Angry White Kid

Support community radio and authentic journalism

Mid-afternoon on May 1, Labor Day, students took over the radio station at the Autonomous University Benito Juarez of Oaxaca, in Oaxaca, Mexico. They explained that they intended to cover two days' events which included a march by the Popular Assembly and Teacher movement.

By seven o'clock that night, the government supporters were already hard at work jamming the university signal. By 10:00 the students were no longer audible.

The government fears that the public might hear honest news, news of real events that affect their lives.

The only available remedy is community radio. Right now, young Oaxaquenos are working to put on the air as many community radio facilities as the communities can afford. The technical support project for them is completely Oaxaqueno in staff and muscle. It's controlled and managed at the base, in a system of democratic participation. But the funding comes in part from people like you.

This is the moment to show Oaxaca communities that they are not alone in wanting the truth as it relates to them, in their towns and villages.

Your donation, of any amount, will help to maintain the vital training and technical support provided by SeComo (SERVICIOS DE COMUNICACION DE OAXACA).

The best way to send money from the USA is to mail a check made out to Jean Rodriguez,  "for the community radio project in Oaxaca". Send it to:

Jean Rodriguez
917 N. Van Ness
Fresno, CA 93728 
Her telephone number is 559.445.0425
Her email address is wabob@earthlink.net

From within the European orbit, money can be wired to:
Frankfurter Volksbank
BLZ: 501 900 00
Kontonummer:  6001801196         (Account number) 
Kontoinhaber:  Kurt Herrmann        (Beneficiary)
BIC (Swift code):  FFVBDEFF               
IBAN:  DE55 5019 0000 6001 8011 96

Notify davies_me@yahoo.com and you will receive confirmation that your donation was received.

Social revolution is not tax deductible.

Thank you from Oaxaca,

Nancy Davies, for authentic journalism

Josh Wolf is free!

Yea Josh!  Glad that you're out.  From the SF Chronicle:

Josh Wolf, the blogger whose record 7 1/2 months in federal prison stirred debate about who qualifies as a journalist and what legal protections they should receive, was freed today after releasing video footage sought by prosecutors about an anarchist protest.

Wolf, 24, held in contempt by a federal judge last August for defying a grand jury subpoena, walked out of the Federal Correctional Institution in Dublin at mid-afternoon after his lawyers and federal prosecutors reached a compromise, with the help of a federal magistrate.

Wolf posted the uncut video on his Web site, gave prosecutors a copy and denied under oath that he knew anything about violent incidents at the July 2005 protest. In return, his lawyers said, prosecutors agreed not to summon him before the grand jury or ask him to identify any of the protesters shown on his video.

I really respect and applaud Josh's steadfastness in standing up for the rights of journalists and not cooperating with the Grand Jury.  Those must have been a long seven and a half months.  There should be a Josh and Gabe freedom party.

The Blue Nightmare

Check out this new 19 minute video from Mal de Ojo TV, "The Blue Nightmare."

After police repression against the people of Oaxaca and APPO (People’ s Popular Assembly of Oaxaca) on November 25, more than 200 people were unjustly and illegally taken to various jails, suffering beatings and rape.

"The Blue Nightmare" contains testimony of some of the people that were detained.

These horrifying testimonies and the multitude of other examples of brutality by the local, state and federal forces in attempting (but still failing) to crush the popular movement in Oaxaca, truly help paint of portrait of what colleague George Salzman has appropriately labeled "the face of  Mexican fascism."

Support political prisoners, old and new

Check out this new short video on two longtime Puerto Rican political prisoners - Oscar Lopez Rivera and Carlos Alberto Torres. Visit the ProLibertad Freedom Campaign and National Boricua Human Rights Network for more info.

And check out these excerpts (in two parts) of a talk by Harold Taylor, one of the former Black Panthers arrested last week, given four days before he was arrested.  The video screening on Sunday in San Francisco went very well - so many people showed they had to screen the film twice.  Help support these political prisoners. Check out the Committee for the Defense of Human Rights and the Freedom Archives for more.

Part one:

Part two:

In other government repression news: Help defend journalist Sarah Olson (UPDATE 1: The army dropped the two charges against Lt. Watada that involved Sarah Olson, and therefore dropped the subpoena!). Activist Nadia Winstead beats a Grand Jury contempt rap.  And former professor Sami Al-Arian continues to be subject to abuse and harassment from this vindictive government and its Grand Juries.

Finally, this Friday, Feb. 2nd, at 6pm, there will be an event in solidarity with the political prisoners in Atenco and Oaxaca at Station 40.  Music, food, and talks on Atenco, Oaxaca, and the encuentro in Chiapas.  $5 - no one turned away - 3030B 16th St., near 16th/Mission BART in San Francisco.

