other two guest had not been males then . . .? Maybe she was nervous?
She was on the air with Ms. Welch who is not a shy broadcaster. People do not need to choose their words carefully with Ms. Welch -- who can handle a lively debate. Ms. Conniff is responsible for her own remarks and her own presentation. There was nothing of value and nothing that went beyond the "script."
That was true of her comments on Al Gore, that was true of her answers to what Democrats need to do. Softly nudging Jeffery Golberg on the shoulder, Ms. Conniff did so in a recent column which she discussed on the program, may have seemed the height of radicalism to Ms. Conniff, but to me, it was just one more person desperate to be an insider, determined to ruffle no feathers in the silly world of Punditville.
A soft nudge was also what she gave Newsweek. Elaine noted that of Ms. Conniff's column. It was true of her remarks on the program as well. Newsweek has still not owned up to what they did. If Ms. Conniff elects to write a column about it and to address it on radio, it is incumbent upon her to note reality. Accepting that a correction has been issued when so much was left uncorrected is "pleasing." It is not, however, reality.
When a male journalist or pundit goes out of his way to be "pleasing," we generally assume that he is doing so because he thinks it will provide him access/status. When a woman does the same it may be for that reason and/or/more it may be because it has been ingrained in her psyche that her existance is based upon pleasing others? If that is the case with Ms. Conniff, as one a few decades older than Ms. Conniff, let me note that there is no destination to happiness at the end of Pleasing Road. Judging by Cokie Roberts, there is a lot of bitterness, a lot of hatred and a very soggy mind.
Just to cover the show, along with Ms. Welch, Ms. Conniff and Mr. Parry, John Nichols was, briefly, a guest. Mr. Nichols had a bad phone connection and another engagement so he was only on at the start of the discussion. This was a real shame because Mr. Nichols had things of value to discuss.
I have heard the frustration in the voices of Dalia Hashad, Michael Ratner, Michael Smith and Heidi Boghosian on Law and Disorder as they have tackled serious issues week after week. Just this week, Ms. Hashad said, "We have got to wake up in America." Ms. Conniff would probably reply, "Oh, hit the snooze alarm, I'm not done whipping up my blueberry pancakes from scratch and it's such a lovely day." The willingness of the hosts of Law and Disorder to share their level of frustration has not only made for wonderful broadcasting, it has illuminated the situations. Floating on a cloud, above it all, tossing off psuedo-inspiritational bits that have no bearing on reality may have a place and may be enjoyed by some attending a "How I Got My Man" or "How I Kept My Man" seminar. It offers nothing to the political conversation.
To those who yearn for shallow scripts, I would urge you to check out Ms. Conniff's comments. I, however, am an old woman and do not need some guru passing out platitudes.
A woman who wants to be a motivational speaker has every right to be that. I just do not need my critiques and analysis from them. Ms. Conniff was once on television quite often. She may be still be. I can remember her from before the rise of the blonde right-wingers. She, and a few other women, would smile serenely and take pains to couch every argument. I had forgotten that until I heard her speaking to Ms. Welch. Suddenly, I remembered every soft-spoken, female guru dispensing love and goodness while a George Will or Tucker Carlson detonated a verbal bomb or while a Chris Matthews shouted over everything. It was useless.
Gloria Steinem is not someone I ever remember shouting a guest or interviewer down. But she is also not someone who fails to register human emotion. She has always been effective. Molly Ivins is another woman I have never failed to be impressed with. But for every Ivins and Steinem there were multiple women who saw their role as the help-mate to the nation, the nation's spiritual and moral advisor and themselves as some sort of quasi-Miss Manners.
As politcal analysts or offering critiques of our times, motivational speakers serve no purpose. They are to politics what Petulia Clark was to sixties rock music. Playing the "good girl" may please whomever they cast in the role of "Daddy," but it does not serves the public conversation or understanding. Soft and gauzey "Women We Love" plays in Esquire but it is not of use to me.
Women I love? Women who are not afraid to speak their minds. Women who are themselves. That might mean loud, that might mean weary, that might mean funny, but it never, ever, means a robot. My generation rebelled against the role of the robatic wife who had no opinion to express that might go against accepted social norms and mores.
Women do not have to be Natalie Wood in Rebel Without a Cause, standing on the sidelines, rooting on the drag race. That road led to unhappiness and spiritual destruction. I have always considered Wood's Deanie in Splendor in the Grass to be the natural outcome for Judy in Rebel.
This is not about the nature of the voice itself or about caring. Sister Helen and Jane Goodall always come off as two caring individuals. Neither woman, however, sticks to scripts or betrays her own platform.
Ms. Conniff was a guest for an hour, for the hour. I heard nothing but dime-store analysis dressed up in a motivational talk. Helpmate of the party isn't a role that interests me. If this house is on fire, you scream, "Fire!" You do not say, "I'll get the marshmellows." Like a Stepford Wife with a hobby, Ms. Conniff batted the Democratic Party with a tissue while Mr. Parry, feet firmly in the real world, spoke of real issues.
She not only found hope in the man Rebecca has christened Evan Blah, she felt the need to share that she had found hope. It was as though she was breathlessly exclaiming, "Did you see the clean hands on our mugger? Wasn't that delightful?" Having cast herself in the role of the party's helpmate, she is now left to explain away the bruises, cuts and other injuries that would have any thinking woman running to a women's shelter. Instead, Mr. Conniff asks only that when she next gets battered, her "man" not hit her in the face.
Where the blame lies for this an inability to question those in power is anyone's guess but when it comes from a woman, there is an additional layer of questions.
As anyone who listens to Ms. Welch even semi-regularly knows, electronic voting is a big issue on her show. It is a big issue with her, with her guests and with her callers. To be asked point blank about voting and to non-respond by issuing a statement on grassroots and party's efforts to win the next election was not only bland, it was stupid. Ms. Welch had noted that the League of Women Voters in Florida will no longer register voters in that state due to the oppressive laws passed by the Republican legislature to surpress voter turnout. The issue of the outcome for 2004 was not, giggles from Ms. Conniff aside, about Senator John Kerry's effectiveness or lack of it in communicating.
