Dear Emma, Have you ever heard of the expression, "you've been had"? Without question, you mean well. I'm sorry but your letter is a complete waste of your time politically, other than simply to satisfy your conscience. Villaraigossa will not, can't be reached on this issue any more than on the So Central farm, or on the absurdity of spending so much money on the westside subway, or on really making changes in the LAPD that would begin to end the racism, torture, brutality, murder or political spying and harassment.
He is simply another Richard Riordan but with a nice tan and owes his existence to the powerful forces that dominate this region and the nation. I'm referring first and foremost to the weapons contractors (in other words, the Pentagon and White House), power companies and telecommunications industries. In regard to the LAPD, the mayor will not go up against a national security state and CIA connected police department that will forever be assisted by local politicians in the coverup of its role in the assassination of Robert Kennedy. That's just for starters. Riordan's endorsement of Villaraigossa is the clear and unequivocal signpost of the character of his Mayoral record to come and who/what Villaraigossa has pledged his actual allegiance to. All progressives should have decided at that moment not to vote for the piece of shit. As long as people continue to buy into appearances instead of facing reality, we will continue down this road to hell. FYI, it was Riordan who arranged the private political meetings between Enron executives (directly connected to the Bush gang operation) and Arnold Schwarzenegger which led to his decision to start the Recall process and run for Governor. Villaraigossa, just like Barb Boxer long ago made a decision like all "good" Democrats, to go along with the most powerful and get rewarded. Their private rationalization quite possibly can be summed up to, 'this is the best I (we) can do in the political climate and reality we live in'. 'One must obtain a level of power before one can begin to "make a difference"'. The problem with that logic is the political and ethical compromises made to attain that power cancel out the potential of making a difference. The endlessly repeated political mistake of progressives (and even liberals) is to allow themselves to be baited over and over and over again to invest politically and emotionally with so-called "progressive" Democratic Party candidates and politicians who are merely playing a charade to keep you coming back, nothing more. Perfect example is this guy running against Lieberman in Connecticut. Political campaigns are used as perception control mechanisms just as any other public phenomenon. Lamont is a fail safe mechanism, a no risk candidate to the powers that be (including the Israeli lobby) in case Lieberman loses. Lamont if elected would show his true colors almost immediately and although he may pose effectively by making progressive statements and voting often with the progressive side it will only be when there is no chance of success legislatively, just like Boxer. And, most importantly, like Kerry, Boxer and other so called progressives or liberals in the Senate, other than lip service, there will be no real leadership getting in the face of the fascist and genocidal juggernaut exemplified by the Carter/Reagan/Bush1/Clinton/Bush2 foreign policy agenda (make no mistake, this is one integrated policy since 1977). If or when Hillary Clinton announces her candidacy for the '08 Presidential race, when all of the women's movement is celebrating, will progressives be suckered (conned, taken) again to support Clinton? (just like Kerry in '04, although he was the designated loser and that's why he had no intention of fighting the election fraud to gain the White House)? The answer is certainly, yes. And the cycle of idiocy will continue and a real progressive direction in this country will be doomed for another 4-8 years. In spite of the lure of the so-called promise to protect a woman's right to choose (for example), when it comes to the broader political viewpoint Hillary will be no different than her husband and may be just as horrendous as Bush2. Foreign policy should take priority in all progressives' minds in determining political alliances. Foreign policy trumps domestic policy, especially when the excuse or justification of protecting national security is submitted. When are progressives going to finally understand this? Progressives need to realize BEFORE the fact, not after, that throwing their support and vote to politicians that later prove to be contrary to their previously accepted image. Within a month of Bill Clinton being in the White House I realized what a mistake I made by voting for him. I learned my lesson in Feb of '93 but I still meet "progressives" and liberals who defend that mother fucker. The Clintons are made members of the Bush gang. There is no difference in the final analysis and result of their applied policies. The movement was unable to have an impact upon Israel's war in Lebanon in 1982 for exactly the same reasons it won't have an impact now, anymore than we've had on the US war in Afghanistan and Iraq and soon to be Syria and Iran. We have no way to impact the political process that empowers and arms Israel unless we never again support any member of Congress that has continued to arm Israel without conditions or pretend it believes that Iraq has WMD's or continue to pretend the US didn't insure 911 happened. It's as simple as that, but in every election cycle, progressives continue to vote for those who arm Israel without conditions or approve of illegal military aggression worldwide. Any hope of redirecting the Dems or replacing them to reverse current policies is first dependent on verifiable and secure voting/counting process in every one of the 3,007 counties in the nation. Cynthia McKinney just suffered wholesale election rigging in her primary and the beneficiary is her "Democratic Party" opponent. Is it any surprise the Democratic Party isn't investigating or exposing the election fraud there? The Dems want to protect election fraud as much as the Repubs. In '92 it was Tom Hayden (and Jane) who wrongly supported Israel's actions (Tom reportedly has come to his senses this time, I hope) and their actions then had a major impact to nullify resistance to Israel's actions. We will continue to lose ground if progressives continue to avoid careful scrutiny of those they invest in politically or settle for the lesser of evils at the voting booth or when contributing to political campaigns. If there is a solution, it would have to include the following adage. Never settle. Never accept compromises that contradict what you know to be right. Never trade on issues. Stand firm. Jonathan Emma Rosenthal wrote: >Dear Mr. Mayor, > > I am writing to you in hope of convincing you NOT to participate in >the upcoming rally in support of Israeli brutality. You are siding with >a very conservative sector of the Jewish community, who have positions >of power and influence in city government and electoral politics and >finance, but who have been totally unaccountable to the Jewish community >as a whole which holds to a diversity of ideas that seem to go >unrecognized by you and those in power. > >Many members of the Jewish community are appalled at Israeli policy, >specifically the recent brutal attacks against the innocent civilians of >Gaza and Lebanon as well as to their vital infrastructure; attacking >and destroying water purification systems, electricity, communications, >food production and factories, hospitals and medical supplies. None of >these attacks in anyway contributes to the security of the Israeli >people who are endangered by Israel's refusal to work towards justice or >peace in the region or to live in peace with its neighbors. These >attacks represent the political aspirations of the most conservative >elements of both the Israeli and the U.S. governments and are part of >Israel's desire for regional hegemony and the U.S.'s global strategy of >expanding empire. You cannot simultaneously oppose the war in Iraq and >support Israel's attacks, with U.S. supplied weaponry and expertise, on >Lebanon and Gaza. They are part of the same rubric; control of the >region, destruction of indigenous infrastructure, leadership and autonomy. > >I hope you will withdraw your support for this event and take a more >balanced position of the situation. > >Sincerely, > >Emma Rosenthal > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/TISQkA/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/7gSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