UPDATE 2: In other great news, an immigration court ended the case of the LA 8 - two (not 8 anymore) Palestinians the government has been trying to deport for the past 20 years for distributing literature.

UPDATE 3: Three detainees being held indefinitely at "Guantanamo North" in Canada are facing serious health crises after being on hunger strike for two months due to a lack of medical supervision and the government's refusal to consider their just and reasonable demands. They are calling for support.

Lazy reporting by Matthew Kalman

Matthew Kalman is the San Francisco Chronicle's reporter in Israel.  For me, reading his work, it is not unusual to get the feeling that one is reading an Israeli government press release instead of a newspaper article.  And I'm not the only one.  The pro-Israel media harassment organization CAMERA likes him.  And I was at a Chronicle "community meeting" a couple years ago where the director of Israel programming for the Jewish Community Relations Council stated how pleased they were with Kalman's reporting.

The first paragraph of the article up for discussion displays well Kalman's point of view.

Standing by the grave of Israel's famously pragmatic founding prime minister, Israeli leader Ehud Olmert set out a new vision of Israeli policy, abandoning ideology in favor of an attempt at peacemaking that David Ben-Gurion himself might have drafted  --  peace, statehood and prosperity for the Palestinians in return for an end to violence.

Of course, many us view Ben-Gurion and Olmert  in a harsher light, not as "peacemakers" but as ethnic cleansers, bent on maintaining, through horrific violence, an apartheid colonial-settler state on land emptied of its indigenous inhabitants.  But that perspective doesn't make it in the paper.

Not only does Kalman's pro-Israel slant pose a problem, but so does what appears to be his laziness.  As with any news article, the one linked to above contains several quotes.  But the problem with Kalman's article is that he does not identify the original sources of the quotes and through this omission, presents it as if he had tracked down the quoted sources himself.

For example, in the article, Kalman quotes Rami Khouri, Emad Gad, Gershon Baskin and Saeb Erekat.  All of these quotes are presented as if that person had told Kalman their words.  But in fact, all of these quotes come from previously published sources, sources which are not identified by Kalman.

Here's the evidence: Rami Khouri's quotes come from this syndicated column.  Emad Gad's quotes come from this Reuters article.  Gershon Baskin's quotes from his column in the Jerusalem Times.  And Saeb Erekat's quotes come from this Associated Press article. For Khouri and Baskin, Kalman even uses the verb "said", though they only "wrote" the words in question.  The only original quote in the entire article comes from Avi Bachrach, whose basis for being quoted is that  his "son Ohad was killed by Palestinian militants near Jericho 11 years ago."  A seemingly arbitrary inclusion when compared to the background of the others quoted.

Though this is not an earth-shattering discovery, it raises concerns and further calls into question Kalman's commitment to accuracy and disclosure.  Why would he lift quotes from other sources and then implicitly portray them as his own?  Also, if all he is doing is stealing quotes from other publications, why does he need to be in Jerusalem to do that? 

I inquired with a journalist friend of mine and he said that reporters get fired for lifting quotes from another publication without citation.  What will be the Chronicle's response to Kalman doing just that?  I emailed their Reader's Representative and have so far received no response.  Will the Chronicle accept such behavior?  How committed is the Chronicle to accuracy and disclosure?

Those are sadly largely rhetorical questions.

Democracy and Deconstruction in Contemporary Media: An Ode to Bill Hicks

Two weeks of silence and now a random posting.  Obviously, this blog has been on an unannounced leave of absence and will likely remain that way for the time being.  But on to the post.  Last Sunday, my friend Jamie came over and we threw on some Bill Hicks.  Jamie hadn't seen/heard Bill before, was clearly inspired, and sent me this the next day.  I don't necessarily subscribe to a bulk of his argument, but I still think it's interesting stuff.  Onward...

