[Peace-discuss] Re: Peace-discuss Digest, Vol 27, Issue 49

Tue Apr 18 14:18:32 CDT 2006

Wendy,

I'm sure that if one of you applied for a position next Fall, you
would get it.  The DI runs columns by people who take the time to
apply.  If you want the anti-war position represented among the
columnists, I encourage one of you to apply.

Hell, I'll even put in a good word for you.

j

On 4/18/06, peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net
<peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
> Send Peace-discuss mailing list submissions to
>        peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        peace-discuss-owner at lists.chambana.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Peace-discuss digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. RE: DI editorial board votes against democracy (Robert Dunn)
>   2. Re: DI editorial board votes against democracy (Wendy Edwards)
>   3. Re almost anti-war (Bob Illyes)
>   4. Re: Re almost anti-war (David Green)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:36:12 +0000
> From: "Robert Dunn" <prorobert8 at hotmail.com>
> Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] DI editorial board votes against
>        democracy
> To: davegreen84 at yahoo.com, peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> Message-ID: <BAY101-F1419CDF55E881DB107D3CE86C40 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/private/peace-discuss/attachments/20060418/b4926035/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:14:04 -0500
> From: Wendy Edwards <wedwards at uiuc.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] DI editorial board votes against
>        democracy
> To: Robert Dunn <prorobert8 at hotmail.com>
> Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> Message-ID: <20060418161404.GA38109 at shrug.csl.uiuc.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> OK, reality check.  This is the same paper that thought that publishing
> the cartoons about Muslims was a good idea.  It also runs regular columns
> by Bambi.  People I know only read it when they're sitting in a really
> boring class.  Why do people in AWARE even care what the DI editorial
> staff thinks?
>
> Wendy
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:28:21 -0500
> From: Bob Illyes <illyes at uiuc.edu>
> Subject: [Peace-discuss] Re almost anti-war
> To: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20060418104827.0223e6d0 at express.cites.uiuc.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> You're exactly right, Dan. The anti-war community is being
> serious damaged by people who think that if you don't exactly
> agree with them, you're a traitor to the cause.
>
> It is always worth asking who folks are working for when such
> conflict occurs. During Vietnam, people were paid to promote
> fighting inside the anti-war community. When peace advocates
> are at war with each other, their behavior is inherently
> contradictory, and one must question their motivations.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:39:42 -0700 (PDT)
> From: David Green <davegreen84 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Re almost anti-war
> To: Bob Illyes <illyes at uiuc.edu>, peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> Message-ID: <20060418163942.66955.qmail at web60512.mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> I think that part of the motivation might be that some
> of us would like to distinguish among those who oppose
> the war on pragmatic grounds (it didn't work), in
> contrast to those who opposed it on principled grounds
> (it was wrong). The former are trying to save face,
> and are more concerned with the fortunes of liberalism
> and the Democratic Party. The latter are concerned
> with setting an example that will prevent future wars,
> unlikely to be opposed by the former when push comes
> to shove at the New York Times. I think that this is a
> legitmate motivation for those of us who want an
> antiwar movement that will be able to sustain itself
> for future challenges. In terms of vision and
> strategy, MoveOn is not part of the antiwar movement.
> It's concerned about electing Democrats.
>
> David Green
>
> --- Bob Illyes <illyes at uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
> > You're exactly right, Dan. The anti-war community is
> > being
> > serious damaged by people who think that if you
> > don't exactly
> > agree with them, you're a traitor to the cause.
> >
> > It is always worth asking who folks are working for
> > when such
> > conflict occurs. During Vietnam, people were paid to
> > promote
> > fighting inside the anti-war community. When peace
> > advocates
> > are at war with each other, their behavior is
> > inherently
> > contradictory, and one must question their
> > motivations.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Peace-discuss mailing list
> > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> >
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
> End of Peace-discuss Digest, Vol 27, Issue 49
> *********************************************
>

--
j
http://jcb.pentex-net.com