| Author |
Message |
    
Mustt_mustt
Citizen
Username: Mustt_mustt
Post Number: 223
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 6:46 pm: | 
|
Not In Our Name
STATEMENTS OF CONSCIENCE AGAINST WAR AND REPRESSION
"No election, whether fair or fraudulent, can legitimize criminal wars on
foreign countries, torture, the wholesale violation of human rights, and
the end of science and reason."
--from the new Not In Our Name
statement
We had planned for the new Not In Our Name statement of conscience to run
on Friday, January 21, in the New York Times. We had a contract and a
confirmation number. This ad was to be our answer to the inauguration, and
it was timed to appear in the middle of the inauguration news coverage.
The ad did not run. The advertising department were themselves deeply
surprised by this, and have not been able to explain what happened. In
fact, we were told that to their knowledge this had never happened before.
At the same time, the Times lead editorial said that this should be a time
of legitimacy and acceptance for the President -- and that this was
especially something that the opposition has to come to terms with.
It is unacceptable that we do not yet know why something that "has never
happened before" happened -- a full page paid ad, accepted and slotted in,
did not run. This is especially so when the content of the ad, the need to
resist the course that this administration has set, is so important to the
people of this country and the world. There needs to be an investigation
of what went wrong and why. If it was just an honest mistake, we expect
that the Times itself would want to know why in order to prevent it from
occurring again.
The Times has given us a new ad reservation number and assured us that the
ad will now run on this Sunday. However, there is the danger of it being
buried in the back of the first section. This would be another way of
marginalizing and rendering relatively invisible the voice of conscience
and dissent.
We urge signers and supporters of the statement to e-mail the Times to
demand that the ad run in the Sunday Week in Review section (where there
will be summation of the inauguration) or in the first 10 pages of the
first section. Send to the President and General Manager of the Times at
president@nytimes.com and to the advertising department at
advertising@nytimes.com.
We also urge people to write letters to the Times in response to their
editorial (www.nytimes.com/2005/01/21/opinion/21fri1.html?oref=login) and
requesting that your letter run on Monday. It would make a huge difference
in making up the loss of the statement not running today, if people would
quote or reference the Not In Our Name statement as part of their answer
to the Times.
|
mwoodwalk
Citizen
Username: Mwoodwalk
Post Number: 272
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, January 23, 2005 - 9:15 pm: |
|
Desperate times call for desperate measures.
Your call to action is the epitome of desperate. |
Mustt_mustt
Citizen
Username: Mustt_mustt
Post Number: 224
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 24, 2005 - 10:09 am: |
|
Do you still think that the NYT is liberal? That's the point. Get it. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 670
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 24, 2005 - 10:07 pm: |
|
Hey double m
How much did that ad cost?
Is this a maplewood group? Or some sort of Soros continuing well funded attack?
And yes the NYT is leftist. Like most leftists they don't care who they stiff as long as they are the last one standing.
Too bad double mm, stop whining and get a real law firm like the T Moore Law Group, to go after your most recent enemy. |
mwoodwalk
Citizen
Username: Mwoodwalk
Post Number: 278
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Monday, January 24, 2005 - 10:34 pm: |
|
I get your point. I just think this is all so sad and desperate---and your conspiratorial assumptions about this episode somehow being evidence of the NY Times abandoning its editorial slant simply add to the air of desperation. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 678
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - 11:29 pm: |
|
NYTimes , Sunday, Jan 23, 2005 mustt mustt's complaint about being dissed by the NYT became moot when the AD appeared.
I want to post a very few of the visible backers of the full page ad which appeared above. This will help all fair minded Maplewoodians to make up their minds.. These will be mostly organizations, with a few prominent, recognizable individuals.
Revolutionary Communist Party, Communities United Against Police Brutality, Poets Against the War, Madisen, WI, School Board (can you believe this?),
Refuse and Resist, National Association of Chicana and Chicano Studies, World Rain Forest Fund, Lawyers Assocation on Nuclear Policy, National Lawyers Guild, United for Peace and Justice, the obligatory artsy and academy folks, and last, my favorite, Representative Jim McDermott, Democrat, Washington State.
If they could publish all 9,000 endorsers they claim to have, we might find that Maplewood thanks to Paul S and Vic, is on this list.
Anyway, thanks mustt mustt for giving me the opportunity to display the fellow travelers in not in our name.
To mimic the anti american peaceniks of the 60's,
In 2005, I'd rather be red then dead.
Think about it.
|
Mustt_mustt
Citizen
Username: Mustt_mustt
Post Number: 232
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - 11:47 pm: |
|
I have and you should be red than dead. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 680
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 12:05 am: |
|
double m
The new statement of conscience in the ad is wide ranging. The language is, imho, seditious.
Why do you feel the organizations listed above in public view on MOL are representative of more than 1% of all americans?
Last, I don't think you get the red vs dead meaning.  |
Mustt_mustt
Citizen
Username: Mustt_mustt
Post Number: 234
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 6:13 am: |
|
Reflective,
It doesn't matter if the statement represents as you claim only 1% of all Americans. The statement is not seditious, it is a democratic expression of the free will of the people. And, yes, I do get the meaning of your red vs dead. How could I miss out on the rhetoric of a conservative Republican! |
mwoodwalk
Citizen
Username: Mwoodwalk
Post Number: 291
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 9:29 pm: |
|
The free will of WHICH people? |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 681
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 9:29 pm: |
|
Well, it was, imho, a clever ab lib, which I thought might have escaped you.
I understand your free expression, and so you will understand my free expression opposing your expressions.
|
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 4276
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 10:31 pm: |
|
Well, imho, I think it's a little simplistic to dismiss all of the signers as "seditious".
