The following is an update from Suzanne Taylor and TheConversation.org Making Sense of These Times [http://www.theconversation.org] Website. Thank you for your interest. If you wish to be removed from this list at any time, just let us know.________________________________________May 23, 2002I'd like to read this somewhere. Can you readers get it placed?"TheConversation.org is an easy to follow tracking of events in these troubling times. If you are of a progressive bent, all that gets posted on it is worth reading -- select columns by Arianna Huffington and Geov Parrish, Five Star Pieces by great writers, pithy quotes that capture the essence of other good writings, and a monitored version of conversation generated by what's on the site. Staying abreast of TheConversation.org will not only save you from plowing through so much more, it also will serve to keep thinking people thinking together -- an instrument for turning separate gadflies into a collective force. Check it out, and then get on a list to get an email every few days consisting of new posts to the site: http://www.theconversation.org."________________________________________Crop Circle Diary, 2002: http://www.mightycompanions.org/cropcircles/diary2002.htmlSuzanne's comments: There's nothing that gets me as excited as crop circles. As I struggle for the equilibrium that all of us yearn for, the only really hopeful thing to me is that we are being visited and signaled by another intelligence, an understanding which could overtake humanity when a documentary film on the subject hits theaters this summer. As of now, I'm opening a track for following events related to the circles with a posting by the filmmaker, William Gazecki (Oscar nominated for "WACO: The Rules of Engagement"), that captures the fascination I have, and tells the story of how our documentary, "CROP CIRCLES: Quest for Truth," for which I'm executive producer, came to be.________________________________________New postings to our heated Conversation on the Middle East: http://www.theconversation.org/c-mideast.html#new________________________________________Column from Arianna Huffington: Has the Patient Expired on the Pharmaceutical Industry's Invincibility? -- May 20, 2002
Full column: http://www.ariannaonline.com/columns/files/052002.htmlSuzanne's comments: Here's a great panorama of what's going on in the pharmaceutical world. I feel so well-informed now -- with, believe it or not, blessedly good news. What a world of corporate sleaze we live in -- you get a good dose of its perversity here. A highly recommended read -- just why we run with Arianna as a regular here. "...drug companies find themselves under fire on a series of fronts -- assailed by Congress, federal prosecutors, federal regulators, human rights activists and international health organizations...Since we so often lament the terrible injustices that surround us, let's take a moment to celebrate this rare instance of chronically corrupt corporations getting a helping of their just desserts."Other quotes drawn from the column:In the latest scheme, one that is costing consumers billions of dollars, drug companies are using American courts to stall the sale of generic versions of some of their most popular products. Here's how it works: when a drug's patent is about to expire, its maker tries to ward off competition by filing frivolous lawsuits against anyone looking to make a low cost, and perfectly legal, version of the pill. They don't really expect to win, but the suit can delay the generic version from hitting the market for up to 30 months -- allowing the patent holders to rake in billions in additional, competition-free sales. And the public gets to pay twice: we pay for unnecessarily high-priced drugs, and we pay for the court system they're exploiting to keep us paying the high price.________________________________________Column from Geov Parrish: Scandalmongering: Hit the Panic Button Enough and No One Will Read the Real News -- May 9, 2002Suzanne's comments: If you love to loathe this administration, you will be fed by Geov's disdain here. In remarking on today's warnings about future attacks on the U.S., he does not mince words in a denunciation of the way the people are being toyed with. "[Asking]how our government brought us and the world to this sorry point, and how we can make it better should be the preoccupation of every waking moment of every political leader in both parties."Other quotes drawn from the column:The only things we know for sure about the next major attack are that thousands more people every day aspire to carrying one out, and that it won't involve either jet planes or boxcutters. That's why these dire warnings can safely (and accurately) be trotted out whenever a day's uncomfortable news stories warrant some White House damage control.________________________________________OTHER ADDITIONS TO OUR QUOTES SECTION [http://www.theconversation.org/index.html#quotes]:While the East Timorese honor us with their gift of exemplary courage and resilience, "the world's most powerful nation" prepares its own trademark birthday gift -- resumption of military aid to Indonesia, East Timor's neighboring human rights abuser. Already responsible for more than 200,000 East Timorese deaths during the occupation, the Indonesian military left East Timor in a "smoking ruin" (according to Human Rights Watch) in the weeks immediately following East Timor's independence referendum in August 1999.
Despite the fact that not a single military officer has yet to be held criminally responsible in a court of law, and despite the Indonesian military's ongoing domestic human rights abuses, President Bush and his administration are paving the way toward restoring military aid.
East Timor Independence Day: May 20, 2002
ZNet Commentary [Zmag commentaries are a premium sent to Sustainer Donors of ZMag/ZNet. You must become a Sustainer to read this article.]
Cynthia Peters
Danny Schechter's Daily Weblog, a must-read for me on the MediaChannel.org Website, has a post about our Site in his May 15 edition. He said this about us:
TAYLOR: TALK ABOUT IT
Other American Jews are turning to websites to discuss their feelings about what is going on. Suzanne Taylor from LA sends in an invitation to join the discussion on her lively site. "With so much posted this past month about Israel's treatment of Palestinians, and my own strong feeling about this -- aligned with Robert Scheer, who says, 'Those are not my tanks careening around the West Bank bringing fear and havoc in their wake' -- I point you to 'Conversation on the Middle East' where us Jews in conflict can engage each other. It amazes me how strongly I am being met with a defense of what I think is indefensible. I welcome any help to get us to where we are indeed 'making sense of these times,' and not fighting with one another." [http://www.theconversation.org/c-mideast.html].
And look at the good things we got from his Weblog on the same day...
You would never see this type of reporting in a US paper, but Mathew Engel of The Guardian, a British newspaper, seems to have told it like it was, citing a Saudi paper, interviewing their own leader.In the most regal possible manner, Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia skewered President George Bush yesterday as a man so ignorant about the Middle East, and specifically about the suffering of the Palestinians, that he needed several hours of personal tuition to bring him up to speed. When the prince visited the presidential ranch in Texas last month, the two men spent five hours together, far longer than expected. This was an indication - according to the White House spin machine - of how well they got on. Prince Abdullah presents a different interpretation: the time was spent coaching the president in political realities. "He is the type of person who sleeps at 9.30pm after watching the domestic news," the prince told Okaz, a Saudi newspaper. "In the morning, he only reads a few lines about what is written on the Middle East and the world due to his huge responsibilities."
George Bush? He's Nice but Dim, Says Crown Prince
Matthew Engel
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4413737,00.htmlTodd Gitlin, the student activist turned culture critic and Media Channel advisor, has been a loud voice against the so-called Blame America school which Noam Chomsky has, unfairly in my view, been accused of leading. Todd tends to be even handed at times of polarized debate and the search for political purity. Writing in Mother Jones online, he laments the rise in a sense of victimization among Jews as a result of the crescendo of criticism being heaped on Israel.The victim mentality, left unleashed, both leads to the crimes of the present and incites the murderers of the future, who might not hesitate to graduate from suicide bombs to suitcase bombs. At this moment, Palestinians who think with their blood are thirsting for the apocalyptic day when they will run the risk of rendering large portions of their wished-for homeland unfit for human habitation. Meanwhile, Jewish fundamentalists, cheered on by the leaders of America's Christian right, gird up to expel the Philistines once more. Self-righteousness has its reasons, but it murders the future in the name of an unsalvageable past.
The Politics of Victimhood
Todd Gitlin
http://www.motherjones.com/web_exclusives/commentary/opinion/gitlin_may.html
Terrorist Warnings, a statement by Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney
http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/05.17AA.Mckinney.Bush.NU.htm________________________________________Quotes that appear on the site in the Quotes section, are in bold in this Five Star Piece.Five Star Piece: What Did Bush Know? Michael Albert -- May 22, 2002Suzanne's comment: A great piece for progressives to recalibrate, so we all can stay on the same page. This cuts through the fascination with what Bush knew when, which moves incompetence centerstage, and takes the spotlight off the real crimes of commission, not omission. "Of course these agencies lack competence. Moreover, what good does demonstrating the incompetence of U.S. intelligence agencies do peace and justice?...The irony is that the question 'what did Bush know before 9/11?' may be the only 'what did he know' question that Bush can answer without revealing a grotesque value system."
The above question screams from mainstream newspapers. It froths from liberals' lips. What troubles me more, however, is that some leftists also find it important.
