|
"Quote" #186, January 3:
On December 17th, Nicholas Calio, the liaison to Congress
for the current White House, resigned his post to take "a job
he did not disclose." Credited with "a major role in the
biggest White House legislative victories on Capitol Hill, among them
the resolution authorizing use of force against Iraq, the creation
of the Homeland Security Department, an education bill, and a major
tax cut." Why did he leave? Here's what he said:
"I can't pay my bills. It comes down to the two F's: family
and finances."
The job Mr. Calio left paid him $145,000 per year.
"Quote" #187, January 10:
"Historians and policymakers will no doubt disagree over
what responsibility the United States bears for the violence-producing
conditions in the world. Some say we have no responsibility at all;
others that we brought it on ourselves. Of the two, denial is more
dangerous because it obscures questions of responsibility and reinforces
the popular domestic view that the U.S. is a force only for good
in the world, the defender of liberty and democracy, the best country
on Earth and probably in history. These beliefs are the stuff of
which war fever, not effective policy, is made."
John F. Manley, professor emeritus of political science at
Stanford University, in a commentary headlined "Lesson U.S. Took
From Terrorist Attacks Was the Wrong One," published in the January
6th Star Tribune (Newspaper of the Twin Cities!).
"Quote" #188, January 17:
In recent research on the Bush administration's new foreign propaganda
initiative-the Office of Global Communications-I ran across this very
good question, posed in Cuba's Communist Party weekly Granma Internacional,
of August. 22, 2002. The writer is Roger Ricardo Luis, in a
commentary called "A Pretty Face for the United States:"
"According to its sponsors, the Office of Global Communications
strategic goal will be to mitigate alleged disinformation about
the United States abroad and to put a friendlier face on the Bush
administration's foreign policies. The latter, of course, is a necessity,
as the administration is well aware. But with regard to the spread
of disinformation, how can that be possible, when the United States
generates 70 percent of the world's information and owns a major
portion of the 25 transnational corporations that dominate the international
media?"
"Quote" #189, January 24:
The Star Tribune (Newspaper of the Twin Cities!) reported on the
front page of the Business section of January 24th on a "Big
Gain At UnitedHealth; 17th Straight Quarter With Double-Digit Growth."
UnitedHealth is "the largest U.S. provider of health services"
and their "earnings" (that's Business-speak for "profits")
increased 40 percent in the fourth quarter of 2002, which was "the
12th straight quarter in which the Minnetonka (Minnesota)-based firm
saw profits increase by 30 percent or better." UnitedHealth people
are pretty enthusiastic about all this money, as you might imagine.
But, as the Star Trib reporter noted in the ninth paragraph of the
story:
"{T}he company's profits are rising in part because of
the continuing rise in the cost of health care, so its results are
often viewed with less enthusiasm outside the circle of investors,
employees and stock analysts close to the company."
Meanwhile, state legislators are considering charging poverty-level
Medicaid recipients a prescription drug co-pay as a means of reducing
the state budget deficit.
"Quote" #192, February 14:
From the New York Times ("All The News That's Fit To Print")
of January 24th, in a report with a Paris dateline:
"'Terrorists are a hundred times more likely to obtain
a weapon of mass destruction from Pakistan than from Iraq,' one
senior European official said, not permitting a reporter to identify
even his nationality because tensions with Washington are so high.
'North Korea is far more likely to sell whatever it's got. But can
we say this in public? Not with George Bush.'"
"Quote" #204, May 9:
"The 19th century forerunners of our modern holiday were
called mothers' days, not Mother's Day. The plural is significant:
They celebrated the extension of women's moral concerns beyond the
home... [The holiday] became trivialized and commercialized only
after it became confined to 'special' nuclear family relations.
The people who inspired Mother's Day had quite a different idea
about what made mothers special. They believed that motherhood was
a political force. They wished to celebrate mothers' social roles
as community organizers, honoring women who acted on behalf of the
entire future generation rather than simply putting their own children
first."
This is a composite quotation from two different sources, both written
by teacher, historian, and author Stephanie Coontz. The first
two sentences are from an editorial in the New York Times ("All
The News That's Fit To Print") of May 10, 1992, entitled "Mothers
in Arms." The rest of the quotation comes from Ms. Coontz' wonderful
book of the same year "The Way We Never Were: American Families
& The Nostalgia Trap."
"Quote" #215, July 25:
Here's a quote from a powerful person. Does it illustrate astonishing
ignorance? Or bald-faced lying? You be the judge in the case of Jim
Nussle, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, who was quoted
in the New York Times ("All The News That's Fit To Print")
of July 16th:
"Tax cuts do not cause deficits. When you reduce taxes,
taxes stay in the pocket of people that earn it. We do not have
to borrow money in order to reduce taxes."
"Quote" #217, August 8:
"If given a choice between tax cuts or federal help to
insure the uninsured, 63 percent [of United Statesians] said they
would rather help the uninsured, while 25 percent chose tax cuts,
according to a survey in May by the Roper Center for Public Opinion
Research."
You most likely didn't hear about this poll, since it was only reported
in two newspapers in this country, and both are "regional"
newspapers, not "agenda-setting" ones. The Milwaukee Journal
Sentinel mentioned it in paragraph 35 of a story about the Democratic
presidential candidates on July 27, and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
reprinted that article on August 3.
"Quote" #220, August 29:
This week's "Quote" appeared in the New York Times ("All
The News That's Fit To Print") of August 26, 2003. Joshua
B. Bolten is the White House budget director, and was formerly
"President" Bush's chief domestic policy adviser. He felt
obliged to comment on the contradiction between Mr. Bush's rhetoric
about his "compassion" agenda and the reality of cutting
funds for popular and compassionate federal programs like veterans'
benefits and Head Start.
At one point in the article Mr. Bolten tried to explain why Mr. Bush
was "largely silent" last month when the House of Representatives,
led by fellow Texan Tom DeLay, cut the funding for the national volunteer
program called AmeriCorps, a program that Mr. Bush "forcefully
called for expanding" just last year.
Speaking of the House opposition to the AmeriCorps money, Mr. Bolten
said:
"Even the president is not omnipotent. Would that he were.
He often says that life would be a lot easier if it were a dictatorship."
"Quote" #224, October 3:
Here are a few selected "quotes" from a little-noticed
news item headlined "U.S. Income Gap Widening, Study Says,"
which appeared on page 2 of the Business Section of the New York Times
("All The News That's Fit To Print") of September 25:
"The gap between rich and poor [in the U.S.] more than
doubled from 1979 to 2000, an analysis of government data shows."
"The gulf is such that the richest 1 percent of Americans
in 2000 had more money to spend after taxes than the bottom 40 percent."
"The figures show 2000 as the year of the greatest economic
disparity between rich and poor for any year since 1979, the year
the [federal government] began collecting this data..."
"The...study found that in 2000, the top 1 percent income group
had the largest share of before-tax income for any year since 1929."
"Quote" #228, October 31:
From the Executive Summary of The Social Report 2003: A Different
Look at America:"
"The nation has undergone a long-term decline in social
health since the 1970s; there are severe problems in many states,
and Americans report social and economic difficulties in their daily
lives, with a disproportionate burden falling on minorities, women,
the young, and people with lower incomes and less education. If
these issues are to be addressed, the public must be kept well-informed."
"Quote" #229, November 7:
Two "quotes" this week. They're both from the same article,
but they are each so tremendously revealing, in different ways, that
I have to offer both of them.
They're from the same Advertising column in the New York Times ("All
The News That's Fit To Print") of September 20th, headlined "Highlights
From an Advertising Conference." It seems that the 2003 annual
conference of the Association of National Advertisers has just concluded
and, as usual, when these sorts of people get together they say and
do all sorts of amazing things. The first amazing thing is the outline
that was presented of the initial activities of a fledgling organization
called, for now, the Task Force to Mobilize American Business for
Public Diplomacy. ("Public Diplomacy" is the polite word
for what we used to call "propaganda.") Here are the words
the Times published:
"'It's not about making ads or selling America in the conventional
sense,' one of the executives was quoted as saying, but rather changing
minds 'about a good brand, but a brand losing friends around the
world.'"
For those who aren't accustomed to thinking in this bizarre fashion,
the "brand" to which he refers is the United States of America.
Bonus "Quote" of the Week, from the same article:
"One idea the task force is working on, Mr. Reinhard said
[that's Keith Reinhard, the chairman at advertising giant DDB Worldwide],
is scheduling a day next April for chief executives of leading American
corporations to gather at the New York Stock Exchange, and off site
by satellite and the Internet, to listen to the concerns, complaints,
opinions and outcries of citizens of other countries. The working
title for the event, he added, is 'The Day America Listens.'"
Did you notice the definition assumed here? "America"
= "Chief Executives of Leading American Corporations."
SPECIAL WAR SECTION:
During the course of 2003 Nygaard Notes featured many, many quotations
about the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, as you might imagine. For
this compilation, however, I am featuring only the quotations that I
think can teach us something useful. That means, among other things,
that I did not include any of the words of Donald Rumsfeld, for
example.
(OK, I can't resist. Here are just a couple of his comments, both on
the subject of the wanton killing and looting that ensued in the wake
of the U.S. attack on Iraq. On April 11 he said: "Freedom's untidy.
And free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad
things." On the same subject, here's the Secretary of "Defense"
on June 10, when he characterized the killing and looting as "some
crime and wrongdoing" and added that "this also occurs in
metropolitan areas of America, Europe and Asia as well.")
Other than that brief lapse into official nonsense, I choose to highlight
some of the many illuminating and important things that were said and
that did not make it into the Mainstream Corporate For-Profit Agenda-Setting
Bound Media.
"Quote" #191, February 7:
Here is the longest "Quote" of the Week in the history of
Nygaard Notes. It's long by my standards, but I thought it addressed
a pretty serious misunderstanding on the part of many of my fellow anti-war
citizens, so I'm going with it. The author is Phyllis Bennis,
and the quotation is taken from one of this week's Anti-War Resources
of the Week:
"[T]he U.S. isn't threatening an invasion simply to ensure
its continued access to Iraqi oil. Rather, it is a much broader U.S.
play for control of the oil industry and the ability to set the price
of oil on the world market.
"Iraq's oil reserves are second only to Saudi Arabia's. And
with U.S.- backed Saudi Arabia increasingly unstable, the question
of which oil companies-French, Russian, or American-would control
Iraq's rich but unexplored oil fields once sanctions are lifted has
moved to the top of Washington's agenda. Many in the Bush administration
believe that in the long term, a post-war, U.S.-dependent Iraq would
supplant Saudi control of oil prices and marginalize the influence
of the Saudi-led OPEC oil cartel. Iraq could replace Saudi Arabia,
at least partially, at the center of U.S. oil and military strategy
in the region, and the U.S. would remain able to act as guarantor
of oil for Japan, Germany, and other allies in Europe and around the
world.
"Expanding U.S. power, central to the Bush administration's
war strategy, includes redrawing the political map of the Middle East.
That scenario includes U.S. control of Iraq and the rest of the Gulf
states as well as Jordan and Egypt. Some in the administration want
even more - "regime change" in Syria, Iran, and Palestine,
and Israel as a permanently unchallengeable U.S.-backed regional power.
The ring of U.S. military bases built or expanded recently in Qatar,
Djibouti, Oman and elsewhere as preparation for a U.S. war against
Iraq will advance that goal.
"But the super-hawks of the Bush administration have a broader,
global empire-building plan that goes way beyond the Middle East.
Much of it was envisioned long before September 11 th , but now it
is waged under the flag of the "war against terrorism."
The war in Afghanistan, the creation of a string of U.S. military
bases in the (also oil- and gas-rich) countries of the Caspian region
and south-west Asia, the new strategic doctrine of "pre-emptive"
wars, and the ascension of unilateralism as a principle are all part
of their crusade. Attacking Iraq is only the next step."
"Quote" #193, February 21:
Historian and novelist Tariq Ali was interviewed this week
by a local newspaper. He was asked, "What is the most important
thing you think the American public is missing, what do they most
need to know, with respect to the looming war with Iraq?" Here
is part of his answer:
"When I travel and encounter hatred for the United States,
I try to tell people that America is a contradictory society, and
that there are people who are also pissed off and alienated from
their government. This is important, because without the help and
support of American citizens there is no hope. Without people rejecting
this sort of government and imperialist adventure, we are doomed,
because the U.S. can't be resisted militarily; it has to be resisted
politically. So to create knowledge and resistance, I believe, is
the most important thing."
Tariq Ali has written over a dozen books on world history and politics
and five novels. His most recent book is a collection of essays he
has edited on the Balkan war: "Masters of the Universe? NATO's
Balkan Crusade." Readers in the Twin Cities have the good luck
to be able to hear Mr. Ali speak this Tuesday, February 25th at the
Walker Art Center. The title of his talk is "Tariq Ali on War
and Empire." This free lecture begins at 7 pm. Call 612-375-7622
for information.
"Quote" #197, March 21 (the day after the U.S. began its
attack on Iraq):
Both of this week's "Quotes" are taken from the March 21st
Star Tribune (Newspaper of the Twin Cities!):
"Quote" #1:
"All of us want for Iraq not to have atomic weapons or weapons
of mass destruction. All of us want a world living in peace, but
that does not give the United States the right to decide by itself
what is good and what is bad for the world."
Brazilian President Luiz Ignacio Lula da Silva
"Quote" #2:
"The world could have taken action to solve this problem
by a collective decision, endowing it with greater legitimacy and,
therefore, commanding wider support than is now the case."
U.N Secretary-General Kofi Annan
"Quote" #198, March 28:
Noam Chomsky was asked in an interview a few days before the
U.S. attack on Iraq started (March 9th) "Assuming that war comes,
should the anti-war movement be depressed about its ineffectuality?"
Here's what he said:
"That's like suggesting that abolitionists, or advocates
of rights of working people or women, or others concerned with freedom
and justice, should have been depressed about their inability to attain
their goals, or even make progress towards them, over very long periods.
The right reaction is to intensify the struggle.
"In this case, we should recognize that the anti-war movement
was unprecedented in scale, so that there is a better base for proceeding
further. And that the goals should be far more long-term. A large
part of the opposition to Bush's war is based on recognition that
Iraq is only a special case of the 'imperial ambition' that is widely
condemned and rightly feared; that's the source of a good part of
the unprecedented opposition to Bush's war right at the heart of the
establishment here, and elsewhere as well. Even the mainstream press
now reports the 'urgent and disturbing' messages sent to Washington
from US embassies around the world, warning that 'many people in the
world increasingly think President Bush is a greater threat to world
peace' than Saddam Hussein (Washington Post lead story). That actually
goes back to the Clinton years, but it has become far more significant
today. With good reasons. The threat is real, and the right place
to counter it is here.
"Whatever happens in Iraq, the popular movements here should
be invigorated to confront this far larger and continuing threat,
which is sure to take new forms, and is quite literally raising issues
of the fate of the human species. That aside, the popular movements
should be mobilized to support the best outcomes for the people of
Iraq, and not only there of course. There's plenty of work to do."
"Quote" #199, April 4:
Dr. Hyder Abbas spoke this week to reporters Anton Antonowicz
and Mike Moore of the British newspaper The Daily Mirror. Dr. Abbas
is a surgeon at Babylon General Hospital in Hillah, Iraq, and he was
speaking in the wake of treating some of the estimated 250 injured
survivors of U.S. and/or British attacks in surrounding villages (perhaps
60 or more were killed). "Not one" of the wounded, according
to Antonowicz and Moore, were being treated for bullet wounds. All
"bore the wounds of bomb shrapnel," most likely deadly cluster
bombs. Dr. Abbas asked a few questions of the reporters, and more:
"What kind of war is it that you and America are fighting?
Do you really think that you will be supported by the Iraqi people
if you win? Do you think we will all forget this and say it was
for our own good? This war is building a hatred which will grow
and grow against you. I have no anger for the British people. But
one day, I fear they will suffer for this just as we do now."
"Quote" #200, April 11:
From the lead editorial in the Star Tribune (Newspaper of the Twin
Cities!) of April 2 (Headline: "Winning in Iraq. It's Not an
Option; It's a Must"):
"If the perception of America as a muscle-bound, ineffectual
warrior is allowed to grow, the United States will find its ability
to influence events around the world compromised..."
(They were saying that such compromise would be a bad thing, by the
way.) This is the newspaper that is considered so liberal that many
people in Minnesota refer to it as the "Red Star." Seriously.
"Quote" #208, June 6:
"Quote" #1:
Here is Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center
for the People and the Press, commenting on an international survey
of tens of thousands of people in 20 countries around the world in
the weeks since the official "end" of the Anglo-American
invasion of Iraq, which he calls a "war." His remarks were
reported in the June 4th New York Times ("All The News That's
Fit To Print"):
"The war has widened the rift between Americans and Western
Europeans, further inflamed the Muslim world, softened support for
the war on terrorism, and significantly weakened global public support
for the pillars of the post-World War II era-the U.N. and the North
Atlantic alliance."
This is only a partial list of arguments that could be made as to
why the invasion was a mistake and/or a crime; the survey did not
touch on (arguably more important) issues of the legality or morality
of the U.S. campaign.
"Quote" #2:
Now, here is Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman, in a May 30th
prepared statement announcing his request to the St. Paul city attorney
that charges be dropped against 28 war protesters (some of whom are
good friends of mine) who were arrested on charges of trespassing
while protesting at his St. Paul office on March 24:
"The protesters were simply wrong. With the discovery of
mass graves, the welcoming of American forces when Baghdad was liberated
and the fact that thousands of American soldiers were not killed
. . . it's clear that those who protested America's position on
this matter were wrong."
See "quote" #1.
|
