He's a Congenital Cheap Pig, But He's Our Congenital Cheap Pig

I have a lot of things I want to write about here, but I've been busy reading, which eats up so much time.

I'm about two-thirds of the way through James J. Lorence's The Suppression of The Salt of the Earth: How Hollywood, Big Labor, and Politicians Blacklisted a Movie in Cold War America (New Mexico, 1999). Let's see, I did a post about that movie just over two years ago. Lorence's book gives a brief account of the production of the The Salt of the Earth, giving me a greater appreciation for the way it involved local, Mexican-American miners and their families in the development of the script and in the filming. Most of the cast were nonprofessionals, and did surprisingly well.

The book goes on to tell of the organized program to block the film's production and distribution. It's chilling, and it reminded me of this post I did at the end of last year, on the misinformation of the American public. Criticizing a blogger who lamented the rise of the Internet and people's reliance on less "objective" outlets than the standard corporate media, I pointed out that Americans have always gone to alternatives:

I'm not sure where my peers and their parents went for their misinformation in the 60s, but there was the Reader's Digest, a reliable fount of right-wing propaganda with an enormous circulation, and there were plenty of right-wing radio commentators even before the Fairness Doctrine was abolished. It was as if there was a sewer in which their blatantly racist, hysterically anti-communist material marinated until it was ready to dump into receptive ears.

As I read The Suppression of The Salt of the Earth I realized that I'd completely forgotten the American Legion and the Roman Catholic Church, two nationwide anti-Communist groups with their own, probably interlocking, propaganda networks. Those networks are the ancestors of the right-wing propaganda we see today -- often directly, since today's propaganda mills often recycle Oldies but Goodies from the Fifties. And I've been ruminating again on accusations I've seen about the supposed McCarthyism of the "left" by right-wing writers, often the very same people who are trying to rehabilitate Joe McCarthy as a martyr of the anti-Red struggle. Coming from them, shouldn't "McCarthyism" be a compliment? (When I asked RWA1, who'd been calling for an end to the use of "Nazi" and "fascist" in political discourse, if he also favored retiring "Red," "pinko," and "socialist," he mused that he didn't know, he had a weakness for those terms. Of course.)

I've also started rereading Mary Lasswell's series of novels that began with Suds in Your Eye (Houghton Mifflin, 1942). They're a guilty pleasure of mine, and it's my third turn through the books. They're about three elderly ladies in San Diego who become fast friends, bonding over beer, good cooking, and war fever, though the series continued after World War II was over. Except for predictable hostility to "Japs" in the wartime books, the books are less racist than most popular fiction of their period, though a couple of gay male interior decorators are the villains of the last book, Let's Go for Broke (1962), which is an annoyance but not enough to turn me off to Lasswell's writing -- as I said, she's a guilty pleasure, and her stories and characters charm me despite that final lapse.

I made a dash through Stephanie Budin's The Myth of Sacred Prostitution in Antiquity (Cambridge, 2008), about a theme that has fascinated Bible scholars and historians of antiquity for centuries now. She's not the first to deny the historical validity of claims about priestesses of Ishtar peddling sex on behalf of the Goddess, which have often been used as distractions in the debates over homosexuality and the Bible, but she brought me up to date on the matter. More on this later, maybe.

Last week I finally read Scott G. Brown's Mark's Other Gospel: Rethinking Morton Smith's Controversial Discovery (Wilfrid Laurer UP, 2005), and so I've been looking online for more reactions to it and to Smith, whom I've written about before. I hope to write about it at more length soon; for the moment I want to mention again how startling it is to find really overwrought homophobia among supposedly "objective" scholars, which seems to fuel their willingness to pass along utter falsehoods (such as the claim that no one but Smith ever saw the manuscript of the "Secret Gospel of Mark"). But as I say, later.

