Sunday, August 22, 2004
Who really learned the most valuable lessons from the 1960s?
From today’s New York Times:
“Mr. Bush’s advisers said they were girding for the most extensive street demonstrations at any political convention since the Democrats nominated Hubert H. Humphrey in Chicago in 1968. But in contrast to that convention, which was severely undermined by televised displays of street rioting, Republicans said they would seek to turn any disruptions to their advantage, by portraying protests by even independent activists as Democratic-sanctioned displays of disrespect for a sitting president.”
Questions we might want to ask:
1. Why will there be so much protest in the first place?
2. Who are the protestors and what do they represent?
3. Why did televised displays in 1968 focus on violence rather than issues?
4. How easy is it for those in power to baldly admit their deceptive strategies upfront without any concern that the American public will be insulted and/or outraged?
5. How easy is it for protest to be portrayed in any manner the corporate media wishes?
6. How much do the Democrats fear being associated with the protests...and why?
7. Why should a “sitting president” (sic) be exempt from “disrespect”?
8. Finally, if protest can be so easily shunted off to the side (i.e. the West Side Highway), disowned by the “loyal opposition,” manipulated by the party in office, co-opted by the venue (NYC Mayor Bloomberg is actually giving out tourist discount coupons to “peaceful” protestors), misrepresented by the media, and virtually ignored by the vast majority of Americans...what else can and must be done to promote peace and justice as soon as possible?
Saturday, August 21, 2004
Airport Security is Working
It seems Senator Ted Kennedy has been placed on a “no-fly” list. Finally, we’re making an effort to keep the truly dangerous types off U.S. airplanes.
Friday, August 20, 2004
40 Years After Tonkin
A nearly unanimous vote by Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution on Aug. 7, 1964, thus authorizing President Lyndon B. Johnson “to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the
United States and to prevent further aggression.” Over the next two years,
400,000 U.S. soldiers shipped out to South Vietnam.
Of this scenario, we can ask the same question being proposed today: Was
this military response based on a legitimate threat or a fabricated pretext?
To read the complete article, visit: