Well, hopefully, if we need to discuss this more, we can do it privately,
so that the whole list does not have to receive extra e-mail. I do want to
respond to your critique of my comment :
> "It should make other members of the WSN list uneasy that
this type of
> posting appears on a list with which we are all
associated."
I still defend that comment. I, like others, belong to several other e-mail
lists. I have had some generally good (in my opinion) messages rejected by those
lists because on occasion, I used language that was perceived as being outside
the boundaries of acceptable discourse for that list. And do you know what?
Sometimes, the list moderators actually were correct, and my wording was
inappropriate, although the general content of my message was
appropriate. Whether or not the content of John Leonard's message was
appropriate, the use of the term "hitler's excesses" was not appropriate, and as
a long time member of this list, I, and others, have the right and
responsibility to dissociate ourselves from that particular comment.
As to whether President Bush knew in advance that the attack on New York
would happen, that is another debate. I do believe that governments, including
the US government, create provocations--actions that they commit in order to
blame on opponents. From the Alamo to the Maine to the Lusitania, to
Reichstag to (I'm not sure about Pearl Harbor) the Gulf of
Tonkin imaginary attack on U.S. forces to hundreds of police agents in
the US anti- Vietnam War movement to Italian police posing as
anarchist demonstrators during recent protests in Genoa, it should be
obvious that there have been provocations and conspiracies in the past and
present. But I suspect that it would have been and easier and more effective
provocation to blow up a dozen or so schools scattered all around the US and
blame that on supposed terrorists. It would kill fewer people, would only
destroy a few million dollars worth of property (instead of tens of billions),
and would probably create a more intense fear because people in all regions of
the USA would feel threatened. Blowing up the World Trade Center? It
doesn't make sense.
On a more theoretical/analytical level, I would debate the implication that
uncovering these conspiracies is the most important way to stop war. Obviously
it is important to expose conspiracies. But it is also important to expose
the workings and processes of advanced capitalism-imperialism
as a system. Otherwise, the peace movement will simply
be substituting one supporter of war and oppression for another. On a day
to day basis, the empires of Britain, the US, France, Germany, etc. kill
hundreds of thousands of people. Obviously a war against Iraq will kill hundreds
of thousands more and must be stopped. But conspiracy theories can sometimes
play into an "anti-Bush" (or anti-Goldwater if we would could refer back to the
election of 1964) sentiment that would end up politically disarming the
peace movement by having them focus on individuals (or even individual
corporations) in ways that might distract people away from understanding
the fundamental dynamics of oppression.
Respectfully,
Alan Spector
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
is statement by Mr. Grizzard:
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 2:02 AM
Subject: Re: Anglo-German competition for Zionist support in
WWI
> Mr. Spector,
>
> You wrote:
>
> "It should make other members of the WSN
list uneasy that this type of
> posting appears on a list with which we
are all associated."
>
> Forgive me if I inject my own opinion
here, but this comes across to me as
> more of a smear than a
criticism.
>
> "I don't know anything about John Leonard."
>
> John Leonard is the publisher of British political scientist Nafeez
Mossadeq
> Ahmed's seminal book on 9/11, "The War on Freedom." This book
should be the
> standard university text for any serious student of the
prehistory and
> history of 9/11.
>
> After the book was
published in Italy, Gore Vidal took out a full page ad in
> a major
Italian daily praising it, and it subsequently sold out the first
> two
printings. Subsequent to that, one million Italians converged on Rome to
> protest the Bush administration's desire to preemptively strike
Iraq.
>
> And while working on Cynthia McKinney's last campaign,
after she had
> requested through me that the 9/11 research community do
all it could to
> educate the voters of Georgia's 4th Congressional
District about the facts
> of 9/11, Mr. Leonard donated a case of books
to the campaign and was
> supportive of my own personal efforts.
>
> In my opinion, the single greatest way to derail the administrations
plans
> for open-ended war is to expose the administration's
clearly-established
> criminal negligence and probable complicity on
9/11. Mr. Ahmed's brilliant
> scholarly work has provided us with an
indispensible tool to try to make
> that happen. As Leonard Lewin wrote
in his political satire "Report From
> Iron Mountain":
>
>
"A more expedient reason for pursuing the investigation of alternate ways
> and means to serve the current functions of war is narrowly political.
It is
> possible that one or more major soveriegn nations may arrive,
through
> ambiguous leadership, at a position in which a ruling
administrative class
> may lose control of basic public opinion or of its
ability to rationalize a
> desired war." [Iron Mountain, P. 91]
>
> Leonard writes that a transfer from a war system to a peace system
carries
> many dangers and difficulties. But he concludes that
contingency plans for a
> transfer to a peace system must be fully
investigated and prepared for the
> above reason: Through ambiguous
leadership, a ruling class may lose its
> ability to rationalize a
desired war... and then peace could start breaking
> out all over the
place whether we're ready for it or not.
>
> This is how I see the
situation we're in today. The administration is going
> to need a Gulf of
Tonkin/Pearl Harbor/Operation Northwoods to pin on Iraq,
> because they
HAVE lost control of public opinion. And some of the credit for
> that
goes to educators like John Leonard and Nafeez Ahmed.
>
> "If we
can't criticize each other in hopes of making our work better, then,
>
what is it we are trying to accomplish?"
>
> I quite agree, and
please allow me to offer my own criticism. A derogatory
> phrase like
"this type of posting," sounds more like an attempt to dismiss
> Mr.
Leonard's post than an attempt to improve it.
>
>
Respectfully,
>
> Buddy Grizzard
>
> ----Original
Message Follows----
> From: "Alan Spector" <spectors@netnitco.net>
> To: "Buddy
Grizzard" <the_allfather@hotmail.com>, <wsn@csf.colorado.edu>
> Subject: Re:
Anglo-German competition for Zionist support in WWI
> Date: Tue, 22 Oct
2002 23:07:32 -0500
>
>
> I don't know anything about John
Leonard. I did not attack him personally. I
> only said that the use of
the term "hitler's excesses" was a terrible
> choice of words. It
was a terrible choice of words, and I stand by my
> comments.
>
> Nothing else in my comments made any other criticism of John
Leonard.
> Presumably he, and Buddy Grizzard, and all others who want to
help prevent
> future genocides should respect a criticism in the spirit
of making the
> movement against genocide stronger, and more able to
resist the kinds of
> distracting counter-attacks from the rightwing that
might occur when we do
> use words inappropriately. If we can't criticize
each other in hopes of
> making our work better, then, what is it we are
trying to accomplish?
>
> Alan Spector
>
>
>
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Buddy Grizzard" <the_allfather@hotmail.com>
> To:
<wsn@csf.colorado.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday,
October 22, 2002 9:38 PM
> Subject: Re: Anglo-German competition for
Zionist support in WWI
>
>
> >
> > I
know of few people who are doing more right now to prevent FUTURE
>
> genocides than John Leonard. If you think he should have used the
word
> > "atrocities" instead of "excesses," that's certainly a
defensible
> opinion.
> > But to suggest that John is
engaging in apologetics by using a milder
> word
> > than
you would have preferred is simple absurdity.
> >
>
> Buddy Grizzard
> > Press Secretary, Garrett for
Governor, Georgia Green Party
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Get a
speedy connection with MSN Broadband. Join now!
> http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
>