Today it was reported that Private Bradley Manning, who's been subjected to forced nudity in his cell on top of months of solitary confinement, has been allowed to cover himself (via). President Obama, you'll recall, told the press last week that the military had assured him that everything was copacetic, but there has been increasing criticism in the media. If I were given dictatorial powers, I would condemn Obama (and Dana Milbank) to wear this outfit at all official functions for the duration of his term -- no, not really, because if I had dictatorial powers Obama would be turned over to the International Criminal Court, along with George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and the rest of the torture gangsters, with no American exemptions allowed. More realistically but only slightly, if I had any Photoshop skills I'd merge images of Barry and Michelle into this photo.

He's a Congenital Cheap Pig, But He's Our Congenital Cheap Pig

I have a lot of things I want to write about here, but I've been busy reading, which eats up so much time.

I'm about two-thirds of the way through James J. Lorence's The Suppression of The Salt of the Earth: How Hollywood, Big Labor, and Politicians Blacklisted a Movie in Cold War America (New Mexico, 1999). Let's see, I did a post about that movie just over two years ago. Lorence's book gives a brief account of the production of the The Salt of the Earth, giving me a greater appreciation for the way it involved local, Mexican-American miners and their families in the development of the script and in the filming. Most of the cast were nonprofessionals, and did surprisingly well.

The book goes on to tell of the organized program to block the film's production and distribution. It's chilling, and it reminded me of this post I did at the end of last year, on the misinformation of the American public. Criticizing a blogger who lamented the rise of the Internet and people's reliance on less "objective" outlets than the standard corporate media, I pointed out that Americans have always gone to alternatives:

I'm not sure where my peers and their parents went for their misinformation in the 60s, but there was the Reader's Digest, a reliable fount of right-wing propaganda with an enormous circulation, and there were plenty of right-wing radio commentators even before the Fairness Doctrine was abolished. It was as if there was a sewer in which their blatantly racist, hysterically anti-communist material marinated until it was ready to dump into receptive ears.

As I read The Suppression of The Salt of the Earth I realized that I'd completely forgotten the American Legion and the Roman Catholic Church, two nationwide anti-Communist groups with their own, probably interlocking, propaganda networks. Those networks are the ancestors of the right-wing propaganda we see today -- often directly, since today's propaganda mills often recycle Oldies but Goodies from the Fifties. And I've been ruminating again on accusations I've seen about the supposed McCarthyism of the "left" by right-wing writers, often the very same people who are trying to rehabilitate Joe McCarthy as a martyr of the anti-Red struggle. Coming from them, shouldn't "McCarthyism" be a compliment? (When I asked RWA1, who'd been calling for an end to the use of "Nazi" and "fascist" in political discourse, if he also favored retiring "Red," "pinko," and "socialist," he mused that he didn't know, he had a weakness for those terms. Of course.)

I've also started rereading Mary Lasswell's series of novels that began with Suds in Your Eye (Houghton Mifflin, 1942). They're a guilty pleasure of mine, and it's my third turn through the books. They're about three elderly ladies in San Diego who become fast friends, bonding over beer, good cooking, and war fever, though the series continued after World War II was over. Except for predictable hostility to "Japs" in the wartime books, the books are less racist than most popular fiction of their period, though a couple of gay male interior decorators are the villains of the last book, Let's Go for Broke (1962), which is an annoyance but not enough to turn me off to Lasswell's writing -- as I said, she's a guilty pleasure, and her stories and characters charm me despite that final lapse.

I made a dash through Stephanie Budin's The Myth of Sacred Prostitution in Antiquity (Cambridge, 2008), about a theme that has fascinated Bible scholars and historians of antiquity for centuries now. She's not the first to deny the historical validity of claims about priestesses of Ishtar peddling sex on behalf of the Goddess, which have often been used as distractions in the debates over homosexuality and the Bible, but she brought me up to date on the matter. More on this later, maybe.

Last week I finally read Scott G. Brown's Mark's Other Gospel: Rethinking Morton Smith's Controversial Discovery (Wilfrid Laurer UP, 2005), and so I've been looking online for more reactions to it and to Smith, whom I've written about before. I hope to write about it at more length soon; for the moment I want to mention again how startling it is to find really overwrought homophobia among supposedly "objective" scholars, which seems to fuel their willingness to pass along utter falsehoods (such as the claim that no one but Smith ever saw the manuscript of the "Secret Gospel of Mark"). But as I say, later.

