A few replies -- Doug, Barabara, jbor, Richard

[barbara100 at jps.net]

Jbor asked:
What if the Western world were as convinced by Doug's propaganda as some
sectors of the population in
repressed Islamic countries are by bin Laden's?

Barbara answers:
Then, What a Beautiful World it Would Be!  Then the people of the world
would be a 'one with.......'  Pynchon didn't finish that sentence for us,
but can you Jbor?

If you insist on calling it propaganda, fine, but what have you so got so
against it anyway?  You make issue with Doug, and you make issue with his
news, but what's really at issue here?  Jbor? Terrance? Malign? Jasper?
Quail? David? (did I miss anybody?)  What's wrong with Doug's propaganda?  I
know you think you're arguing till you're blue in the face too, but I find
very little substance in any of you. Doug you're a propagandist; Doug you're
a jerk; Doug you're crazy; shut up Doug; fuck off, Doug.  Where's the meat
of your argument, fellas? What's really at the heart of the matter here?  It
can't be *all* about Doug, now can it?  His ideas aren't original,  you
know.  He's not the only one saying it, you know.  What else besides Doug
don't you like here? (Correction: What else besides Doug and me don't you
like here?) (Some things are just a given.)

Barbara


----- Original Message -----
From: jbor <jbor at bigpond.com>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: A few replies -- Doug, Barabara, jbor, Richard


> on 18/10/01 4:24 AM, The Great Quail at quail at libyrinth.com wrote:
>
> > And unlike
> > jbor, who makes many reasonable points, I do not feel that it is
> > useful to imply that Doug is trying to do the same thing as bin
> > Laden. Doug may dislike America intensely, and he is certainly
> > virulent and a fanatic, but his words have every right to be heard,
> > and he is far from advocating violence or havoc.
>
> I suspect that Doug's primary aim in his propaganda campaign is the
> overthrow of the Bush government, whether or not he even admits this to
> himself. At this time I don't see that either his methods or this aim are
> conducive to American or world stability. What if the Western world were
as
> convinced by Doug's propaganda as some sectors of the population in
> repressed Islamic countries are by bin Laden's? It is just as important to
> speculate on the manipulation of public opinion in the U.S. as it is on
what
> might happen in Afghanistan. The two are directly connected in fact.
>
> Doug is entitled to his opinions, I agree, as is everyone else. I would
> hesitate before allowing them to be published on the front page of the
NYT,
> however, which probably expresses the gist of my point a little less
> provocatively.
>
> best
>