Sunday, March 13, 2005
Random weekend thoughts
Okay, Rush Limbaugh--I received an e-mail that mentioned Limbaugh saying nasty things about Colorado, and accidentally deleted the e-mail. I emptied the Trash Can before realizing my mistake. I can find no mention of this anywhere online--if any of my readers knows about this, please e-mail me with a link I can use? Thanks so much!
Now, for Ward Churchill ;) Couldn't let 48 hours pass without posting something about him, now could I? Which raises the question--what on earth will I have to post about when this is all over with? Yikes...
Dan Caplis and Craig Silverman posted a tape on their website, linked on the left sidebar at 630KHOW, of WC teaching a man how to commit a terrorist act. He later, in direct response to Caplis and Silverman, said that--duh--his words were taken out of context. Again, the last defense of the indefensible. This article in the Boulder Daily Camera (you may have to register first, but again, it's free, and takes just a second) details exactly what WC wants us all to believe he actually meant when he said that you should send yourself, in a banker's suit, into Wall Street as the weapon, so that "they don't see you coming."
Basically, he claims this:
The "weapons" I referred to were young people's own consciousness and capacity to transmit it. Along the way, I also pointed out that as relatively privileged Euro-Americans, they were ideally situated to undertake such a project.
So, let me see if I understand this, WC. You meant that their minds and consciousness were the weapons? Following that logic, "a weapon is a terrible thing to waste," right? Did you mean, maybe, some sort of telekinetic activity, then, when you spoke of carrying out an "action?" Because you cannot, without resorting to telekinesis, carry out an "action" with your "consciousness." You specifically told that group of admitted anarchists that they were ideally placed to carry out an action. An "action," which is exactly what you called the terrorist activities on 9-11-01. You said, and I quote, "the action was correct," when speaking about 9-11. You called it an "action," you said that the young anarchist you were addressing was ideal to carry out an "action." So, then, those planes in New York and Washington and Pennsylvania--they were, what, mere thought-waves? Hair-trigger consciousness, perhaps...
Now, for Ward Churchill ;) Couldn't let 48 hours pass without posting something about him, now could I? Which raises the question--what on earth will I have to post about when this is all over with? Yikes...
Dan Caplis and Craig Silverman posted a tape on their website, linked on the left sidebar at 630KHOW, of WC teaching a man how to commit a terrorist act. He later, in direct response to Caplis and Silverman, said that--duh--his words were taken out of context. Again, the last defense of the indefensible. This article in the Boulder Daily Camera (you may have to register first, but again, it's free, and takes just a second) details exactly what WC wants us all to believe he actually meant when he said that you should send yourself, in a banker's suit, into Wall Street as the weapon, so that "they don't see you coming."
Basically, he claims this:
The "weapons" I referred to were young people's own consciousness and capacity to transmit it. Along the way, I also pointed out that as relatively privileged Euro-Americans, they were ideally situated to undertake such a project.
So, let me see if I understand this, WC. You meant that their minds and consciousness were the weapons? Following that logic, "a weapon is a terrible thing to waste," right? Did you mean, maybe, some sort of telekinetic activity, then, when you spoke of carrying out an "action?" Because you cannot, without resorting to telekinesis, carry out an "action" with your "consciousness." You specifically told that group of admitted anarchists that they were ideally placed to carry out an action. An "action," which is exactly what you called the terrorist activities on 9-11-01. You said, and I quote, "the action was correct," when speaking about 9-11. You called it an "action," you said that the young anarchist you were addressing was ideal to carry out an "action." So, then, those planes in New York and Washington and Pennsylvania--they were, what, mere thought-waves? Hair-trigger consciousness, perhaps...