There were no giggles regarding the Bully Boy. In fact, I do not even remember Ms. Conniff naming him. That is a script Bob Somerby's addressed quite often. For those unfamiliar with that script it boils down to: the press mocks, sneers and smears the Democratic candidate while never judging the Republican candidate by the same standard. An example I believe he has cited quite often is that Al Gore could be judged a liar via "clowning" but Bully Boy could do or say whatever he wanted and not face the same consquences. On this week's CounterSpin, Steve Rendall addressed how Jim Lehren of PBS' NewsHour does not feel it is his job to note when the Bully Boy lies. Somehow, however, it is the job of the press to create the myth of "Al Gore: The Great Liar."
In a giggling fit, Ms. Conniff actually offered one specific opinion during the hour program: Al Gore should not run for president because he is no candidate. Al Gore the candidate was a source of much mirth to Ms. Conniff. It probably keeps the laughs coming when you never challenge your peers but instead add to the nonsense, year after year, and fail to highlight very real issues. Here is one for Ms. Conniff, Al Gore got more votes in 2004.
Did the laughter stop? Good. I do not consider the attacks on women, the illegal war, the warrantless spying on Americans, Guantanamo Bay or other issues "laughing matters." Ms. Conniff's mistake may have been in thinking that she was on a Beltway program where easy answers could be dressed up with "my neighbor, who's serving in Iraq" bits of gossip from the neighborhood, but that was not the case. She would do better for others and herself by getting out into the real world. For instance, it would probably be a good idea to be able to talk about the Tuesday election in California when you are brought on a show whose topic includes that election. She had no insight to offer. Apparently the actual realities of the California election, which were addressed by Mr. Nichols and Mr. Parry in their own responses, are far removed from the Beltway and her own neighborhood.
At one point, Mr. Nichols stated, "If you want to be serious about politics, you have to be serious about where the new ideas are coming from." Though he was not addressing Ms. Conniff's contributions, he might just as well have been. What might this election tell us about the November general elections? To answer that question, you would have to know something about the results. (Andrea Lewis and Philip Maldari discussed this at length on Wednesday's The Morning Show.) The fact that Ms. Conniff appears to feel knowledge of an election is unnecessary when offering her predictions may go a long way in explaining why she finds the thought of former Vice-President Al Gore so humorous.
On Tuesday, Danny Schechter was on KPFA's The Morning Show. With Philip Malderi he addressed the way the media santizes war crimes -- the topic of a recent article written by Mr. Schechter. Mr. Schechter noted the "risk adverse" nature of the media and how, at a Peabody awards ceremony, Brian Williams stated that our government failed us with regards to Hurricane Katrina. While there is safety in making that claim, the media refuses to speak the same truth about the illegal war despite the fact that the people are more and more aware of it. Mr. Malderi addressed the issue of embedded journalists identifying with the troops and being unable to address the realities of what goes on whether it is Haditha or Falluja. Mr. Schechter referred to this as media crimes. Mr Schechter discussed how power has shifted from the government "into the corporate world with globalization, with corporations dominating everthing" and the media is a part of that, the face of it.
John F. Burns, of the New York Times, was discussed and how controlled what he sees is. "His coverage has spun into a need to accept the war for removing Saddam," Mr. Schechter noted following Mr. Maldari's comments about how limited Mr. Burns' access and mobility is in Iraq. Mr. Schechter addressed the covert operations, the outsourcing of the war and a great deal more including the issue of traction for a news story noting that, "a story only rises to the level of everybody knows about when a lot of people pile on it."
In a half-hour interview, in any two minutes of the half-hour interview, Mr. Schechter offered more reality than Ms. Conniff managed to. I do not believe Mr. Schechter was attempting to inspire, I do believe he was attempting to inform -- which he did consistently. He has a new documentary that will be out shortly entitled In Debt We Trust focusing on the credit squeeze in America.
WBAI's Law and Disorder offered a discussion with Anthony Arnove, author of IRAQ: The Logic of Withdrawal, for the last half of the hour long show. Topics discussed included the illegal occupation as the root cause of chaos and violence in Iraq, the need to combat empire, the need to link civil rights to the movement, the need to address the administration's plans for Iran, the counter-recruiting movement . . . Strangely enough, despite the fact that the hosts are no fans of the Clinton administration, they did not make time to giggle over Al Gore as a candidate. Possibly, having real issues and real priorites prevented them from having the need or desire to embarrass themselves?
That allowed them to offer real contributions to the discussion of the war -- something far removed from "Well, golly, people aren't effected by it and we have a professional military and, what else is on the check list all the pundits check off, oh, yes! Also . . ." Instead we got real moments that mattered such as this exchange between Ms. Hashad and Mr. Arnove.
Ms. Hashad: Several weeks ago we were out at an anti-torture protest in Portland, Oregon . . . and we spoke to this woman who was there who had just quit her job to protest full time against the war in Iraq. She said, "My brother is over there now and, if he dies, I'll just lose my mind. This is the moment. This is the time. If I don't quit my job and devote myself to this fully, I will never have the opportunity to go back and correct that mistake."
Mr. Arnove: That's very powerful. I think a lot of people are sensing that this is the moment. The thing is, I think we just need to find ways of effectively channeling that.
Possibly, Ms. Conniff felt that giggling over Al Gore and avoiding the issue of the war, while justifying the avoidance of it by the elected Democrats -- sharing how it is not hitting home (that's a very interesting neighborhood she lives in) -- is what she sees as an effective way to channel this moment? I do not and I do not have time for those who do.
Please check Kat's "Guns and Butter, Betty's latest chapter and more" for coverage of Guns and Butter, Mike's "Law and Disorder and more" and Cedric's "Law and Disorder on Ahmed Omar Abu Ali" for coverage of Law and Disorder, Elaine's "Rare morning post" for coverage of WBAI's Cat Radio Cafe, and Rebecca's covered KPFA's Flashpoints all week.
Coming up on KPFA:
Sunday Salon
Sunday, June 11th, 09:00a.m.
Hour 1: The controversial California High School Exit Exam;
Hour 2: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and the ongoing conflict in the Middle East
Act One Radio Drama
Sunday, June 11th, 7:30p.m.
Aliens in America, written by contemporary satirist Sandra Tsing Loh.
Against the Grain
Monday, June 12th, 12:00p.m.
Aaron Glantz, author of "How America Lost Iraq," talks about the massacre by US troops of Iraqi civilians in Haditha.
Rebecca's post that spoke of her grandmother's scrapbook of clippings from the local paper about WWII, while it was ongoing, reminded me of how little news we are getting on Iraq when you consider that this is an ongoing war that has now lasted three years, is headed for the fourth, possibly the fifth, the sixth . . . The press is not treating it seriously.
In future reports, I will probably be far more likely to highlight discussions of the war than anything else.
For this report, Iraq is a topic I will be noting; however, I am also going to note the issue of female guests. As a longterm feminist, I remember the joys of finally seeing women break through in many fields. It mattered then and it still matters today.
But some make themselves useless. For feminism, that is not a bad thing. It serves to remind us all that a woman can be everything a man can be. Commanding, on top of their game, brilliant to be sure. But the list also includes "useless."
Ruth Conniff cast herself in that role Friday. Ms. Conniff appeared on Kris Welch's Living Room on KPFA Friday. Ms. Welch specifically asked Ms. Conniff about the 2004 election results. Ms. Conniff did not to respond to the question. I have no use for that. I have no use for people who cannot speak up. If Ms. Conniff feels the election was not stolen, that is her right and I would have listened to her reasoning. Instead, she spoke of everything but the 2004 election results. Possibly she misheard the question?
With too much too cover, I will not waste my time, or any member's time, by recording lengthy statements from those who, for whatever reason, cannot address an issue put to them.
On Iraq, Robert Parry, another guest, spoke of what he was saw around the country, what he heard. Ms. Conniff spoke in generalities about the war ("professionalized military . . ."). It was as though it was being spit out by a machine. Our time is too valuable to waste with robotics.
The question was about the war and how it had not made the top ten of MoveOn.org's poll. There is a reason for that. It has been covered most recently in John Walsh's "MoveOn Rigs Its Own Vote; Betrays Its Membership" (CounterPunch). . MoveOn.org has a history of silencing the war issue. That includes the March 2005 protests, the second anniversary of the illegal invasion, where, under pressure, they suddenly hooked up at the last minute with Sojouner's to do something, anything.
Mr. Parry spoke of what he saw in this country and how it was innaccurate to claim that the war was not an issue to people. Ms. Conniff's answer would not offend MoveOn.org since it gave them every excuse and plenty of cover to hide behind. It had nothing to do with reality or people (represented as "the people," far removed). Ms. Conniff mentioned only one actual person, a neighbor. Goddess of the hearth at this late date? Sounding like a cross between a Bronte shut-in and June Cleaver, Ms. Conniff, after dispensing with her coffee clatch, went on to provide dull remarks. If that is what I enjoyed hearing, I would be doing Ruth's Meet the Press Report.
I have no time or interest in noting her superficial remarks on Al Gore (with giggles) that did not address the press attacks on him in 2000 but did endorse them. She honestly struck me as the sort of pundit that Bob Somerby rails against regularly.
Former Vice-President Gore is not above criticism. But silly giggles and remarks that follow what Mr. Somerby has dubbed the "script" are of no use to me. Being a woman, and a Ruth, I was sad to find that Ruth Conniff was of no use to me. That was, however, the reality.
I made a million excuses as I listened. Possibly if Andrea Lewis was interviewing her one on one . . .? If the other two guest had not been males then . . .? Maybe she was nervous?
She was on the air with Ms. Welch who is not a shy broadcaster. People do not need to choose their words carefully with Ms. Welch -- who can handle a lively debate. Ms. Conniff is responsible for her own remarks and her own presentation. There was nothing of value and nothing that went beyond the "script."
That was true of her comments on Al Gore, that was true of her answers to what Democrats need to do. Softly nudging Jeffery Golberg on the shoulder, Ms. Conniff did so in a recent column which she discussed on the program, may have seemed the height of radicalism to Ms. Conniff, but to me, it was just one more person desperate to be an insider, determined to ruffle no feathers in the silly world of Punditville.
A soft nudge was also what she gave Newsweek. Elaine noted that of Ms. Conniff's column. It was true of her remarks on the program as well. Newsweek has still not owned up to what they did. If Ms. Conniff elects to write a column about it and to address it on radio, it is incumbent upon her to note reality. Accepting that a correction has been issued when so much was left uncorrected is "pleasing." It is not, however, reality.
When a male journalist or pundit goes out of his way to be "pleasing," we generally assume that he is doing so because he thinks it will provide him access/status. When a woman does the same it may be for that reason and/or/more it may be because it has been ingrained in her psyche that her existance is based upon pleasing others? If that is the case with Ms. Conniff, as one a few decades older than Ms. Conniff, let me note that there is no destination to happiness at the end of Pleasing Road. Judging by Cokie Roberts, there is a lot of bitterness, a lot of hatred and a very soggy mind.
Just to cover the show, along with Ms. Welch, Ms. Conniff and Mr. Parry, John Nichols was, briefly, a guest. Mr. Nichols had a bad phone connection and another engagement so he was only on at the start of the discussion. This was a real shame because Mr. Nichols had things of value to discuss.
