Of Palestinians rejoicing

[Paul Mackin]

In the spirit of biparticismship let me clarify if necessary that my
warnings against relying principally on (nonprintbased media) Internet sites
for one's information apllies not only to peace activism and
anti-globalization sites but equally to anti-Bill&Hillary sites and
gun-rights sites.

The point of the highly selected "facts" deseminated on this type site is
not to provide generally applicable information but to advance  specific
partisan views. Nothing wrong with that in itself but let the buyer beware.
The New York Times and Washington Post depite criticisms one might make have
of their inclusions and ommisions DO in any case provide generally useful
informaton with which to think about things.

And about going back and checking the transcritpt of the 60 Minutes program
one would especially want to see if Madeline Albright in any way shape or
form assented to the implication in the secondary reporting that the actions
she said might have been necessary were the principal cause of the
diplorable outscomes described.

P.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Wise" <philwise at paradise.net.nz>
To: "Paul Mackin" <paul.mackin at verizon.net>; <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 5:56 PM
Subject: Re: Of Palestinians rejoicing


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Mackin" <paul.mackin at verizon.net>
> To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2001 8:29 AM
> Subject: Re: Of Palestinians rejoicing
>
>
> > I'd love to see bin Laden turned into a martyr and the sooner the
better.
> > However the thing I appreciated most about Mark's post was that he
> bothered
> > to point out how much  misleading caca appears on the Internet. The
> greatest
> > source of disinformation the world has ever known. But that's OK, it's a
> > free country as they say. Since Mark asked for our opinions, mine on
using
> > nuggets gleaned from cyberspace as sources for points we are trying to
> make
> > would be--don't do it unless the material also appears somewhere in
print
> > preferably in something someone actually are willing to pay to read..
> Well,
> > that's going too far of course but some people, it seems to me,  have
been
> > far too undisciminating. Oh hell continue on as you were. A little
> > disinformation is good for keeping your defenses up.
>
> Well, since Otto posted the date of the 60 minutes broadcast, it would be
> quite possible to go back and find the context of the remark, provided you
> can find the episode.  May 12, 1996.  I presume that recording is in the
> public domain somewhere...
>
> There's lots of malarki on the internet, and tons of truth.  Was the quote
> Otto posted, with a citation, malarki?  Was the material Calbert quoted,
> apparently from an official website, the entire truth?  Probably no to
both
> questions - both are spinning, but both will have nuggets of truth in
there
> somewhere.  Is Saddam Hussain an inhuman monster who is responsible for
the
> suffering of his population?  Undoubtedly.  Did the US/UN commit war
crimes
> in the region, which are continuing?  Seems likely.  Does any of it
> "justify" murdering yet more civilians, in New York, Washington,
> Afghanistan, or elsewhere?  Bloody hell no.  Do the US have the right to
> find and deal to the perpitrators of this terrible crime?  Bloody hell
yes.
> Should they expand this to eliminating existing terrorist organisations in
> the world?  If they do it well, they'll be doing the world, including the
> middle east, a big favour.  Should they emply any method to do so?  No,
> because that'd be repeating the mistakes of the past.  Should they own up
to
> the unsavoury aspects of that past and determine to act more responsibly
in
> the future?  Absolutely.  To actually achieve this could make Bush a great
> president.  Should Chomsky and Fisk and co balance their analysis with a
> recognition of the complexity of the picture (e.g. that the States has
also
> offered generously an enormous amount to the world, that some of the
> policies in the middle east, at least, were driven by impossible choices
in
> utterly polarised situations)?  Yes.  Is there some truth to what they
say,
> however?  It would seem so.  What should be done?  Damned if I know.
>
> phil
>
>
> >
> >     P.
> > .
> >
> >
>
>