[Peace-discuss] [Peace] come and share your reasons for being against this war with Dr. Gill / Tuesday, 5pm-6pm / UPTV 400 South Vine Street, Urbana, IL

Wed Oct 27 13:45:22 CDT 2010

I agree that there might be some minor utility in distinguishing the lists 
(primarily so that announcements don't get lost in discussion).

But wouldn't you agree that there's a right to reply when one is directly 
addressed - to put no finer point upon it - on a given list?

On 10/27/10 1:17 PM, Gregg Gordon wrote:
> Carl,
> Did you not get the memo about the peace list?  Personally, I enjoy these 
> discussions and think we should have more of them.  But others have made clear 
> that they don't, and they, too, deserve respect, your Orwellian freedom 
> notwithstanding.
> GG
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
> *To:* Morton K. Brussel <brussel at illinois.edu>
> *Cc:* peace at lists.chambana.net; Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
> *Sent:* Wed, October 27, 2010 12:56:03 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Peace] come and share your reasons for being against this war 
> with Dr. Gill / Tuesday, 5pm-6pm / UPTV 400 South Vine Street, Urbana, IL
>
> Mort--
>
> Naturally I appreciate your tender concern for my absence from AOTA's 
> interview with David Gill.  In fact at the time I was literally up in the air, 
> flying Missoula-Denver-Dallas-CU and arriving home just in time to see the 
> program.  In fact, I would love to have asked Gill some questions about the 
> war - and to quote back to  him his evasions from the past.
>
> Linda got Gill to agree to be on the show - and asked me not to be 
> "confrontational." But Gill said he couldn't make the regular recording time. 
> So I asked the accommodating people at UPTV to provide us with other possible 
> times: Gill eventually chose 5-6pm on 10/26.  As it happened, I was out of 
> town Friday-Tuesday.
>
> I've been corresponding with Gill since he announced for the seat in the fall 
> of 2009 - trying to get him to come clean on his stance on the war. (From the 
> News-Gazette, October, 2009:  "Gill said he would not support a total 
> withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan...")
>
> Gill's statement read at the top of program managed to evade any mention of 
> (a) the administration's motive for the AfPak war and its lies ("stopping 
> terrorism") about those motives; (b) any principled - as opposed to 
> "pragmatic" ("we might not be winning") - reason to oppose the war (as found, 
> e.g., among
> Ron Paulists, Libertarians and paleo-conservatives); and/or (c) a pledge like 
> Tim Johnson's to vote against any more money for war. (And Johnson is in fact 
> voting that way.) What the statement does contain are self-serving errors in 
> fact about the history of the AfPak war.
>
> As for the no-hope comment, did you note that the NYT gave Gill a 0.2% (that's 
> two-tenths of one percent) chance of winning?
>
> And I'm sorry you don't see the difference between Gill's campaign and the 
> "presumed futile" Green party campaign for the same seat in 2002.  The Greens 
> took advantage of a quirk in the repressive election laws to run a campaign - 
> which they knew  they would loose - in order to raise issues that would not be 
> raised by the Republicans or Democrats. Gill evaded issues - especially the 
> war - in order to try to be elected.
>
> It's not a smear to point out those evasions.  --CGE
>
> On 10/26/10 11:45 PM, Morton K. Brussel wrote:
> > Most telling of all is the absence of Carl Estabrook on the panel. If
> > he were able to participate (Did he require an invitation [for a
> > program he initiated]? Did Gill object to his possible presence on
> > the panel with him?), his absence indicates rank cowardice. Evidently
> > Estabrook feels he can mouth off accusations better if there is no
> > face-to face rebuttal.
> >
> > As for the sly "no-hope" comment, Estabrook should know what it means
> > to run a campaign presumed futile. His attempt to smear the program
> > is appalling.
> >
> > I thought Gill expressed himself admirably, and Karen, Ron and Linda
> > deserve our thanks for carrying on and preparing well.
> >
> > --mkb
> >
> > On Oct 26, 2010, at 11:06 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
> >
> >> The program tonight as broadcast showed a remarkable
> development to
> >> David Gill's views on the US war in the Middle East. (Gill is the
> >> no-hope Democratic candidate running against the Republican
> >> incumbent, Tim Johnson, for the local congressional seat.) He even
> >> struggled to modify the statement - his statement - read by a
> >> member of the panel at the beginning of the program!
> >>
> >> One can see why - that statement is a tissue of lies. What he said
> >> tonight - together with that statement - is a painful exercise in
> >> misrepresentation - both of his own views and those of his
> >> opponent. That has of course been the practice of the Democrats
> >> since the beginning of this phase of the Long War.
> >>
> >> See the statement here:
> >> <http://www.gill2010.com/issues/foreign-policy/afghanistan/>.
> >>
> >> We might actually get a debate on the war if people have a chance
> >> to see how disingenuous Gill's statement is - even with his
> >> "evolutions" on tonight's program.
> >>
> >> Gill's major charge against Johnson is that he "doesn't support the
> >> troops" - a made-up Bushism. But Gill's prevarications and
> >> misrepresentations have deprived the local voters of a real debate
> >> on the war - which looked liked happening, when Johnson said he
> >> was wrong to vote for the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and
> >> pledged to vote against any more money for war in the Mideast - and
> >> he is voting that way. Gill still won't make that pledge, as a
> >> close examination of his statement shows.
> >>
> >> Both parties have worked hard to make sure
> that next week's
> >> election is meaningless - and have largely succeeded. It will not,
> >> most importantly, be a vote on the war. We should therefore be
> >> working to stir up people across the political spectrum on the
> >> military and economic betrayals of the current president and
> >> Congress.
> >>
> >> The question is, Whom are we going to allow Barack Obama to kill
> >> going forward, and why?
> >>
> >> Some people are talking about what Obama and the Democratas are
> >> actually doing. Contrast Chris Floyd's remarks, as follows, with
> >> Gill's evasions, above:
> >>
> >> "...Friends, it's very simple: if you support Barack Obama and the
> >> Democrats -- even if reluctantly, even if you're just being all
> >> sophisticatedly super-savvy and blogospherically strategic about
> >> it, playing the "long game" or
> eleven-dimensional chess or what
> >> have you -- you are supporting the outright murder of innocent
> >> people who have never done anything against you or yours. You have
> >> walked into a house, battered down the bedroom door, put the barrel
> >> of a gun against the temple of a sleeping child, and pulled the
> >> trigger. That is what you are supporting, that is what you are
> >> complicit in, that is what you yourself are doing."
> >>
> >> Full article at
> >> 
> <http://chris-floyd.com/articles/1-latest-news/2035-obamas-finest-hour-killing-innocent-people-for-qmade-up-crapq.html>.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> On 10/25/10 12:05 PM, Karen Medina wrote:
> >>> Dr. Gill is coming to talk with
> >> AWARE (the local anti-war,
> >>
> >>> anti-racism effort of Champaign-Urbana). Would you like to
> >> come and
> >>
> >>> share your reasons for being against this war with Dr. Gill?
> >> We would
> >>
> >>> greatly appreciate it.
> >>
> >>>
> >>
> >>> Tuesday, October 26, 2010 5pm-6pm UPTV (in the Urbana City
> >> Council
> >>
> >>> Chambers) 400 South Vine Street, Urbana, IL A taping of AWARE
> >> on the
> >>
> >>> Air for Channel 6 that will air at 10pm Tuesday evening.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20101027/c2dd9b0a/attachment.html>