------------------------

I believe one of the greatest problems in our media landscape today is the curious coming together of democracy and deconstruction.  While media used to follow a more metaphysical program of cramming the absolute beliefs of the rich and powerful down our collective throat, this heavy handed treatment of the populous inevitably lost favor.  The traditional power structures of the “old world” were the industrialists, politicians and religious groups that held a symbolic importance so great they presented themselves as earth-bound elements of God’s eternal plan.  These institutions, however, could not easily maintain their grip on power in a democratic country while maintaining that power through such obvious disregard for democracy’s underlying principles of equality and participation.  So in time the media outlets knew their style would have to change, to become more egalitarian, or they would become increasingly perceived as out of touch with their own target audiences.  Luckily for them, this change was to come about with the proliferation of alternative media outlets.  The number of alternative sources of information grew as the means to disseminate information became less expensive and more easy to obtain.  While the evolving technology of television, computers, printers and copy machines moved this process along, the most fundamental shift certainly came with the birth of the internet and the mouthpiece it provided to anyone with access to the world wide web.  Now the mainstream media no longer had a monopoly on the outlet for mass-produced information, and to a more optimistic mind that may have seemed like a good thing (I for one thought it was great at first).  Here we have the dramatic upheaval of the traditional seats of power who could no longer present their points of view as fact.  This is postmodern philosophy at it’s best: applying an adolescent energy of rebellion and deep socratic questioning to the traditional sources of power, so comfortable in their untouched ivory towers and secure corporate boardrooms that they no longer know how to properly defend their own lies.  Due to the greater dissemination of information and the greater willingness to ask questions that this carries with it, the symbols of the elite’s power could no longer be passed off as signposts of truth, and their claim to be one with the absolute was deconstructed (and Derrida did a jig on Kant’s grave...or something).

Al Jazeera in English: Might as well watch CNN?

Like many others, I was initially excited about the news of an Al Jazeera TV channel in English.  Though under no illusions that it was going to be something other than a massive corporate news entity, it at least held the promise of offering Western viewers a counterpoint to the dominant, uncritical, jingoistic rhetoric that passes for news on Western outlets. 

Yet as time has passed, information has come out that Al Jazeera International, as the English station is to be called, is shaping up to be nothing more than another standard fare Western news channel.    Khalid Amayreh's article below is the most recent and in-depth indication of Al Jazeera International's trajectory.

Not only does he speak about the TV station, but the English website - which as of now is the only indicator the public has as to the course of the English station's coverage.  And it's not good, especially in regards to Palestine/Israel.  As a long time reader of the English website, I can attest to the marked decline in the quality of coverage of the conflict.  Whereas they used to run original articles, virtually all the news on the conflict now is straight off the Reuters wire - or else a compilation of the AP, AFP and Reuters wires.  By its near-universal use of European and U.S. wire services, when it comes to Palestine/Israel, Al Jazeera's English website is already a typical Western news outlet.

For those concerned like I am about the troubling direction of Al Jazeera International, I urge you to write to AJI's managers: nigel.parsons@aljazeera.net and manager@aljazeera.net and let them know what you're looking for in a news source.  The world - especially now - doesn't need another CNN or BBC.

Amayreh, a reporter for Al Jazeera and Al-Ahram Weekly, writes,

[I]t seems that disappointment may be awaiting many of those who expect to see a world TV channel that is fair and objective and especially free from the usual Anglo-American (and Israeli) worldview.

In fact, there are already ominous signs showing that pro-Israeli sympathizers, some of them with a background in the BBC, are already trying to control the editorial policies of the new channel, all under the rubric of professionalism and journalistic standards.

This writer, who has been working for Aljazeera.net/English (which has now been incorporated into AJI) has discovered by chance efforts by some senior western editors at AJI to minimize and avoid as much as possible the publication of articles, especially news and feature stories, portraying Israel in bad light and exposing Israeli occupation practices against the Palestinian people.

The aloneness

A Lebanese baby killed by Israel when it bombed a civilian convoy fleeing the violence. From the Angry Arab.

The baffling failure of humanity over the past few weeks is incredible.  Traveling and overwhelmed by events, I have little in the way of words.  Luckily, there are many (though never enough) doing all they can to dent the empire of killers and warmongers, led by Bush and Olmert, and cheered by the U.S. media. 

One of those is my dear friend Nora Barrows-Friedman, a producer for Flashpoints on KPFA radio, who writes from Dheisheh refugee camp in Bethlehem.  An earlier report can be read here.

------------

There will be no statistics in this journal entry. Because what difference does 10 shredded children in Gaza, or 15 sliced children in Lebanon, or 40 smashed children in Iraq make to the international community anyway? What difference does it make when the twisted and sick US corporate media doesn't even mention their names, or their ages, or their favorite color, something to put a human face on the mangled mess that the latest US-made Israeli-fired missile replaced as a nose, a mouth, two eyes, freckles, cheek, forehead?

Yes, there were "escalations" today in Gaza and Lebanon. There were "military strikes" and "retaliatory attacks" and "intensifications" and "deaths." There were "officials" and "spokespeople" and "leaders" joining in the finger-pointing and the name-calling. Meanwhile, Arab people are burning. Numbers and statistics become, therefore, irrelevant. Language loses its meaning on the tongue, becomes sludge and dribbles down one's chin. My dear friend Siham said today, "What does the term 'civilized society' mean when they are killing people like this?"