Today it was reported that Private Bradley Manning, who's been subjected to forced nudity in his cell on top of months of solitary confinement, has been allowed to cover himself (via). President Obama, you'll recall, told the press last week that the military had assured him that everything was copacetic, but there has been increasing criticism in the media. If I were given dictatorial powers, I would condemn Obama (and Dana Milbank) to wear this outfit at all official functions for the duration of his term -- no, not really, because if I had dictatorial powers Obama would be turned over to the International Criminal Court, along with George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and the rest of the torture gangsters, with no American exemptions allowed. More realistically but only slightly, if I had any Photoshop skills I'd merge images of Barry and Michelle into this photo.

Because You Are Lukewarm, I Will Spew You Out of My Mouth

Oh, dear, where does the time go? While I'm struggling to get my act together, here are a couple of things that I hope will be useful and informative.

The Daily Beast has an article on Pfc. Bradley Manning, accused of leaking classified material to Wikileaks, which supplements Glenn Greenwald's article of a couple of days ago.

What is clear today is that he’s being held in extraordinarily harsh conditions—notably harsher than Bryan Minkyu Martin, the naval intelligence specialist who allegedly tried to sell military secrets to an undercover FBI agent, and is currently being held awaiting trial, though not in solitary confinement. Manning, who has been convicted of nothing, has spent the better part of a year incommunicado, living the life of a man convicted of sa heinous crime.

Free added bonus: more deranged comments, dripping with bloodlust, endorsing any and all punishment of a man who has not yet been convicted of anything.

Extra added bonus, also at Daily Beast: John Avlon, founder of dead-armadillo group No Labels, reports on his "war with Rush Limbaugh," with whom he's evidently on a first-name basis. The article itself is predictable middle-of-the-road mush.

Back to serious matters. I'd been hearing for some time about the planned civil disobedience demo against Obama's wars, planned for Thursday at the White House. There doesn't seem to have been much, if any, corporate media coverage, despite the participation of some fairly high-profile figures. A search of CNN.com brings up nothing, though there are plenty of eulogies for the late war criminal Richard Holbrooke. The New York Times links to Democratic Underground in lieu of any coverage of its own. Here's a report from the Veterans For Peace website:

131 people were arrested at the White House yesterday in an action to End The Wars, including the board executive committee of Veterans for Peace. It is estimated that 2/3rds of those arrested were veterans. Of those arrested a number of women from Code Pink were also arrested. Approximately 500 folks attended the rally. There were dozen of speakers including Daniel Ellsberg and Ray McGovern who were also arrested.

But where was Dan Choi? Even one of the crowd of loons at right-wing site FreeRepublic concluded, "There doesn't seem to be much interest in this thread." Only veterans, after all. Once they come home, they're of little interest to the Support Our Troops crowd.

Because You Are Lukewarm, I Will Spew You Out of My Mouth

Oh, dear, where does the time go? While I'm struggling to get my act together, here are a couple of things that I hope will be useful and informative.

The Daily Beast has an article on Pfc. Bradley Manning, accused of leaking classified material to Wikileaks, which supplements Glenn Greenwald's article of a couple of days ago.

What is clear today is that he’s being held in extraordinarily harsh conditions—notably harsher than Bryan Minkyu Martin, the naval intelligence specialist who allegedly tried to sell military secrets to an undercover FBI agent, and is currently being held awaiting trial, though not in solitary confinement. Manning, who has been convicted of nothing, has spent the better part of a year incommunicado, living the life of a man convicted of sa heinous crime.

Free added bonus: more deranged comments, dripping with bloodlust, endorsing any and all punishment of a man who has not yet been convicted of anything.

Extra added bonus, also at Daily Beast: John Avlon, founder of dead-armadillo group No Labels, reports on his "war with Rush Limbaugh," with whom he's evidently on a first-name basis. The article itself is predictable middle-of-the-road mush.