Prevalent Question: What did Bush know and when did he know it regarding possible terrorism threats preceding 9/11--and what did Bush do in light of his knowledge?
Absent Question 1: What did Bush know and when did he know it regarding the likely effects of bombing Afghanistan after 9/11--and why did Bush go ahead and bomb in light of his knowledge?
Absent Question 2: What did Bush know and when did he know it regarding the impact of the Iraq Embargo--and why does Bush persist with the embargo in light of his knowledge?
Absent Question 3: What did Bush know and when did he know it regarding the impact of his globalization policies, his arms shipments and production, his repressive civil legislation, his economic and cultural policies, his UN vetoes and ecological isolationism, and so on and so forth--and why does Bush persist with these policies in light of his knowledge?
Supposing we had the means to answer the question about Bush's foreknowledge of 9/11, it would at most reveal that U.S. intelligence services lack competence. But these are the U.S. same intelligence agencies that can't find the perpetrator of the recent anthrax attacks, even though the anthrax came from Fort Detrick, Maryland, and even though, given the skills required, the number of possible culprits is a handful.
Of course these agencies lack competence. Moreover, what good does demonstrating the incompetence of U.S. intelligence agencies do peace and justice? Should bolstering surveillance budget allotments be a new progressive program plank?
In contrast to the difficulty of knowing Bush's foreknowledge of terrorist tactics, it's easy to know what Bush knew and when he knew it about bombing Afghanistan, about the Kyoto Accords, about Mideast policy, about implications of embargoes on Iraq and Cuba, about globalization, and so on. And knowing this would reveal important truths profoundly relevant to peace and justice concerns.
So why is any leftist caught up in the hypocritical democratic party and media maven hoopla? When TV news allots massive time to a story vaguely correlated to progressive concerns, must we immediately hop on board?
The irony is that the question "what did Bush know before 9/11?" may be the only "what did he know" question that Bush can answer without revealing a grotesque value system.
Bush can say, for example, "I knew that our intelligence services reported numerous threats, just as they have reported at all other times. I did not, in response, shut down transportation and communication because if I did, the next day I would have heard ten times as many threats, and thereafter I would have had to permanently shut down all communications and transportation, if I accepted that approach."
This is also the answer Democrats would give, were Democrats in the White House for the event. And it is the answer the media mavens would give, were the media not concerned to put some brakes on the Bush juggernaut.
Okay, if the government knew that planes might soon be flown into the sides of skyscrapers, then instructions to pilots and even to passengers should have been different, sure. And maybe some politicians are sincerely concerned to correct these failings--it's possible. But none of that makes expanding CIA spending a leftist agenda.
Hold on. The media want to restrain the Bush juggernaut?
Yes, the Bushite maniacs in Washington have sufficiently worried sectors of our ruling elites that elements of the media have begun seeking self-serving ways to slow down the madness. Why don't the media just call it immoral, call it imperial, call it warmongering, repressive, vile? They don't do that because they like those features, and they don't want to draw attention to them, much less ridicule them.
They worry that the Bush approach has gone a little over the top--but not that it is immoral or imperial. They want to curb the excesses, but they don't want to point the populace toward system-defying insights.
Not surprisingly, therefore, democrats and media commentators ask what Bush knew regarding 9/11, rather than asking how markets, private ownership relations, and government bureaucracy compel horrible outcomes regardless of what Bush or anyone else knows.
The left should not climb aboard as a barely audible echo to a crescendo of hypocrisy.
The left should direct public attention back on the plight of Palestinians, on the Iraq embargo and impending invasion of Iraq, on the enlarging war in Colombia, and on the horrors of globalization, racism, sexism, and wage slavery.
[Please support ZMAG -- a great source for the best pieces of the day. Commentaries are a premium sent to Sustainer Donors of ZMag/ZNet. To learn more, consult ZNet at www.zmag.org.]________________________________________If you are receiving this newsletter from a third party, you can sign up
by sending your full name and how you heard of us to:
update@theconversation.org________________________________________
Your feedback is subject to posting here and on our Website. If you do not wish to have your comments posted, please let us know.
You can always visit our What's New Since Last Update [http://www.theconversation.org/new.html] page for links to everything new since we posted an Update from Suzanne, May 11, on the site.
We're sending these messages in HTML -- prettier than text. If you prefer text, let us know.