[Peace-discuss] Letter in today's DI

Tue Dec 2 13:41:46 CST 2008

Whether it is the fault of those who read it or not does not really matter
since I never said it was the fault of the readers.  I was merely describing
what I saw as being the majority  and probably target audience of the DI.  I
am not sure that I concur in your optimism regarding the openness of the
readers on this or other issues (since the meaning or openness itself is
open to question).  As for attempts to  improve the paper, I think that this
is probably a fool's errand; and one can waste one's time doing other things
that are more productive and feasible.  However, it certainly is a matter of
choice and what one sets as their priorities.  I still find it hard to
understand why anyone treats the DI seriously even in the light of any
justifications based on optimism about improving the DI.  When offered the
suggestion that one is trying to improve the paper under the optimistic
assumption that this is possible, I then find it hard to understand where
this optimism and faith comes from.  It is a mere leap of faith; or do
people have actual supporting evidence that such optimism is warranted and
that change is really possible with a high probability of success?

I suppose it is just not in me to be optimistic, to be accepting, to be
trusting, or to take leaps of faith without some form of supporting evidence
or reason to do so.

From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net
[mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 12:53 PM
To: LAURIE SOLOMON
Cc: Peace Discuss
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Letter in today's DI

Laurie,

Sure, it's a crappy paper, fit for a world class university. But that's not
the fault of those who read it, who are probably more open than you think,
especially about this issue. And that's no reason not to try to improve on
it.

David

  _____  

From: LAURIE SOLOMON <LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>
To: David Green <davegreen84 at yahoo.com>; Peace Discuss
<peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2008 11:55:00 AM
Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] Letter in today's DI

I find it hard to understand why you and others treat the DI as if it were a
real newspaper when even the so-called real newspapers these days are not
real to newspapers.  The DI in the end turns out to be an experimental
training ground which allows students to play at being reporters.  Being
students who may wish to become the future journalists of Amerika and get
jobs in corporate media, it is no wonder that they and their professors and
advisors take their lead from the establishment press rather than going out
on their own and establishing alternative papers and media of their own in
which they can take critical, ideological, and/or novel innovative
approaches to editorial and story writing about things that they are
familiar with and are important to them and their audiences in which they
have firsthand knowledge.   Unfortunately, they have selected to take the
easy route taken by many small medium sized city papers (like the
News-Gazoo) and rely on wire service reports and other media for their
subject matter and stories, as if this will train the students in
investigative journalism or how to ask the right critical questions of
authority so as to get the back story.

I suppose one could argue that one is concerned with the DI content because
members of its audience read the stories and buy into them as THE TRUTH and
as documentation of reality; but I propose that those who do this are the
very people who could not give a damn about any criticisms that might be
leveled at the DI, its editorial board and staff, or its writers, probably
will not or do not read any articles or letters to the editor that you or
others might submit that require time to think about, and/or may already
access alternative sources of information to balance what they get from the
DI if they do care about accuracy and truth in journalism.  

I would not be at all surprised to find out that the article in question
with the dateline from Ramallah, West Bank, turned out to be a propaganda
piece written by the Israeli government (on its own or at the behest of the
US government) or by a Zionist group and distributed by the AP.  We know
that the US government via the CIA and even the Defense department have been
circulating propaganda as legitimate journalism via the wire services, the
New York Times, the Washington Post, and other papers of record for years.
The planting of stories is not something new and probably not restricted to
the US government.  Now why on earth would I even suggest such a thing;
maybe because it was a Jewish facility that was among those attacked and
some Jews of Israeli citizenship were among those killed which typically
tends to elicit an extreme response by Zionist groups and the Israeli
government usually after a concerted effort to demonize those that they wish
to attack.  Thus, if this is again the case, what better way to set the
stage than by planting news articles on the wire services as if they were
legit news reports asserting motivations and linkages that may or may not
exist.

Obviously, I am a snob who thinks that there are better places to get one's
news from than the DI - especially international news.  I also think that
there are better places and more qualified people to get ones editorial
opinions and evaluations from than the DI.  In fact, I am so much of a snob
that I do not think much of people who take the DI seriously as a newspaper
or treat its articles with seriously, unless you are a young student who
does not know better or a student or faculty/staff member who wants
information about what is happening on campus that is of interest mostly to
campus dwellers.  But I guess that that might cover most of the people in
this University dominated community, including many on this list and many
non-university types who suck at the tit of the University.

From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net
[mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of David Green
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 8:50 AM
To: Peace Discuss
Subject: [Peace-discuss] Letter in today's DI

The DI's coverage (12/1) of the Mumbai atrocities, an AP wire story, has the
bizarre headline "Muslims condemn attacks on Mumbai as foolish terrorism."
Is there any doubt that over 99.99% of the world's Muslims condemn these
events? Nor do they support any kind of terrorism, foolish or otherwise. The
origins and motives of the perpetrators are not yet clear. Nevertheless, it
is misguided from the outset to understand such events in fundamentally
religious terms, with only secondary reference to regional conflict (India,
Pakistan, Kashmir), class/caste politics within India, or the general
conditions created by our insane "war on terror." 

The latter has been used to justify invasion, occupation, and destruction in
a predominately Islamic region of the world that happens to produce vast
amounts of oil. The consequences of our invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq,
our manipulation of Pakistan, and our continued support for Israel's
occupation of Palestine have created numerous hells on earth (dwarfing
Mumbai's), from Kabul to Gaza and beyond. Our geopolitical ambitions do
nothing to promote reconciliation in this region, to say the least.

The article has the equally bizarre dateline of Ramallah, West Bank (that's
Palestine, the word that cannot be spoken). How did Palestinians and Hamas
get mixed up in this story? Oh yeah, we have to take every chance to imply
that "Islamofascism" is behind all this, including Israel/Palestine, rather
than American-supported Zionist ethnic cleansing, apartheid, forced
starvation, and incipient genocide. The article outrageously refers to the
killing of hundreds of Israeli civilians, without context, as if Israel
hasn't been terrorizing and murdering Palestinians for over 60 years, and as
if it isn't getting ready to finally finish them off. Perhaps, for a change,
the DI might pass on the opportunity to gratuitously denigrate the most
sadistically crushed and abandoned people on earth.

David Green

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20081202/a7dedff8/attachment.html