Back to serious matters. I'd been hearing for some time about the planned civil disobedience demo against Obama's wars, planned for Thursday at the White House. There doesn't seem to have been much, if any, corporate media coverage, despite the participation of some fairly high-profile figures. A search of CNN.com brings up nothing, though there are plenty of eulogies for the late war criminal Richard Holbrooke. The New York Times links to Democratic Underground in lieu of any coverage of its own. Here's a report from the Veterans For Peace website:

131 people were arrested at the White House yesterday in an action to End The Wars, including the board executive committee of Veterans for Peace. It is estimated that 2/3rds of those arrested were veterans. Of those arrested a number of women from Code Pink were also arrested. Approximately 500 folks attended the rally. There were dozen of speakers including Daniel Ellsberg and Ray McGovern who were also arrested.

But where was Dan Choi? Even one of the crowd of loons at right-wing site FreeRepublic concluded, "There doesn't seem to be much interest in this thread." Only veterans, after all. Once they come home, they're of little interest to the Support Our Troops crowd.

Procrastination Is My Middle Name

I've been fiddling around with a couple of other posts for the past few days, but haven't been able to finish anything. Here's something that I can toss out there quickly, with minimal comment -- it speaks for itself. Glenn Greenwald has posted an article at Salon.com on the inhumane conditions in which Pfc. Bradley Manning, alleged leaker of classified documents to Wikileaks, is being held. Although Manning

has never been convicted of that crime, nor of any other crime. Despite that, he has been detained at the U.S. Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia for five months -- and for two months before that in a military jail in Kuwait -- under conditions that constitute cruel and inhumane treatment and, by the standards of many nations, even torture....

From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement. For 23 out of 24 hours every day -- for seven straight months and counting -- he sits completely alone in his cell. Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he's barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions. For reasons that appear completely punitive, he's being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch).

Greenwald quotes John McCain, who endured such confinement while a POW in Vietnam: "It’s an awful thing, solitary. It crushes your spirit." He's probably aware of the irony involved, but some of his commenters aren't. (Neither, it's safe to say, is the President of the United States.) I haven't taken the time read all 494 comments that have been posted so far, but there are several writers (this one, right off the bat) who are saying that this is what will happen to you if you break the law, as Manning is alleged to have done, and if he'd done the same thing in China or Russia he'd be dead by now, he's a traitor traitor traitor ... the usual, predictable ranting that appears in various fora, including as content in right-wing media, when a story like this breaks. Since Manning has not, as Greenwald stresses, been convicted of any crime, there's no basis for punishing him at all, let alone in this draconian manner. (Except for Catch-22: You must have done something wrong, or you wouldn't be in jail.) And isn't it inspiring to be told once again that the US is not, and needn't be, any better than regimes like Russia or China or Iran or Saddam's Iraq? This, remember, is what such people consider a defense of the United States: that we are simply behaving like the official enemies, whose horrific behavior justifies our demonization of them, but should also be our role model.

Remember this bit from informer Adrian Lamo's appearance at a Hackers on Planet Earth conference a few months ago?

EMMANUEL GOLDSTEIN: Adrian, I mean, you say it’s—you know, it’s been a pleasant experience for you, you know, working with the government on this, I guess. But Bradley Manning, the alleged leaker, is currently sitting in prison in Kuwait, I believe, and he could be locked up for the rest of his life. How do you feel about that?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Tortured!

ADRIAN LAMO: I think that it’s a little bit ludicrous to say that Bradley Manning is going to be tortured. We don’t do that to our citizens.

Oh, don't we?

Greenwald has written an important article, which should be read by everyone.