I have heard the frustration in the voices of Dalia Hashad, Michael Ratner, Michael Smith and Heidi Boghosian on Law and Disorder as they have tackled serious issues week after week. Just this week, Ms. Hashad said, "We have got to wake up in America." Ms. Conniff would probably reply, "Oh, hit the snooze alarm, I'm not done whipping up my blueberry pancakes from scratch and it's such a lovely day." The willingness of the hosts of Law and Disorder to share their level of frustration has not only made for wonderful broadcasting, it has illuminated the situations. Floating on a cloud, above it all, tossing off psuedo-inspiritational bits that have no bearing on reality may have a place and may be enjoyed by some attending a "How I Got My Man" or "How I Kept My Man" seminar. It offers nothing to the political conversation.
To those who yearn for shallow scripts, I would urge you to check out Ms. Conniff's comments. I, however, am an old woman and do not need some guru passing out platitudes.
A woman who wants to be a motivational speaker has every right to be that. I just do not need my critiques and analysis from them. Ms. Conniff was once on television quite often. She may be still be. I can remember her from before the rise of the blonde right-wingers. She, and a few other women, would smile serenely and take pains to couch every argument. I had forgotten that until I heard her speaking to Ms. Welch. Suddenly, I remembered every soft-spoken, female guru dispensing love and goodness while a George Will or Tucker Carlson detonated a verbal bomb or while a Chris Matthews shouted over everything. It was useless.
Gloria Steinem is not someone I ever remember shouting a guest or interviewer down. But she is also not someone who fails to register human emotion. She has always been effective. Molly Ivins is another woman I have never failed to be impressed with. But for every Ivins and Steinem there were multiple women who saw their role as the help-mate to the nation, the nation's spiritual and moral advisor and themselves as some sort of quasi-Miss Manners.
As politcal analysts or offering critiques of our times, motivational speakers serve no purpose. They are to politics what Petulia Clark was to sixties rock music. Playing the "good girl" may please whomever they cast in the role of "Daddy," but it does not serves the public conversation or understanding. Soft and gauzey "Women We Love" plays in Esquire but it is not of use to me.
Women I love? Women who are not afraid to speak their minds. Women who are themselves. That might mean loud, that might mean weary, that might mean funny, but it never, ever, means a robot. My generation rebelled against the role of the robatic wife who had no opinion to express that might go against accepted social norms and mores.
Women do not have to be Natalie Wood in Rebel Without a Cause, standing on the sidelines, rooting on the drag race. That road led to unhappiness and spiritual destruction. I have always considered Wood's Deanie in Splendor in the Grass to be the natural outcome for Judy in Rebel.
This is not about the nature of the voice itself or about caring. Sister Helen and Jane Goodall always come off as two caring individuals. Neither woman, however, sticks to scripts or betrays her own platform.
Ms. Conniff was a guest for an hour, for the hour. I heard nothing but dime-store analysis dressed up in a motivational talk. Helpmate of the party isn't a role that interests me. If this house is on fire, you scream, "Fire!" You do not say, "I'll get the marshmellows." Like a Stepford Wife with a hobby, Ms. Conniff batted the Democratic Party with a tissue while Mr. Parry, feet firmly in the real world, spoke of real issues.
She not only found hope in the man Rebecca has christened Evan Blah, she felt the need to share that she had found hope. It was as though she was breathlessly exclaiming, "Did you see the clean hands on our mugger? Wasn't that delightful?" Having cast herself in the role of the party's helpmate, she is now left to explain away the bruises, cuts and other injuries that would have any thinking woman running to a women's shelter. Instead, Mr. Conniff asks only that when she next gets battered, her "man" not hit her in the face.
Where the blame lies for this an inability to question those in power is anyone's guess but when it comes from a woman, there is an additional layer of questions.
As anyone who listens to Ms. Welch even semi-regularly knows, electronic voting is a big issue on her show. It is a big issue with her, with her guests and with her callers. To be asked point blank about voting and to non-respond by issuing a statement on grassroots and party's efforts to win the next election was not only bland, it was stupid. Ms. Welch had noted that the League of Women Voters in Florida will no longer register voters in that state due to the oppressive laws passed by the Republican legislature to surpress voter turnout. The issue of the outcome for 2004 was not, giggles from Ms. Conniff aside, about Senator John Kerry's effectiveness or lack of it in communicating.
There were no giggles regarding the Bully Boy. In fact, I do not even remember Ms. Conniff naming him. That is a script Bob Somerby's addressed quite often. For those unfamiliar with that script it boils down to: the press mocks, sneers and smears the Democratic candidate while never judging the Republican candidate by the same standard. An example I believe he has cited quite often is that Al Gore could be judged a liar via "clowning" but Bully Boy could do or say whatever he wanted and not face the same consquences. On this week's CounterSpin, Steve Rendall addressed how Jim Lehren of PBS' NewsHour does not feel it is his job to note when the Bully Boy lies. Somehow, however, it is the job of the press to create the myth of "Al Gore: The Great Liar."
In a giggling fit, Ms. Conniff actually offered one specific opinion during the hour program: Al Gore should not run for president because he is no candidate. Al Gore the candidate was a source of much mirth to Ms. Conniff. It probably keeps the laughs coming when you never challenge your peers but instead add to the nonsense, year after year, and fail to highlight very real issues. Here is one for Ms. Conniff, Al Gore got more votes in 2004.
Did the laughter stop? Good. I do not consider the attacks on women, the illegal war, the warrantless spying on Americans, Guantanamo Bay or other issues "laughing matters." Ms. Conniff's mistake may have been in thinking that she was on a Beltway program where easy answers could be dressed up with "my neighbor, who's serving in Iraq" bits of gossip from the neighborhood, but that was not the case. She would do better for others and herself by getting out into the real world. For instance, it would probably be a good idea to be able to talk about the Tuesday election in California when you are brought on a show whose topic includes that election. She had no insight to offer. Apparently the actual realities of the California election, which were addressed by Mr. Nichols and Mr. Parry in their own responses, are far removed from the Beltway and her own neighborhood.
