|
|
|
March 18, 2004
Free speech for me but not for thee?
More CRUSHING OF DISSENT at another American university! And who's accused of being behind it? Is it Bush? Is it Ashcroft? No, I am sorry to say that it's the ACLU -- in the form of its National Field Coordinator, Matt Bowles. The guy has written for a pro-terrorist Egyptian journal, the Al-Ahram Weekly, and here's a sample (in which he attacks not not terrorism, but the word "terrorist"): The politically vacuous "terrorist" label is a prominent fragment of highly racialised hate rhetoric used to demonise Third World people of colour in general and Arab and Muslim people in particular. Ironically, since "terrorism" is the central discourse currently justifying the US conquest of the Middle East, Arab- American "leaders" who wish to build ties to the White House do so at the expense of confronting such labels or developing a politically useful critique of US imperialism.Do I really need to fisk that? He has also written for the ferociously anti-Israel Palestine Monitor -- and is featured in this leftist conspiracy site which claims Bush is behind 9-11. Mr. Bowles is the National Field Organizer for the ACLU, and that's an organization of which I have been proud to be a card-carrying member. In a fit of idealistically driven frenzy a couple of years ago, I had the naive idea that somehow those who belonged to both the ACLU and the NRA could join together. Very foolish of me -- especially now that I see the types of people who appear to be in charge of the former. (Everyone makes mistakes, I guess.)
posted by Eric on 03.18.04 at 01:36 PM
Comments
Sure he has every right to support terrorism, and even to be a Nazi. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. That does not make me comfortable in supporting his leadership role in an organization to which I belong. Eric Scheie · March 19, 2004 03:10 PM I guess that's your right. You don't have to support him, personally, but I would figure that you do still support the goals of the ACLU. I guess that as long as he keeps his personal life separate from his public life, he's fine. As long as he works for the goals of the ACLU, he's doing good work in that capacity. Now if the ACLU were to start supporting terrorist groups, that would be something different. However, sticking up for the rights of Americans (Arab or otherwise) doesn't strike me as terrorist-supportive. He does have a bit of a point about the word "terrorist" being applied strictly to Middle Eastern folks in common discourse. Perhaps it's just a current phase, as most of our terrorists right now do happen to be of Middle Eastern Stock. If the Irish start bombing and killing again, do you think they'll get the "terrorist" label? I guess it's kind of academic for me, being non-middle-eastern, not an ACLU member, and not living in the areas in question or even attending the lecture that caused all this in the first place. Scott rassbach · March 19, 2004 03:36 PM In my opinion, the ACLU was much better off in the 1950's, when they explicitly excluded Communists and other totalitarians from their Board of Directors. They removed that bar in the late 1960's in the name of anti-"McCarthyism". Now, they have a flood of Communists and other Leftists who are more interested in equality than in freedom. They still have a good number of old-fashioned liberals, though, they still do defend free speech, the right to privacy, and other parts of the Bill of Rights, even if not the Second Amendment. I love the combination of ACLU and NRA. I used to describe myself as "a Birchite Wobbly". ("Wobbly", old name for I.W.W., Industrial Workers of the World). I still love that Confederate Rainbow flag you showed us. Syeven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-eating pho-loving aesthete-worshipping gun · March 20, 2004 11:10 AM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• War For Profit
• How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide • I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight • Wind Boom • Isaiah Washington, victim • Hippie Shirts • A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? • Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists • PETA agrees -- with me! • The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
In reading Mr. Pipe's article, the ACLU proper did not organize the event at the speech. Mr. Bowles was acting as a private citizen, which is certainly within his right.
Are we going to say that the people who help to secure our liberties are not allowed to exercise them?
He may be wrong headed, but he does have that right, and he's definitely shouldering the responsibilities along with his right. Many people are of the opinion that US involvement in Israel/Palestine/The middle east is simply a Bad Idea.