New Quaker Notebook

Over at his Regressive Antidote website is David Michael Green's concise but painful statement of fact about Iraq—what happened before we invaded the nation, a Bushevik timeline of events surrounding our devastating Shock and Awe attack, copious evidence of careless lies and mass incompetence, and a bleak assessment of any possible "way forward." These could be chapters of the definitive story about one of the world's greatest war crimes.

Green's "What Every American Should Know about Iraq" is also archived at CommonDreams.org.

Ridiculous Is as Ridiculous Does

The most outrageous news of the year has to be the report this week of the US military's plans to arm Sunni insurgents who will, they hope, use those weapons to attack al-Qaeda fighters in Iraq. Of course, this "enemies of my enemies are our friends" strategy will only work if these Sunni fighters won't use those weapons against our troops. Reports the Guardian:

The US high command this month gave permission to its officers on the ground to negotiate arms deals with local leaders. Arms, ammunition, body armour and other equipment, as well as cash, pick-up trucks and fuel, have already been handed over in return for promises to turn on al-Qaida and not attack US troops.

To test their loyalty (their promise not to attack our troops with the US-supplied equipment and weapons), the "US said it would use fingerprinting, retinal scans and other tests to establish whether insurgents had been involved in fighting against American troops."¹

I feel a rant coming on, but I'm not sure it can match Jon Stewart's Daily Show take on this ridiculous strategy in this devastating Mess O' Potamia episode:

1. "US arms Sunni dissidents in risky bid to contain al-Qaida fighters in Iraq," Guardian, June 12, 2007. If this isn't just crazy on the face of it, compare it with this news item from last year: "If US leaves Iraq we will arm Sunni militias, Saudis say," Guardian, December 14, 2006.

The Beast

"When a good time turns around you must whip it / You will never live it down unless you whip it / No one gets their way until they whip it / I say whip it / Whip it good" - Devo

Last night I took a drive to the local Publix grocery store for some skim milk and noticed that regular unleaded gasoline was down to $2.95 per gallon. No bombs went off, no IEDs were triggered, no one was lurking around with rocket launchers or AK-47s, and food, drink, and bottled spring water were plentiful at the grocer. And organic milk, too. Life is good in America.

The corporation is in part the reason why we have this sleepy comfort. In one of the first (and few) media responses to Ralph Nader's Taming the Giant Corporation conference on corporate accountability at the Carnegie Institution this past weekend, Alec Dubro noticed that a conference such as this has to be the mere beginning:

We can't compete with the corporations on the basis of material abundance, but we do have to offer more than struggle, the possibility of justice, and solar panels for all. People do sense that they don't really need all that junk and the excess space to store it, but they can't at the moment conceive of another vision for increasing their happiness.

The vision of a post-corporate America put forth at the conference was one in which security and equality reigned. But that left out what corporate state traffics in: the possibility of success. It's what the conservatives misleadingly call freedom, but it's not entirely a fraud. Lots of people want to do better, and we need their support.¹

I think the same thing has happened with the anti-war movement here in the US. I re-read Todd Gitlin's opinion piece in Mother Jones, written in 2002, and still find it rich in prescience. In asking Who Will Lead? Gitlin says:

Where is the party of sense? Now that the Democrats having caved in—most are too calculating by half—who will mobilize the millions of Americans who think the Bush doctrine is dangerous, but are sure to flee left-wing pieties? Will the silent majority of American antiwarriors stand up?

Those who care about global peace and security, and reject preventive or preemptive war as the means to achieve it, should be organizing teach-ins—real teach-ins. They should be holding debates, not rallies of the faithful, mouthing nonsensical slogans.

That was written five years ago. Nader's conference is now beginning to hold these debates, these teach-ins, and to put the spotlight on the real power source in the global commercial community.