At one point, Mr. Nichols stated, "If you want to be serious about politics, you have to be serious about where the new ideas are coming from." Though he was not addressing Ms. Conniff's contributions, he might just as well have been. What might this election tell us about the November general elections? To answer that question, you would have to know something about the results. (Andrea Lewis and Philip Maldari discussed this at length on Wednesday's The Morning Show.) The fact that Ms. Conniff appears to feel knowledge of an election is unnecessary when offering her predictions may go a long way in explaining why she finds the thought of former Vice-President Al Gore so humorous.
On Tuesday, Danny Schechter was on KPFA's The Morning Show. With Philip Malderi he addressed the way the media santizes war crimes -- the topic of a recent article written by Mr. Schechter. Mr. Schechter noted the "risk adverse" nature of the media and how, at a Peabody awards ceremony, Brian Williams stated that our government failed us with regards to Hurricane Katrina. While there is safety in making that claim, the media refuses to speak the same truth about the illegal war despite the fact that the people are more and more aware of it. Mr. Malderi addressed the issue of embedded journalists identifying with the troops and being unable to address the realities of what goes on whether it is Haditha or Falluja. Mr. Schechter referred to this as media crimes. Mr Schechter discussed how power has shifted from the government "into the corporate world with globalization, with corporations dominating everthing" and the media is a part of that, the face of it.
John F. Burns, of the New York Times, was discussed and how controlled what he sees is. "His coverage has spun into a need to accept the war for removing Saddam," Mr. Schechter noted following Mr. Maldari's comments about how limited Mr. Burns' access and mobility is in Iraq. Mr. Schechter addressed the covert operations, the outsourcing of the war and a great deal more including the issue of traction for a news story noting that, "a story only rises to the level of everybody knows about when a lot of people pile on it."
In a half-hour interview, in any two minutes of the half-hour interview, Mr. Schechter offered more reality than Ms. Conniff managed to. I do not believe Mr. Schechter was attempting to inspire, I do believe he was attempting to inform -- which he did consistently. He has a new documentary that will be out shortly entitled In Debt We Trust focusing on the credit squeeze in America.
WBAI's Law and Disorder offered a discussion with Anthony Arnove, author of IRAQ: The Logic of Withdrawal, for the last half of the hour long show. Topics discussed included the illegal occupation as the root cause of chaos and violence in Iraq, the need to combat empire, the need to link civil rights to the movement, the need to address the administration's plans for Iran, the counter-recruiting movement . . . Strangely enough, despite the fact that the hosts are no fans of the Clinton administration, they did not make time to giggle over Al Gore as a candidate. Possibly, having real issues and real priorites prevented them from having the need or desire to embarrass themselves?
That allowed them to offer real contributions to the discussion of the war -- something far removed from "Well, golly, people aren't effected by it and we have a professional military and, what else is on the check list all the pundits check off, oh, yes! Also . . ." Instead we got real moments that mattered such as this exchange between Ms. Hashad and Mr. Arnove.
Ms. Hashad: Several weeks ago we were out at an anti-torture protest in Portland, Oregon . . . and we spoke to this woman who was there who had just quit her job to protest full time against the war in Iraq. She said, "My brother is over there now and, if he dies, I'll just lose my mind. This is the moment. This is the time. If I don't quit my job and devote myself to this fully, I will never have the opportunity to go back and correct that mistake."
Mr. Arnove: That's very powerful. I think a lot of people are sensing that this is the moment. The thing is, I think we just need to find ways of effectively channeling that.
Possibly, Ms. Conniff felt that giggling over Al Gore and avoiding the issue of the war, while justifying the avoidance of it by the elected Democrats -- sharing how it is not hitting home (that's a very interesting neighborhood she lives in) -- is what she sees as an effective way to channel this moment? I do not and I do not have time for those who do.
Please check Kat's "Guns and Butter, Betty's latest chapter and more" for coverage of Guns and Butter, Mike's "Law and Disorder and more" and Cedric's "Law and Disorder on Ahmed Omar Abu Ali" for coverage of Law and Disorder, Elaine's "Rare morning post" for coverage of WBAI's Cat Radio Cafe, and Rebecca's covered KPFA's Flashpoints all week.
Coming up on KPFA:
Sunday Salon
Sunday, June 11th, 09:00a.m.
Hour 1: The controversial California High School Exit Exam;
Hour 2: Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and the ongoing conflict in the Middle East
Act One Radio Drama
Sunday, June 11th, 7:30p.m.
Aliens in America, written by contemporary satirist Sandra Tsing Loh.
Against the Grain
Monday, June 12th, 12:00p.m.
Aaron Glantz, author of "How America Lost Iraq," talks about the massacre by US troops of Iraqi civilians in Haditha.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
C.I. talking about the willfully useless
Critique of those who willingly made themselves useless last week.
"Other Items (Robert Jay Lifton on Democracy Now)"
After years of trying to sell the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s archives to a library or university, the King family will instead put them up for auction on June 30, Sotheby's announced Thursday.
The sale, expected to bring $15 million to $30 million, will take place exactly five months after the death of Coretta Scott King, Dr. King's widow, who was keenly interested in finding an institutional home for the papers.
The buyer will determine the future accessibility of the papers. Many were housed for years in the archives of the nonprofit King Center in Atlanta, but the papers considered the most interesting by scholars, including a trove of handwritten sermons, were found in Mrs. King's basement and have not been widely studied.
Billie noted the above, from Shaila Dewan's "King Archives Will Be Sold at Auction" in this morning's New York Times. It won't start your day with a smile, it is, however, news. (Really sad news.)
I thought we had some practical highlights, if not uplifting ones, but it turns out that even some of the voices of the left, which we might usually be able to count on, are far too busy weighing in with their distaste of Zarqawi to make any sense out of what's happened in the last news cycle.
Gotta' prove the bonafides! (It's as though they're all channeling Petey but he's genuine when he writes that nonsense.) And, due to the fact that the majority that we usually highlight are far too busy playing "Me too!" ("Oh, it's so disgusting, this Zarqawi!"), to offer anything of use (they're all echoing), we're not highlighting them this morning. Even the few voices writing on another topic and actually being useful because I'm not highlighting sites where people are being craven.
