[Fwd: [sixties-l] Re: sixties-l-terrorist???]

From: William Mandel (wmmmandel@earthlink.net)
Date: Tue Jun 13 2000 - 17:12:36 CUT

  • Next message: Jvaron@aol.com: "[sixties-l] BPP and the logic of disintegration"

    -- 
    To be removed from list, e-mail "Opt Out."
    You may find of interest website www.BillMandel.net
    
    

    attached mail follows:


    On Jeff Blankfort's two posts. 1977 is, by a quarter century, too late a date to mark the treatment of Israel as U.S. military outpost in the Middle East. I have before me as I write the notorious October 27, 1951 issue of the mass-circulation Collier's, which in those years shared with the Saturday Evening Post the status of weekly Bible of Middle America. The issue was unique in being devoted to a single subject, announced on the cover as "Russia's Defeat and Occupation 1952-1960." The cover picture was of an American soldier, with UN and U.S. insignia on his helmet, standing guard with bayonetted rifle over a map of the USSR, marked "Occupied," with the UN flag flying over Moscow. The contributors included Walter Reuther of the CIO, explaining how we were running the Soviet labor unions, Sen. Margaret Chase Smith, economist Stuart Chase, contemporary historian Robert Sherwood, literary figures like J. B. Priestley, distinguished editor Edwin Canham, a galaxy of journalists from the full spectrum of dailies and radio: N.Y.Times military expert Hanson Baldwin and its Russia expert Harry Schwartz to Walter Winchell with Edward R. Murrow reporting on his "A-Bomb Mission to Moscow" in the B-36 which bombed the city. The best-known electronic voice of the era, Lowell Thomas, wrote: "I Saw Them Chute Into the Urals," in which one finds: "At the Tel Aviv air base, they had assigned me to a transport due to land the moment UN paratroopers seized the Soviet flying field." Clear enough. Jeff's post on the Black Panthers is simply superb. William Mandel

    Jeffrey Blankfort wrote: > > Actually, most Jews prior to the establishment of Israel in 1948 > considered bith the Stern Gang and the Irgun, headed by Menachem Begin, > to be "terrorist" gangs. In fact, an advertisement that appeared in the > NY Times and signed by many leading Jews such as Albert Einstein, > describing, not inappropriately, Begin as a fascist, proved to be an > embarrassment when Begin was elected prime minister in 1977. It was at > that time, with the need to convince the US public that it was necessary > to continue support of Israel despite Begin's presence, that the notion > of Israel as a "US gendarme in the Midle East" was created. For a > variety of reasons, this rationalization of US support for the Begin > regime was embraced across the political spectrum, despite any evidence > that Israel has ever played this role. In fact, when Lebanon was > experiencing a democratic challenge to its reactionary regime in 1958, > it was the US military and not Israel that stepped in, and in 1991, > during the Gulf "War," Israel was directed to sit on the sidelines. > Again, in 1983, the US sent troops to Lebanon again, to assist an > Israeli-installed government after Israel proved unequal to the task. > > Personally, I don't think "terrorist" is necessarily a bad word. > Certainly, the concept of "state terror" as employed by the US, Israel > and Turkey, to cite three examples that come to mind, is a good > description of what those countries are frequently involved in. > > Jeff Blankfort > > Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 15:48:29 -0400 > > From: Marty Jezer <mjez@sover.net> > > Subject: Re: [sixties-l] terrorist??? > > > > The word terrorist is subjective, in the eyes of the beholder. > > > > The Brits would have considered the Minutemen terrorists. > > I would consider the South between Reconstruction and the civil war era as > > run by terrorists. > > Israelis thought the PLO a terrorist organization and the Stern Gang patriots. > > The Palestinians thought the Stern Gang terrorists and the PLO patriots. > > > > "Terrorism" is a propagandist term and should be placed (delicately) in > > the trash bin of history. > > > > The Weatherman were more than confrontational, however. I mean radical > > pacifists were also confrontational. I respect (and knew and know) many > > who chose the Weathern route. > > I think they (and SDS as a whole after 69 or 70) must bare some > > responsibility for the destruction of the movement and the rise of the > > right. But that's a larger topic. > > > > Marty Jezer > > > > >Subject: "terrorists" > > > > > >>and I agree, the weather people could hardly be called terrorist, > > confrontationalist definitely ... > > > > - -- > > Marty Jezer * 22 Prospect St. * Brattleboro, VT 05301 * p/f 802 257-5644 > > > >

    -- 
    To be removed from list, e-mail "Opt Out."
    You may find of interest website www.BillMandel.net
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jun 13 2000 - 19:09:29 CUT