[CLUE-Talk] [Fwd: MRC Alert Special: ABC's War News Touts Doubt and Dissent]

[Randy Arabie]

On Thursday, 27 March 2003 at 10:15:18 -0700, Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier
<clue at dissociatedpress.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 23:04, Randy Arabie wrote:
> 
> 
> > That said, I think both are getting pretty close to the treason line but
> > neither have crossed it.
> 
> I don't even see it as close. I see treason as supporting a foreign
> power and taking action against your own government. Spying, joining the
> taliban, that kind of thing. Being a protester against the actions of
> your own government doesn't qualify. 
> 
> > Getting back to the whole point....I don't find it outrageous that some
> > "right-wingers" have called Sean Penn and/or the human shield traitors.
> > They are dancing pretty close to the fire.
> 
> I do. If it's treason for me to go to Iraq to be a human shield, it
> ought to be treasonous for Cheney to have been involved with a company
> (Halliburton) that had dealings with Iraq between the first Gulf War and
> now. 
> 
> http://www.uscrusade.com/forum/config.pl/noframes/read/932
> 
> But I suppose the right-wingers don't qualify it as treason if it's
> money at stake -- only if it's politics. 

Or the UN sanctioned "oil-for-food" program? That's exactly what those
Halliburton contracts were under.  I guess you didn't read the article
too closely. I would have expected you to support such a program, which
was clearly designed to help the impoverished Iraqi people.

The article also states that dozens of American and foreign oil
companies participated in the same program.  Are you suggesting we round
up all US oil company executives and bring them up on charges of
treason, too?

Granted, Saddam is suspected of benefiting greatly from the UN
"oil-for-food" program.  This particular article states that he is
suspected of siphoning off 10% of the proceeds for weapons, luxury goods
and palaces.  But who is to blame for that?  Saddam? The oil companies? Or the
UN (who was administering the program)?

<---snip--->

> > I didn't suggest that all of his comments were fair and even-handed.
> > But that wasn't the issue, now was it?
> 
> The issue, as I see it, is the attempt by a number of commentators to
> dismiss anti-war protesters by labeling them traitor or anti-American or
> communist or whatever. To distract from what those people are saying by
> calling them names and trying to attack their character and not their
> statements. 

I thought the issue was that you implied that Limbaugh called protesters
traitors.  He didn't.

<---snip--->

> I think a lot of people are keeping quiet about their feelings on the
> war due to consensus terrorism. They don't agree, but they're afraid to
> be singled out. 

I think you are onto something there.  And, it ties into the label
issue.  All too often, people are lumped into conservative v. liberal or
right v. left categories.  But often, especially now talking about the
war and the fight against terrorism the issue are far too complex to
fall neatly into one category or the other.

I know people who will only, very reluctantly, discuss their opinion on
these matters because they don't want to be put into the "liberal camp"
or the "right-winger camp".

I don't know the answer to that....I understand your point, but I'm
reluctant to say we shouldn't call an anti-American an anti-American.
If I see a protester carrying a sign that says "USA = Terrorist" (and I
have) then I'll call it like I see it.  Would I say all the people there
are anti-American?  No.  But I might suspect that some significant
portion were.  And, if I knew the rally was funded by a self-described
Marxist organization it would only reinforce my suspicions.

If a more moderate protester is fearfull of such a label, perhaps they
should think twice about participating in a rally with those people.
For example, I think abortion is wrong.  But, I don't participate in
anti-abortion rallies because I don't agree with the positions and
tactics taken by most of the people who do.

Is "guilt by association" OK?  No, not really. But it is reality.
That's just the way human nature works.  You know the old saying, "Birds
of a feather flock together."
-- 
Allons Rouler!
        
Randy
http://www.arabie.org/