If you disagree with them, fine, that's what America is all about. But the selective identification of the named signers, and the hostility directed towards them as a group, seem a little excessive. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 684
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 9:14 pm: |
|
OK, ok, nohero, maybe a little simplistic.
How about un-american?
Double M's brief excerpt above is disingenuous. Double M - Please print the whole statement. I am looking at it, as it appeared in the NYTimes.
I see the statement as giving aid and comfort to our enemies.
NH - here are two excerpts:
The Bush Government...sends our youth to destroy entire cities for the sake of so-called democratic elections.
The Bush Government seeks to impose a narrow, intolerant and political form of Christian fundalmentalism as government policy.
It seems to me that the double M's and their simplistic lies of the world need to be exposed and challenged. It is something they aren't used to.
NH - my intent is not to do point / counterpoint. But rather to clarify your fair observation. |
Mustt_mustt
Citizen
Username: Mustt_mustt
Post Number: 241
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 9:55 am: |
|
Reflective,
Who are you to decide what is American and un-American? And what is wrong with the excerpts that you quote? They are true. Look what happened to Fallujah and as for the policies of Bush, you can see for yourself. Bush went to war by LYING to the whole world, sp please give me a break about being "disingenous." If you feel the need to challenge me and folks who think like me (there are many of us in this country),please go ahead and make my day. |
sbenois
Citizen
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 13039
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 10:00 am: |
|
Bush didn't lie. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 686
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 10:27 am: |
|
Double M
the more you respond, the clearer your extremism is.
And the folks that think like you, well I have seen them at the protests on the mall, and at the World Bank protests.
The younger ones have their faces covered, they destroy property and knock people over as they run thru the crowd, very strange behavior.
The older ones, my age look like flower children who never grew up. Kinda sad.
|
mantram
Citizen
Username: Mantram
Post Number: 110
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 11:57 am: |
|
Thank god for those folks -- it is what makes the U.S different from China or Saudi Arabia. If you believe Freedom is a good enough concept to export -- why do you not embrace it at home? I'm so revolted by this hypocrisy. |
mtierney
Citizen
Username: Mtierney
Post Number: 743
Registered: 3-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 12:42 pm: |
|
Question for Bush haters (that is their category, nothing more, nothing less):
Do you want to see the elections in Iraq fail? |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 5302
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 5:42 pm: |
|
No, I'm glad they went so well. Does that sound odd that I hate Bush's policies and rhetoric but would like to hear that the Iraqi election went well? |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 72
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 6:52 pm: |
|
No Tom that doesn't surprise me as I know your a better guy than that. We all have our views but ultimately we all want our country to be successful. Half the people like Bush and half don't. All this bickering on this board is pretty useless. We don't have a major election for another 3 plus years so I don't understand why people don't just chill and live a little. The President isn't going to resign or be impeached so if you really hate him then you have a few years to stew. You know my view - I'm glad he won and I hope he is able to pass a lot of his proposals. So far the second term is going pretty well and I hope it continues for the good of the country. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 5310
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 7:00 pm: |
|
That's a pretty bizarre comment. There is never a good time to hold off criticism of our government. I didn't expect any restraint when Clinton was president, and I don't expect or promise any now, either. The essence of American society is that we tolerate and encourage criticism of our government. Even a hint that criticism is in poor taste is, in itself, in poor taste.
If I wanted to live where criticism is stomped, I would move to a totalitarian place. Doesn't Bush claim to be spreading freedom and democracy? Then he and you should be praising all criticism. That's what leads us to try to do a better job. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 5311
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 7:02 pm: |
|
Oh, and the NY Times and The New Yorker offer plenty of criticism to left wing politicians, too. You'll notice this when the Democrats are in power.
Al Franken (yes, I can hear you groan) laid out a theory about how publishers tend to be conservative and reporters tend to be liberal. His research has borne this out. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 3054
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 9:34 pm: |
|
That's interesting research for the book world if true. And was Franken's research some book party he went to? If it's people in top positions that tend to be conservative -- well, maybe, but from my contacts in publishing it's being a republican that is best kept quiet unless you're at Regnery. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 74
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 1, 2005 - 1:29 am: |
|
Tom, go ahead and criticize away. I just hope I'm still around to read some of your links from the New Yorker when the Dems are back in power. I'm 34 so they should have enough time to get a meaningful message in place. |
joeltfk
Citizen
Username: Joeltfk
Post Number: 83
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 12:56 pm: |
|
"The Bush Government...sends our youth to destroy entire cities for the sake of so-called democratic elections...The Bush Government seeks to impose a narrow, intolerant and political form of Christian fundalmentalism as government policy. "
This was your example of the "worst" of the comment? I haven't read it at all, but I am 100% comfortable with the second part and would have edited the first part to read "sends our less-advantaged youth to sacrifice their lives for the sake of democratic elections".
I'll buy that the Iraqi elections are no less "democratic" than, say, U.S. Presidential elections in Florida and Ohio.
-- Someone who is also very comfortable supporting and celebrating the election while condemning the war and the misrepresentations of fact that led us into it. |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 4453
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 1:11 pm: |
|
I'll buy that the Iraqi elections are no less "democratic" than, say, U.S. Presidential elections in Florida and Ohio.
 |
Bobkat
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 7476
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 3, 2005 - 1:18 pm: |
|
Tom, the best example of "liberal" reporters and a conservative editorial page is the Wall Street Journal. Most of their non-business reporting is moderate to slightly left leaning, but the editorial page looks like it was written by, or at least approved by, Karl Rove. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page