Even the power brokers forget who wields the real strength in influence and change. Witness Tony Blair's ridiculous charge that the media function like a feral beast. Oh, boo hoo. We forget, like Blair and others, that our media outlets are corporations with the same profit interests as other large corporations. That is why Fox News gets away with its minimal coverage of the Iraq war.² Why bore people with the same-old, same-old stories about the same-old, same-old war in the Middle East, when it makes more business sense to give real news, what people want to hear? Fox makes more money when there is more interest in Anna Nicole Smith, Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, et al. Love them or hate them, Fox and Wal-Mart are peas in a pod. They give their shareholders a good return on their investment when they profit, and the money is surely in bread and circuses.³

So Nader is again on the right track. His classic 7-steps to curb corporate power underscored the need for citizens to take an interest in how the corporation operates like a person to control the outcome of our electoral process:

6. Get Corporations Out of Our Elections. The cost of running for a seat in the House of Representatives is more than $1 million. The cost of winning a seat in the Senate is well over $5 million—running nearly as high as $40 million in the largest states. The Bush/Cheney 2004 re-election campaign spent $367 million. As a result, those who run for office package their candidacies in a manner attractive to those with money. Roughly 75 percent of the money raised in campaigns comes from business or business-related interests. Corporations are legal entities, not human beings; as such they should be prohibited from contributing to campaigns, sponsoring PACs or lobbying.

If we actually subordinate corporate interests to the will of the people, we ought to have less influence from the military industrial complex, more thoughtful and balanced reporting from our media, and legitimate representation from our elected officials. Life would be good in America.

1. "Lying Down with Hyenas," TomPaine.com, June 11, 2007.
2. "War Takes Up Less Time on Fox News," AP/Forbes, June 11, 2007: "Fox spent half as much time covering the Iraq war than MSNBC during the first three months of the year, and considerably less than CNN, according to the Project for Excellence in Journalism."
3. I suppose I should note that no one seems too concerned about the extent of power available to, and exerted by, Google. I am amused by this statement over at The Randolph Bourne Institute: "Donations to the Randolph Bourne Institute (and Antiwar.com!) are tax deductible—and essential for the continuation of our efforts. We don't carry ads; we don't sponsor "shopping"—we focus on delivering a very clear, undiluted message of news and analysis of events, current and past. But we need you, our readers, to help us stay afloat. Without that, we'll sink." Most of the pages at its Antiwar.com site carry Google ads. But, hey, it's Google, so that makes it okay.

The Great Oz has spoken, um, again

There are some things that, when challenged, bring down upon the challengers a weighty atmosphere of rejection, sucking the life out of whatever intellectual honesty remains in the room and resulting in ruined careers, backbiting whispers, and silence from people who used to be friends. I would say that the Holocaust and Evolution are two leading contenders for issues that must not be challenged.¹

Norman Finkelstein and Guillermo Gonzalez are learning this the hard way. Both have lost tenure at their respective universities. Dr Gonzalez, a defender of Intelligent Design, will be departing as assistant professor of physics and astronomy at Iowa State University, whose president rejected his loss-of-tenure appeal on June 1. Dr Finkelstein, a controversial expert on Zionism and the Jewish Holocaust, will be leaving DePaul University after notification on Friday that his application for tenure and promotion has been denied. Both have amazing credentials and will without doubt land in better places.

As someone who has spent part of his college career in administration and academic affairs, I will not hesitate to repeat what my friend J. was recently told in a heated conversation with his provost at one of the universities in the State University of New York system: "I would rather have mediocrity that tows the line!" Indeed. Academic freedom is always a weightless phrase when balanced on the scale with other institutional interests.

1. I suppose I should add to this short list the meteor theory of dinosaur extinction. After all, Walt Disney World now has a thrilling ride to commemorate the theory. See also Wikipedia: "In Dinosaur, guests board 'Time Rovers' at The Dino Institute, a once secret research facility. The guests are taken into the Cretaceous period, just before the arrival of the meteor which is believed to have caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. Their mission is to capture a living Iguanodon (Aladar from the Dinosaur movie to be exact) and to return it to the present. The mission is complicated by encounters with various dangerous dinosaurs (including a Carnotaurus) and the arrival of the meteor."

Green's Iraq War Wiki

Ridiculous Is as Ridiculous Does

The Beast

The Great Oz has spoken, um, again