Procrastination Is My Middle Name

I've been fiddling around with a couple of other posts for the past few days, but haven't been able to finish anything. Here's something that I can toss out there quickly, with minimal comment -- it speaks for itself. Glenn Greenwald has posted an article at Salon.com on the inhumane conditions in which Pfc. Bradley Manning, alleged leaker of classified documents to Wikileaks, is being held. Although Manning

has never been convicted of that crime, nor of any other crime. Despite that, he has been detained at the U.S. Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia for five months -- and for two months before that in a military jail in Kuwait -- under conditions that constitute cruel and inhumane treatment and, by the standards of many nations, even torture....

From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement. For 23 out of 24 hours every day -- for seven straight months and counting -- he sits completely alone in his cell. Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he's barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions. For reasons that appear completely punitive, he's being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch).

Greenwald quotes John McCain, who endured such confinement while a POW in Vietnam: "It’s an awful thing, solitary. It crushes your spirit." He's probably aware of the irony involved, but some of his commenters aren't. (Neither, it's safe to say, is the President of the United States.) I haven't taken the time read all 494 comments that have been posted so far, but there are several writers (this one, right off the bat) who are saying that this is what will happen to you if you break the law, as Manning is alleged to have done, and if he'd done the same thing in China or Russia he'd be dead by now, he's a traitor traitor traitor ... the usual, predictable ranting that appears in various fora, including as content in right-wing media, when a story like this breaks. Since Manning has not, as Greenwald stresses, been convicted of any crime, there's no basis for punishing him at all, let alone in this draconian manner. (Except for Catch-22: You must have done something wrong, or you wouldn't be in jail.) And isn't it inspiring to be told once again that the US is not, and needn't be, any better than regimes like Russia or China or Iran or Saddam's Iraq? This, remember, is what such people consider a defense of the United States: that we are simply behaving like the official enemies, whose horrific behavior justifies our demonization of them, but should also be our role model.

Remember this bit from informer Adrian Lamo's appearance at a Hackers on Planet Earth conference a few months ago?

EMMANUEL GOLDSTEIN: Adrian, I mean, you say it’s—you know, it’s been a pleasant experience for you, you know, working with the government on this, I guess. But Bradley Manning, the alleged leaker, is currently sitting in prison in Kuwait, I believe, and he could be locked up for the rest of his life. How do you feel about that?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Tortured!

ADRIAN LAMO: I think that it’s a little bit ludicrous to say that Bradley Manning is going to be tortured. We don’t do that to our citizens.

Oh, don't we?

Greenwald has written an important article, which should be read by everyone.

I, Uh, I Forgot What I Was Gonna Say, Man!

This video clip shows informer Adrian Lamo on the BBC, justifying his decision to turn in Bradley Manning for allegedly delivering material to Wikileaks, and -- holy shit, man, what is Lamo on? He reminds me of a pothead character in an old Cheech and Chong skit. I'm not sure I agree with Glenn Greenwald, whose latest column pointed me to the clip, that I've "never seen someone behave quite like him on television before" -- I've known numerous people, usually male, with the same manner of speaking -- but he's certainly weird. On the other hand, compare his appearance at a hackers' conference as shown here; he may just have consumed too much Jolt Cola in his hacking days.

Greenwald also reports that Lamo turns out to have been a volunteer for a private vigilante Internet monitoring group, who pressured him to turn Manning in, "telling him (falsely) that he'd likely be arrested if he failed to turn over to federal agents everything he received from Manning."

But the main reason I'm posting this is to add my voice to those who are revolted by the line being peddled here and elsewhere, that the Wikileaks data dump on Afghanistan may put "innocent people in danger." (For example, listen to Admiral Mullen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the BBC clip.) Nowhere do these propagandists acknowledge that the NATO/US war in Afghanistan has certainly hurt and killed many innocent people over the past decade, and is still doing so.

I, Uh, I Forgot What I Was Gonna Say, Man!

This video clip shows informer Adrian Lamo on the BBC, justifying his decision to turn in Bradley Manning for allegedly delivering material to Wikileaks, and -- holy shit, man, what is Lamo on? He reminds me of a pothead character in an old Cheech and Chong skit. I'm not sure I agree with Glenn Greenwald, whose latest column pointed me to the clip, that I've "never seen someone behave quite like him on television before" -- I've known numerous people, usually male, with the same manner of speaking -- but he's certainly weird. On the other hand, compare his appearance at a hackers' conference as shown here; he may just have consumed too much Jolt Cola in his hacking days.