The issue isn't Zarqawi (who may or may not be dead and may or may not have been responsible for various evils). But way to play war hawks!
It's nonsense. It's disgusting and I'm not in the mood for those who want to rush in to reassure that, if you book them, they'll stick to reciting the assigned pages in the book.
Thank goodness for Dahr Jamail (and for Rebecca for highlighting Flashpoints). I'm still looking through the e-mails but seeing only disappointments (usually noted by the person e-mailing). Propaganda, to work, needs a lot of cooperation.
It's amazing how many supposed strong voices on the left want to dishonor their voices (and those who listen to them) by wasting space and time addressing the mythical Zarqawi but can't say ONE DAMN WORD about the fact that civilians were killed. If you read Rebecca's "flashpoints (dahr jamail was a guest)," you'll see that Jamail said that this would suck up everything and it truly has. You expect that from the mainstream, you don't expect it from the supposed independent media.
But everyone's got to rush in to say, "Oh, he's evil." He's not really the issue. His actions ("actions") aren't proven and the same voices who would dispute the administration on any number of other "briefings" are quick to swallow now.
Why?
Probably because everyone's so damn scared of being Dixie Chicked to this day. Don't think that's not at play here. "Oh my God, if I don't condemn the mythical Zarqawi for what he's allegedly done, they'll string me up!" And it's also true that they're writing with a herd mentality. It's disgusting. Shame on them. Shame on voices that we usually highlight who can't offer anything of value today because they're so damn busy proving that they too "oppose terrorism." Did they really think anyone doubted that? Did they really think that needed to be proven?
If nothing else it says a great deal about how they think readers will interpret them.
Someone's dead, someone the administration wants to tell you this and that about, and we're all supposed to line up and accept their words as truth, apparently. Don't give me the nonsense about Jordan. That would be the same Jordanian government that detained an Al Jazeera reporter yesterday but apparently only Brian Conley's going to break from the pack and note that?
It's nonsense and the left needs to grow up, or the voices of the left need to. No one needs your denuciation of terror. That was already a given. Using a straw man to prove your bonafides is the sort of crap better left to The New Republic. (Again, Petey's at least sincere when he does it.) It's how many years after Susan Sontag was Dixie Chicked? Grow up already. You're no use to the left if when the latest wave of propaganda (sold to take Haditha and others out of the news) is being pushed and, like an IDIOT, you take the bait.
The mythical Zarqawi's not the issue. Terrorism isn't the issue. Changing the news cycle is. And it's very sad to see so many on the left be steered into this nonsense (and coming off from a weak and defensive posture). Seriously, shame on everyone doing it. Everyone. As Goldie Hawn says in Shampoo (screenplay by Warren Beatty and Robert Towne), kissing ass doesn't make you a success, it just makes you a kiss ass.
Oh good. Mia found something actually worth highlighting. It's from CounterPunch. No surprise because CounterPunch never confuses turning out a periodical with running for office nor mistakes itself for the party organ of any party. Others might want to take note. It's Chris Floyd's "Hubub in Hibhib:"
Abu Musab Saddam Osama al-Zarqawi, the extremely elusive if not entirely mythical terrorist mastermind responsible for every single insurgent action in Iraq except for the ones caused by the red-tailed devils in Iran or the stripey-tailed devils in Syria, has reportedly been killed in an airstrike in Hibhib, an area north of Baghdad, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki announced today.
Zarqawi, the notorious shape-shifter who, according to grainy video evidence, was able to regenerate lost limbs, speak in completely different accents, alter the contours of his bone structure and also suffered an unfortunate binge-and-purge weight problem which caused him to change sizes with almost every appearance, was head of an organization that quite fortuitously dubbed itself "Al Qaeda in Iraq" just around the time that the Bush Administration began changing its pretext for the conquest from "eliminating Iraq's [non-existent] weapons of mass destruction" to "fighting terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them over here."
The name change of the Zarqawi gang from its cumbersome original "The Monotheism and Holy War Group" to the more media-sexy "Qaeda" brand was thus a PR godsend for the Bush Administration, which was then able to associate the widespread native uprising against the Coalition occupation with the cave-dwelling dastards of the bin Laden organization. This proved an invaluable tool for the Pentagon's massive "psy-op" campaign against the American people, which was successful in sufficiently obscuring reality and defusing rising public concerns about what many experts have termed "the full-blown FUBAR" in Iraq until after the 2004 elections.
However, in the last year, even the reputed presence of a big stonking al Qaeda beheader guy roaming at will across the land has not prevented a catastrophic drop in support for President Bush in general and the war in Iraq in particular. Polls show that substantial majorities even those still psy-oped into believing the conquest has something to do with fighting terrorism are now saying that the war "is not worth it" and call for American forces to begin withdrawing.
With the Zarqawi theme thus producing diminishing returns, the Administration has had another stroke of unexpected luck with his reputed sudden demise. Moreover, the fact that Zarqawi was killed in a military action means that Mr. Bush will not have to cough up the $25 million reward placed on the head of the terrorist chieftain. That money will now be given to Mr. Bush's favorite charity, Upper-Class Twits Against the Inheritance Tax, an Administration spokesman said.
That's one way an intelligent person (on the left) can write about it. Chris Floyd doesn't feel the need to waste paragraphs explaining how he's against terrorism and how awful blah-blah-blah . . . He starts from the premise that he's not writing a defensive opinion piece, that he's not going to waste precious space establishing his bonafides, and instead addresses the issue. He trusts the readers' intelligence. Something all the ones posing right now fail to do -- which is insulting.
If you want to be a brave voice on the left, especially when you're expecting people to pay for your writing, you might want to consider growing up because these are serious times and it's not a child-proof world. You give up your power when you structure your argument to avoid any imagined attack from the likes of Ann Coulter or whomever. Grow up.
I'm highlighting Danny Schechter. I wondered if someone, someone with real journalism experience (and plenty of it), would be foolish enough to fall into the trap? (I doubted it. Danny's a smart guy.) Sure enough, Danny's not opening with, "Let me just say that I oppose terrorism and the death of the terrorist, we know he was because Bully Boy says so, is a wonderful thing and I won't lose any sleep over it and now I'll waste countless paragraphs proving my bonafides." Danny doesn't have to. He's not a coward and he's not a poser. If others on the left take offense by the "coward" and "poser" term, then, again, GROW UP.
So Danny puts you straight as only someone writing from a position of strength can. Read "Dissecting the Zargawi Spectacle" (News Dissector):
The essence of information/media warfare is to seize the advantage, frame the story, and capture the audiences’ imagination from the staged flags of Iwo Jima to that not so safe house in Baquba.
And now we have the bloodied head of the feared Zarqawi displayed on TV by the very military that will not allow us to see the American dead coming home. He was brought down by not one, but two, 500 pound bombs, in a later televised operation that CNN tells us cost $500,000 and has been underway for months. (And despite their devestating impact was apparently not blown to smithereens.)
What a coup! What a show! And what an event for Iraqi "leaders" to show-off with terms like he has been "eliminated." Within hours, the spinmeisters were claiming a “major victory” and pronouncing another "turning point."
Think also of the timing. Yes, they think about timing all the time. Timing is, as I have said, everything. A day earlier the NY Times had the defeat of the CIA backed warlords in Somalia on page one. The day and week before, it was All the Haditha, All The time with many commentators like Paul Rodgers, to cite one example, arguing that responsibility for the crimes and the cover-ups goes way UP the chain of command.
Those who are useless today have made themselves so. The Bully Boy didn't do it to them. That mean mainstream media didn't do it to them. No one forced you to show up at your platform (I'm obviously speaking of publications before some blogger gets upset and thinks I'm referring to him or her) and flaunt how quickly you could do the administration's bidding and go "on message." You did it to yourself. You're betraying your own power and your readership. What you've done is as annoying and self-defeating as anything Joe Lieberman could do. It's not a proud moment.
For reality, always, listen, watch or read Democracy Now!:
Psychiatrist and author Robert Jay Lifton on the Iraq War, war crimes and torture.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
the new york times
shaila dewan
democracy now
robert jay lifton
chris floyd
danny schechter
brian conley
After years of trying to sell the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s archives to a library or university, the King family will instead put them up for auction on June 30, Sotheby's announced Thursday.
The sale, expected to bring $15 million to $30 million, will take place exactly five months after the death of Coretta Scott King, Dr. King's widow, who was keenly interested in finding an institutional home for the papers.
The buyer will determine the future accessibility of the papers. Many were housed for years in the archives of the nonprofit King Center in Atlanta, but the papers considered the most interesting by scholars, including a trove of handwritten sermons, were found in Mrs. King's basement and have not been widely studied.
Billie noted the above, from Shaila Dewan's "King Archives Will Be Sold at Auction" in this morning's New York Times. It won't start your day with a smile, it is, however, news. (Really sad news.)
I thought we had some practical highlights, if not uplifting ones, but it turns out that even some of the voices of the left, which we might usually be able to count on, are far too busy weighing in with their distaste of Zarqawi to make any sense out of what's happened in the last news cycle.
Gotta' prove the bonafides! (It's as though they're all channeling Petey but he's genuine when he writes that nonsense.) And, due to the fact that the majority that we usually highlight are far too busy playing "Me too!" ("Oh, it's so disgusting, this Zarqawi!"), to offer anything of use (they're all echoing), we're not highlighting them this morning. Even the few voices writing on another topic and actually being useful because I'm not highlighting sites where people are being craven.
The issue isn't Zarqawi (who may or may not be dead and may or may not have been responsible for various evils). But way to play war hawks!
It's nonsense. It's disgusting and I'm not in the mood for those who want to rush in to reassure that, if you book them, they'll stick to reciting the assigned pages in the book.
Thank goodness for Dahr Jamail (and for Rebecca for highlighting Flashpoints). I'm still looking through the e-mails but seeing only disappointments (usually noted by the person e-mailing). Propaganda, to work, needs a lot of cooperation.
It's amazing how many supposed strong voices on the left want to dishonor their voices (and those who listen to them) by wasting space and time addressing the mythical Zarqawi but can't say ONE DAMN WORD about the fact that civilians were killed. If you read Rebecca's "flashpoints (dahr jamail was a guest)," you'll see that Jamail said that this would suck up everything and it truly has. You expect that from the mainstream, you don't expect it from the supposed independent media.
But everyone's got to rush in to say, "Oh, he's evil." He's not really the issue. His actions ("actions") aren't proven and the same voices who would dispute the administration on any number of other "briefings" are quick to swallow now.
Why?
Probably because everyone's so damn scared of being Dixie Chicked to this day. Don't think that's not at play here. "Oh my God, if I don't condemn the mythical Zarqawi for what he's allegedly done, they'll string me up!" And it's also true that they're writing with a herd mentality. It's disgusting. Shame on them. Shame on voices that we usually highlight who can't offer anything of value today because they're so damn busy proving that they too "oppose terrorism." Did they really think anyone doubted that? Did they really think that needed to be proven?
If nothing else it says a great deal about how they think readers will interpret them.
Someone's dead, someone the administration wants to tell you this and that about, and we're all supposed to line up and accept their words as truth, apparently. Don't give me the nonsense about Jordan. That would be the same Jordanian government that detained an Al Jazeera reporter yesterday but apparently only Brian Conley's going to break from the pack and note that?
It's nonsense and the left needs to grow up, or the voices of the left need to. No one needs your denuciation of terror. That was already a given. Using a straw man to prove your bonafides is the sort of crap better left to The New Republic. (Again, Petey's at least sincere when he does it.) It's how many years after Susan Sontag was Dixie Chicked? Grow up already. You're no use to the left if when the latest wave of propaganda (sold to take Haditha and others out of the news) is being pushed and, like an IDIOT, you take the bait.
