I think most of the "movement" press is so bad that it's almost beyond depressing. But that's for a later entry with lots of documentary evidence.
The appeal of the AVA to me is that it's a left paper that isn't read by just the left. It's well-written, reprints timely articles from elsewhere, and covers its local area with a political slant in a way that no other paper I've seen does. Partly it's just that I like talented journalism and good rants and the AVA gives me that. It certainly isn't the only left publication I read, and it definitely has its blindspots.
His obsession with the case has to do with the fact he knew her, it is a local (Mendocino County) issue in many ways, and, to him, illuminates much of the hypocrisy of the Left. This case is a multi-million dollar lawsuit about assasination and coverup done in the name of the "movement". I'd say he also believes, and this is probably "the point", that an honest and credible left is has to oppose "frauds" done in the name of political action if it's ever going to be taken seriously.
You'll notice that paragraph is full of a lot of "He" and "him". Personally, I don't think that any of it, FBI on the scene or not, will ever really be revealed until the person who planted the bomb is discovered. Has the RSJP done anything to that end? Why can't Hubby have been working for the FBI? If it was big timber, or a deranged or methed-up logger is there really no evidence? What was the extent of surveilence and undercover operations in the forrests during that year?
I have a lot of questions that don't preclude the RSJP's thesis. But I can't really buy their theory completely yet. I personally find it troubling when things go into left culture that are mostly taken on faith. The FBI bombed Bari or Bush planned 911. Maybe. but I really need harder evidence before I take it on as fact. And I resent the feeling I get sometimes (not from you!) that if I don't believe the most cynical theories, that somehow I'm not political enough.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-01-25 10:28 pm (UTC)The appeal of the AVA to me is that it's a left paper that isn't read by just the left. It's well-written, reprints timely articles from elsewhere, and covers its local area with a political slant in a way that no other paper I've seen does. Partly it's just that I like talented journalism and good rants and the AVA gives me that. It certainly isn't the only left publication I read, and it definitely has its blindspots.
His obsession with the case has to do with the fact he knew her, it is a local (Mendocino County) issue in many ways, and, to him, illuminates much of the hypocrisy of the Left. This case is a multi-million dollar lawsuit about assasination and coverup done in the name of the "movement". I'd say he also believes, and this is probably "the point", that an honest and credible left is has to oppose "frauds" done in the name of political action if it's ever going to be taken seriously.
You'll notice that paragraph is full of a lot of "He" and "him". Personally, I don't think that any of it, FBI on the scene or not, will ever really be revealed until the person who planted the bomb is discovered. Has the RSJP done anything to that end? Why can't Hubby have been working for the FBI? If it was big timber, or a deranged or methed-up logger is there really no evidence? What was the extent of surveilence and undercover operations in the forrests during that year?
I have a lot of questions that don't preclude the RSJP's thesis. But I can't really buy their theory completely yet. I personally find it troubling when things go into left culture that are mostly taken on faith. The FBI bombed Bari or Bush planned 911. Maybe. but I really need harder evidence before I take it on as fact. And I resent the feeling I get sometimes (not from you!) that if I don't believe the most cynical theories, that somehow I'm not political enough.