Husseini is the guy that sends out those Institute for Public Accuracy
press releases with lefty academics and think tankers and
activists/organizers. The Fox website
(besides their wretched politics!) is not exactly full of transcripts of any
of their shows, methinks. Even the O'Reilly factor which millions watch on
the tube they don't offer clips of like CNN does with Crossfire. E-mail,
Husseini here,
Institute for Public Accuracy
915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045
(202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Pugliese
PM Friday, September 14, 2001
A Way Out?
At the National Cathedral today, President Bush said "this nation is
peaceful." The following analysts are available for interviews.
HOWARD ZINN, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
http://www.tompaine.com/opinion/2001/09/13/1.html,
www.geocities.com/howardzinnfans
A renowned historian who has authored numerous books including "A People's
History of the United States," Zinn was a bombardier during World War II.
He said today: "The images on television horrified and sickened me. Then
our political leaders came on television, and I was horrified and sickened
again. They spoke of retaliation, of vengeance, of punishment. I thought:
they have learned nothing, absolutely nothing, from the history of the 20th
century, from a hundred years of retaliation, vengeance, war, a hundred
years of terrorism and counter-terrorism, of violence met with violence in
an unending cycle of stupidity. Will we now bomb Afghanistan, and
inevitably kill innocent people, because it is in the nature of bombing to
be indiscriminate? Will we then be committing terrorism in order to 'send a
message' to terrorists? Yes, it is an old way of thinking, and we need new
ways. A $300 billion military budget has not given us security. Military
bases all over the world, our warships on every ocean, have not given us
security. Land mines, a 'missile defense,' will not give us security. We
need to imagine that the awful scenes of death and suffering we are
witnessing have been going on in other parts of the world for a long time,
and only now can we begin to know what people have gone through, often as a
result of our policies. We need to decide that we will not go to war,
whatever reason is conjured up by the politicians or the media, because war
in our time is always indiscriminate, a war against innocents, a war
against children. War is terrorism, magnified a hundred times."
KEVIN GRAY, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An activist and contributing editor to Black News in Columbia, S.C., Gray
is working on a book entitled "The Death of Black Politics." He said today:
"People who feel hopeless fly into buildings. And now we're going to get
mad and kill them. Well, they're already willing to die -- they're already
dead. People have focused on the who, what, where and how -- but we need to
ask and think about the why. U.S. policies have caused enormous levels of
death and destruction around the world. From Nicaragua to Chile to Iraq to
Cuba to Palestine to Timor to Cambodia to any number of other places, one
clearly sees the callousness with which U.S. policies treat the lives and
property of especially non-white peoples. A declaration of war will --
rather than reducing the threat of terrorism -- eliminate basic civil
liberties and strengthen the existing tendency toward a racist and classist
police state."
JULES LOBEL, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Professor of constitutional and international law at the University of
Pittsburgh, Lobel co-wrote the Yale International Law Journal article "The
Use of Force to Respond to Terrorist Attacks -- The Afghanistan and Sudan
Bombing." He said today: "We live in a culture of violence. I was in a
courtroom arguing about how to deal with violent inmates when the judge
told us of the attacks. I spent hours wondering if my sister -- who worked
on the 50th story of the WTC -- was safe. I thought about whether our
bombing another country and killing people would give her possible death
meaning. It was an empty feeling. When our leaders talk of a
disproportionate response that would inevitably kill many civilians -- what
exactly distinguishes that response from this heinous act? The only hope is
if this tragedy forces us to re-evaluate our role in the world."
For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
Institute for Public Accuracy
915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045
(202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________
Friday, September 14, 2001
"BLOWBACK"?
Facing the Roots of Terrorism: Interviews Available
RABBI ARTHUR WASKOW, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.shalomctr.org
Director of The Shalom Center and author of "Godwrestling -- Round 2,"
Waskow said today: "Even the greatest oceans do not shield us; even the
mightiest buildings do not shield us; even the wealthiest balance sheets
and the most powerful weapons do not shield us. The lesson is that only a
world where we all recognize our vulnerability can become a world where all
communities feel responsible to all other communities. And only such a
world can prevent such acts of rage and murder. If I treat my neighbor's
pain and grief as foreign, I will end up suffering when my neighbor's pain
and grief curdle into rage. This does not mean ignoring or forgiving
whoever wrought such bloodiness. They must be found and brought to trial,
without killing still more innocents. Their violence must be halted, their
rage must be calmed -- and the pain behind them must be heard and
addressed. Human beings become terrorists in a pool of despair, we must dry
up that pool of despair by replacing despair with dignity and justice in
all neighborhoods on this planet."
JEFFREY SOMMERS, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.zmag.org/ZNET.htm
Assistant professor of history at North Georgia College and State
University, Sommers said today: "Colin Powell said yesterday that Osama bin
Laden is the prime suspect. If that accusation is right, this would be what
the CIA calls 'blowback' -- when what we've created blows back in our face.
The Taliban's coming to power is partly the outcome of the U.S. support of
the Mujahadeen, the radical Islamic group, in the 1980s in the war against
the Soviet Union. Blowback might erupt quickly, or simmer for decades. In
Afghanistan, we trained the fundamentalists for covert operations -- the
stuff of terrorism. After they came to power, they turned on their former
benefactor, the U.S., which had achieved the smooth flow of oil from the
Middle East at a terrible human cost. A decade of bombing and sanctions has
left Saddam Hussein in power but over 700,000 Iraqi children are dead.
Palestinians live under a brutal military occupation. When the Arabic
nations try and address this matter civilly in the UN, as they just tried
last week at the Durban conference, they are rebuffed. When blowback
strikes, the consequences are as devastating as they are tragic."
DAVID GIBBS, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
http://www.gened.arizona.edu/dgibbs/cv.htm
Associate professor of political science at the University of Arizona and
author of the recent articles "Afghanistan: The Soviet Invasion in
Retrospect" and "Washington's New Interventionism," Gibbs said today: "Bin
Laden began his military career during the 1980s, as a fighter with Muslim
groups in Afghanistan that were armed and trained by the CIA. The Taliban
government of Afghanistan, which supports Bin Laden's organization,
consists of elements that also were supported by the CIA. It is ironic that
some of the alleged villains in the recent terrorist attacks may well be
products of past U.S. policies. A major problem with military 'solutions'
is that they often create far more problems than they solve. The CIA's
operations in Afghanistan during the 1980s, which have helped to generate
terrorism in recent years, are spectacular examples of such policy
failures."
For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Devine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 8:11 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:17139] Re: Law or War?
> This O'Reilly character fits the classic profile of a jingoist.
>
> Is there a transcript of what Huessini (sic?) said? did O'Reilly cut him
> off before he finished his points? It sure looks that way.
>
> At 04:59 PM 09/14/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> >Interview with Francis Boyle, Professor of Law, University of Illinois
> >Subject: NO RUSH TO WAR!/O'Reilly Factor/FOX/13Sept2001
> >
> > > GUESTS: Sam Huessini, Francis Boyle
>
> Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
>