The mythical Zarqawi's not the issue. Terrorism isn't the issue. Changing the news cycle is. And it's very sad to see so many on the left be steered into this nonsense (and coming off from a weak and defensive posture). Seriously, shame on everyone doing it. Everyone. As Goldie Hawn says in Shampoo (screenplay by Warren Beatty and Robert Towne), kissing ass doesn't make you a success, it just makes you a kiss ass.
Oh good. Mia found something actually worth highlighting. It's from CounterPunch. No surprise because CounterPunch never confuses turning out a periodical with running for office nor mistakes itself for the party organ of any party. Others might want to take note. It's Chris Floyd's "Hubub in Hibhib:"
Abu Musab Saddam Osama al-Zarqawi, the extremely elusive if not entirely mythical terrorist mastermind responsible for every single insurgent action in Iraq except for the ones caused by the red-tailed devils in Iran or the stripey-tailed devils in Syria, has reportedly been killed in an airstrike in Hibhib, an area north of Baghdad, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki announced today.
Zarqawi, the notorious shape-shifter who, according to grainy video evidence, was able to regenerate lost limbs, speak in completely different accents, alter the contours of his bone structure and also suffered an unfortunate binge-and-purge weight problem which caused him to change sizes with almost every appearance, was head of an organization that quite fortuitously dubbed itself "Al Qaeda in Iraq" just around the time that the Bush Administration began changing its pretext for the conquest from "eliminating Iraq's [non-existent] weapons of mass destruction" to "fighting terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them over here."
The name change of the Zarqawi gang from its cumbersome original "The Monotheism and Holy War Group" to the more media-sexy "Qaeda" brand was thus a PR godsend for the Bush Administration, which was then able to associate the widespread native uprising against the Coalition occupation with the cave-dwelling dastards of the bin Laden organization. This proved an invaluable tool for the Pentagon's massive "psy-op" campaign against the American people, which was successful in sufficiently obscuring reality and defusing rising public concerns about what many experts have termed "the full-blown FUBAR" in Iraq until after the 2004 elections.
However, in the last year, even the reputed presence of a big stonking al Qaeda beheader guy roaming at will across the land has not prevented a catastrophic drop in support for President Bush in general and the war in Iraq in particular. Polls show that substantial majorities even those still psy-oped into believing the conquest has something to do with fighting terrorism are now saying that the war "is not worth it" and call for American forces to begin withdrawing.
With the Zarqawi theme thus producing diminishing returns, the Administration has had another stroke of unexpected luck with his reputed sudden demise. Moreover, the fact that Zarqawi was killed in a military action means that Mr. Bush will not have to cough up the $25 million reward placed on the head of the terrorist chieftain. That money will now be given to Mr. Bush's favorite charity, Upper-Class Twits Against the Inheritance Tax, an Administration spokesman said.
That's one way an intelligent person (on the left) can write about it. Chris Floyd doesn't feel the need to waste paragraphs explaining how he's against terrorism and how awful blah-blah-blah . . . He starts from the premise that he's not writing a defensive opinion piece, that he's not going to waste precious space establishing his bonafides, and instead addresses the issue. He trusts the readers' intelligence. Something all the ones posing right now fail to do -- which is insulting.
If you want to be a brave voice on the left, especially when you're expecting people to pay for your writing, you might want to consider growing up because these are serious times and it's not a child-proof world. You give up your power when you structure your argument to avoid any imagined attack from the likes of Ann Coulter or whomever. Grow up.
I'm highlighting Danny Schechter. I wondered if someone, someone with real journalism experience (and plenty of it), would be foolish enough to fall into the trap? (I doubted it. Danny's a smart guy.) Sure enough, Danny's not opening with, "Let me just say that I oppose terrorism and the death of the terrorist, we know he was because Bully Boy says so, is a wonderful thing and I won't lose any sleep over it and now I'll waste countless paragraphs proving my bonafides." Danny doesn't have to. He's not a coward and he's not a poser. If others on the left take offense by the "coward" and "poser" term, then, again, GROW UP.
So Danny puts you straight as only someone writing from a position of strength can. Read "Dissecting the Zargawi Spectacle" (News Dissector):
The essence of information/media warfare is to seize the advantage, frame the story, and capture the audiences’ imagination from the staged flags of Iwo Jima to that not so safe house in Baquba.
And now we have the bloodied head of the feared Zarqawi displayed on TV by the very military that will not allow us to see the American dead coming home. He was brought down by not one, but two, 500 pound bombs, in a later televised operation that CNN tells us cost $500,000 and has been underway for months. (And despite their devestating impact was apparently not blown to smithereens.)
What a coup! What a show! And what an event for Iraqi "leaders" to show-off with terms like he has been "eliminated." Within hours, the spinmeisters were claiming a “major victory” and pronouncing another "turning point."
Think also of the timing. Yes, they think about timing all the time. Timing is, as I have said, everything. A day earlier the NY Times had the defeat of the CIA backed warlords in Somalia on page one. The day and week before, it was All the Haditha, All The time with many commentators like Paul Rodgers, to cite one example, arguing that responsibility for the crimes and the cover-ups goes way UP the chain of command.
Those who are useless today have made themselves so. The Bully Boy didn't do it to them. That mean mainstream media didn't do it to them. No one forced you to show up at your platform (I'm obviously speaking of publications before some blogger gets upset and thinks I'm referring to him or her) and flaunt how quickly you could do the administration's bidding and go "on message." You did it to yourself. You're betraying your own power and your readership. What you've done is as annoying and self-defeating as anything Joe Lieberman could do. It's not a proud moment.
For reality, always, listen, watch or read Democracy Now!:
Psychiatrist and author Robert Jay Lifton on the Iraq War, war crimes and torture.
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.
the new york times
shaila dewan
democracy now
robert jay lifton
chris floyd
danny schechter
brian conley
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
