Ahhh, a quick strike by the colorful drieux! I can't step between him
and Fisk on the weaponry of the Taliban --though I will note that Fisk
has written voluminously and importantly on the Middle East for years
and is knows for his efforts to go to forbidden places behind the lines
to dig out the truth behind the glossy imagery that paraded on TV during
the Gulf War (to name just one example). I recommend you check him out
at the Independent's web site [ www.independent.co.uk/ ].
As for Nicaragua, I'm not sure what the point is of citing the
disaffection of Commandante Zero with the Sandinistas, etc. unless it
means that the unsaintliness of the Sandinistas is for drieux (like it
was for the US propagandists at the time) sufficient 'grounds' for a US
operation designed to destroy the popular base of support for the
Sandinistas through what amounts to US-generated, backed, trained, &
supported state terror (Contras) in order to insure there be no
'independent development' in Central America that could spread (rapidly
one suspects) to US-supported/trained/armed/etc. police-terror states
like El Salvador & Guatemala that posed (in US propaganda and media like
the NYTimes, etc.) as "fledgling democracies..." etc. etc. And of
course, the same foreign policy framework applies to the postwar history
of US interventions from the Middle East to ... Southeast Asia. Not just
a tired and discredited argument, but one that threatens 3rd world
peoples to this day.
Finally, who exactly ARE the "trendy Left" who have done nothing in
response to or against the war that, yes, the United States has been
waging against Iraq since January 1991? Not the people I know who
write, speak, converse with others, act against the continuing atrocity
of sanctions (including myself). Is it because these voices don't show
up often in the mainstream media that they apparently don't exist?
[Whereas, point well taken, the "trendy left" ARE visible in the New
York Times or on CNN --precisely underscoring the dubious use of the
word "left" in association with them (back to the Gitlin debate?). That
might suggest a different target for one's disdain than the activists
themselves who have tried to break through on this issue, but are
largely ignored by mass media (as I can attest).
> When we talk about 'what the americans are not hearing' do we mean to
> note what they didn't want to know about back then, and are still unwilling to interrupt their lives with unravelling now?
I mean, how many americans KNEW on 9/10 that the USA was still legally
at war? Clearly the trendy leftists of the 'anti-war' cabal were not
running up there protesting the american war with Iraq - and now clearly
feel that they should do something about their silence.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Nov 16 2001 - 18:31:59 EST