Greenwald also reports that Lamo turns out to have been a volunteer for a private vigilante Internet monitoring group, who pressured him to turn Manning in, "telling him (falsely) that he'd likely be arrested if he failed to turn over to federal agents everything he received from Manning."

But the main reason I'm posting this is to add my voice to those who are revolted by the line being peddled here and elsewhere, that the Wikileaks data dump on Afghanistan may put "innocent people in danger." (For example, listen to Admiral Mullen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the BBC clip.) Nowhere do these propagandists acknowledge that the NATO/US war in Afghanistan has certainly hurt and killed many innocent people over the past decade, and is still doing so.

The "How Many Times Have I Heard That One Before?" Department

From the Daily Beast, via Antemedius, via Sideshow:

The US is apparently convinced that whistleblower Bradley Manning, who was arrested two weeks ago, did indeed hand over 260,000 US diplomatic cables concerning the Middle East over to Wikileaks....

American officials would not discuss the methods being used to find Assange, nor would they say if they had information to suggest where he is now. "We'd like to know where he is; we'd like his cooperation in this," one U.S. official said of Assange.

Gee, that sounds familiar. Remember when the US was apparently convinced that Saddam Hussein was in cahoots with Al-Qaeda and had Weapons of Mass Destruction that he could toss across the unfortified Iraq-US border in, like five minutes? (We'd have liked to have Mr. Hussein's cooperation in this, too.) Remember when the US was apparently convinced that the American scientist Wen Ho Lee had given our nuclear secrets to the Chi-coms? (Cooperation, Dr. Lee?) For an oldie but goodie, remember when the US was apparently convinced that Ho Chi Minh was a willing puppet of the Russkies? (It's in your own interests to cooperate, Mr. Ho.)

Right now the US is also apparently convinced that Iran has Weapons of Mass Destruction that it can toss across the flimsy, unguarded Iran-US border with nothing to protect us. (Also that Iran is moving toward a military dictatorship, which the US of course deplores.) Also that Hamas seized control of Gaza in a brutal coup against the Palestinian authority.

This doesn't mean, of course, that the US is never correctly convinced about anything. But how do you tell? Generally it's wiser to assume that the American government (like any government) is lying at the outset.

The "How Many Times Have I Heard That One Before?" Department

From the Daily Beast, via Antemedius, via Sideshow:

The US is apparently convinced that whistleblower Bradley Manning, who was arrested two weeks ago, did indeed hand over 260,000 US diplomatic cables concerning the Middle East over to Wikileaks....

American officials would not discuss the methods being used to find Assange, nor would they say if they had information to suggest where he is now. "We'd like to know where he is; we'd like his cooperation in this," one U.S. official said of Assange.

Gee, that sounds familiar. Remember when the US was apparently convinced that Saddam Hussein was in cahoots with Al-Qaeda and had Weapons of Mass Destruction that he could toss across the unfortified Iraq-US border in, like five minutes? (We'd have liked to have Mr. Hussein's cooperation in this, too.) Remember when the US was apparently convinced that the American scientist Wen Ho Lee had given our nuclear secrets to the Chi-coms? (Cooperation, Dr. Lee?) For an oldie but goodie, remember when the US was apparently convinced that Ho Chi Minh was a willing puppet of the Russkies? (It's in your own interests to cooperate, Mr. Ho.)

Right now the US is also apparently convinced that Iran has Weapons of Mass Destruction that it can toss across the flimsy, unguarded Iran-US border with nothing to protect us. (Also that Iran is moving toward a military dictatorship, which the US of course deplores.) Also that Hamas seized control of Gaza in a brutal coup against the Palestinian authority.

This doesn't mean, of course, that the US is never correctly convinced about anything. But how do you tell? Generally it's wiser to assume that the American government (like any government) is lying at the outset.