What becomes of a language that has lost its original meaning? Does it shrivel up and slink into an abyss to mingle with the ghosts of these headless, armless, forgotten brown-skinned kids? And as we watch the footage, as we hear on the phone from friends witnessing in their backyards, as we read the articles, how many times can we use the words "unbelievable," "disgusting," "horrific?" They have lost all meaning as well.

We need a new language to describe these nightmares. We need a new vehicle to convey the disbelief and the disgust and the horror as Gaza burns, as Lebanon smolders, as Iraq collapses.

As we rub our eyes tonight, bleary from thick cigarette smoke and too many hours of being glued to the television, my friend Mustafa says, "No one notices, no one cares. We are alone in this world." This is the aloneness. The isolation. Gazan and Lebanese and Iraqi children are huddled in their beds tonight, screaming out to the wall of silence in a sore-throated language, isolated in their terror.

Marcos on Televisa

Tuesday morning Marcos sat down in Televisa's studio and did a one hour interview on Mexico's most popular morning show.

Last week, Marcos challenged Mexico's corporate media, in particular Televisa and TV Azteca, to "tell the truth" about the situation in San Salvador Atenco and the Other Campaign.  He also said he would only agree to be interviewed if it was unedited and uninterrupted.  Perhaps this was Televisa's response to those challenges?

So far, I've only been able to find a 90-second clip of the interview on YouTube.  Hopefully more of it will be up later.  In the clip Marcos discusses the Zapatistas' opposition to the presidential candidacy of the "leftist" Lopez Obrador and the composition and functioning of the political class.

Corporate Media, Reformists Try to Squash May Day

In the face of a surging movement for immigrants' rights, the corporate media and timid reformist organizations are doing their best to make sure the May 1 strike and boycott fails. 

Until recently, organizing and outreach for the strike had been going very well.  But in the past three days there have been several major news stories about "splits" in the movement regarding May Day or about prominent groups and individuals urging their constituency to not strike.

According to a local station, in Arizona,

Rights advocates have scrapped plans to back a May 1 nationwide worker boycott designed to call attention to the economic importance of illegal immigrants.

Who the "rights advocates" are is not mentioned, only one organization, Somos America, is quoted.  While in L.A., the Catholic Church is trying to keep people off the streets (big surprise).

Los Angeles Cardinal Roger M. Mahony, a leading voice for immigration reform, is urging immigrants and their supporters not to participate in a boycott of jobs, schools and consumer activity that some activists are organizing for May 1.

Today, the Washington Post and AP both published stories about rifts and splits, though mentioned only a few groups opposed to the strike.

The owners of Spanish-language radio stations, which played a huge role in bringing people out for earlier protests, have passed down orders that no one is to promote the strike.  Today, el Cucuy, a very prominent radio host, urged everyone to go to work May first.

Clearly the government, big business, and their lackeys hoping for some crumbs are frightened of the spontaneous nature of this movement and how quickly it's spread.  The arguments against the strike are frivolous.  They say it will create a backlash from "Americans" and will costs thousands of people their jobs. 

There already is a massive anti-immigrant backlash in this country, how May 1 will exacerbate it, I don't know.  We already have vigilantes at the border and horrid legislation passing in Congress.  Almost 1,200 immigrants were arrested yesterday in the largest raid in history.  Racist attacks like the burning of a Mexican restaurant in San Diego, the burning of a pro-immigrant bus company's buses near Atlanta, and the urging by neo-Nazis to kill immigrants are already occurring.  By not going out on May 1, what does that say to these people?  "OK, your thuggish tactics win?"

Unfortunately, I don't believe there's anything immigrants can do to make "Americans" - and we all know that's code for white U.S. citizens - to fully respect them or treat them with the dignity they deserve.  People don't automatically start to like others because they're not protesting.  Not protesting won't make the Minutemen or their allies in government or the Border Patrol or ICE go away or be any nicer.  Only when power is asserted and demands are leveled, as immigrants and their supporters have been doing recently, does progress get made. 

Trying to keep people in check only serves those who care more about their careers than about their people.  On some email lists I am on they have been labeled "traitors"  by some.

As for not striking because people can get fired, this is where a little independent thinking comes in - something these groups aren't interested in promoting.  Obviously, if someone will get fired for striking and by no means can afford to lose their job, then they shouldn't strike.  There are many other ways to support this effort.  No one is forcing anyone to do anything beyond what they are capable of.  As well, nationally and locally groups are organizing legal support teams to help anyone who may face repercussions because of their activities on May 1st. 

Despite the fact that toe-the-line groups and the mass media don't want the strike to happen, it will, and it will be a success.  We already know places like the Port of LA will be completely shut down.  This is just one event in a much bigger struggle.  Vamos adelante y nos vemos en las calles!