Steve
Stephen Philion Lecturer/PhD Candidate Department of Sociology 2424 Maile Way Social Sciences Bldg. # 247 Honolulu, HI 96822
On Mon, 17 Sep 2001, Max Sawicky wrote:
> >From today's Salon. In full fascist rant, as usual; plus, nasty attacks on
> Chomsky, which should warm Leo's heart.
>
> http://www.salon.com/news/col/horo/2001/09/17/ayers/index.html DP
>
>
> Doing my Rodney King imitation, I wish we could
> all get along. But we probably can't. I think
> the above is unfair to Leo, but he kind of started
> it by saying I have nothing in common with XX, etc.
> I'm not over this myself, and I was nowhere near
> either plane crash. I tried to buy a gas mask
> yesterday at my local Army surplus store (Israeli
> model, $19.95), but they were sold out. We should
> be bashing the other guys, like this:
>
> I send this to Salon in re: Horowitz
>
>
> Horowitz, Jihadist
>
> How unsurprising that the always loathesome David Horowitz joins Jerry
> Falwell and Pat Robertson in seeking to tie Tuesday's crimes to U.S.
> liberals.
>
> But others can play at this game. For instance, it is logical to presume
> that America's enemies seek to promote discord and division among our
> people, and the American jihadists Horowitz, Falwell, and Robertson are
> their agents.
>
> Among several hundred salient points utterly neglected by DH, let me note
> three:
>
> 1. In choosing Bill Ayers and the detestable weatherman cult as
> poster-child for the New Left, DH fails to mention that he was of that ilk
> his own self. Not a Weatherman per se, but an advocate of state-smashing
> for whom the Weatherpeople were unconstructive, not immoral. Not for him to
> guide the left towards a non-violent socialist posture. No -- he was down
> with the putschists. He WAS Bill Ayers.
>
> 2. Besides self-aggrandizement, DH's mission in life is to apologize for
> the problematic performance of elites. There is no mention, for instance,
> of the role of airlines in lobbying for less regulation in matters of
> security (along with everything else), and less commitment of resources to
> more effective security systems. Nor does he touch on the lackadaisical
> posture of politicians in ALL parties in regards to periodic warnings of
> insufficient effort and funds devoted to security.
>
> 3. Finally, there is no mention of the historic role of the U.S. in
> supporting Islamic fundamentalists in their struggle against the
> Soviet-backed regime in Afghanistan. "Blowback" is a real thing. We had it
> with Noriega and with Saddam Hussein, and here it is again.
>
> The peace camp is wrong on this issue, but I don't fault their intentions.
> The U.S. ought to seek retribution and accept the possibility of harm to
> innocents in that process. Vacuous rhetoric about "war" will not be a clear
> guide to what will actually be useful, as opposed to what will make people
> here feel better.
>
> One thing is certain, however. DH didn't go to war in the 1960's, and hell
> no he ain't gonna go now either.
>
> Max B. Sawicky
> Washington, D.C.
>
>
>
>