Of lapel pins and buttoned lips


St. Petersburg Times, published October 4, 2001

Noam Chomsky, a brilliantly iconoclastic, leftist social
critic and linguist, calls them the limits of "thinkable

They're the invisible boundaries he says encircle every
mainstream U.S. journalist or commentator, ensuring they
don't say anything too subversive.

WFLA-Ch. 8 news director Forrest Carr ran into those
boundaries Sept. 20, after I reported his decision to take a
stand in his newsroom and say something controversial:
Objective TV journalists shouldn't wear red, white and blue
ribbons on their lapels on air.

hydrarchist writes: "Robert Fisk's latest, from the London Independent 10/09/2001

'The Taliban have kept reporters out; does that mean we have to
balance this distorted picture with our own half-truths?'

09 October 2001

A few months ago, my old friend Tom Friedman set off for the small
Gulf emirate of Qatar, from where, in one of his messianic columns for The New York Times, he informed us that the tiny state's Al-Jazeera satellite channel was a welcome sign that democracy might be coming to the Middle East. Al-Jazeera had been upsetting some of the local Arab dictators – President Mubarak of Egypt for one – and Tom thought this a good idea. So do I. But hold everything. The story is being rewritten. Last week, US Secretary of
State Colin Powell rapped the Emir of Qatar over the knuckles
because – so he claimed – Al-Jazeera was "inciting

we first put this up on 9/18. With the war having started today, I thought it was important enough to repost to the front page.--nomadlab


By Manny Goldstein

Take a close look and there is something downright suspicious about former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, now the darling of certain sectors of the radical left. His journey has taken him from the heights of federal power to outer orbits of the political fringe. In the process, he has seemingly transformed from a shill for the most corrupt elements of the US elites to a shill for any foreign despot who claims to oppose the US elites. Who is Ramsey Clark really working for?

Open Source DNA?

Eugene Thacker eugene.thacker@lcc.gatech.edu

Opening the Biomolecular Black Box

What follows here is a series of observations, comments, and reflections on
the current intersections between computer science and molecular biology. In
conjunction with issues pertaining to open source initiatives, this aim of
this paper is to raise similar questions in the domain of biotechnology.

All of us have witnessed the media-hype generated by such biotech issues as
the human genome, human cloning, and debates over the use of embryonic stem
cells. But what often goes unmentioned is that the real generator of radical
change in fields like biotech is not genome mapping, cloning, or genetic
engineering != it is >=bioinformatics.=a technology-driven quest.

But is that all that bioinformatics is? In other words, what other kinds of
developments can emerge out of this intersection between computer science
and molecular biology, between computer code and genetic code, between data
and flesh? Could it be that approaches from computing (network theories,
systems theories, parallel processing, a-life) might have something to teach
us about the complexity of the organism? Could such approaches even
transform the way in which molecular genetics and biotech has traditionally
thought of the organism, the body, and biological >=life

[text continued at:
http://www.mikro.org/Events/OS/text/Eugene-Thacker _OSDNA.htm]

Anonymous Comrade writes: "Basis of Unity

"In all wars the object is to protect or to seize money, property
and power, and there will always be wars so long as Capital rules and
oppresses people."
- Ernst Friedrich, War Against War (1924)

1. The Boston Anarchists Against Militarism (BAAM) is a coalition of
social anarchists committed to building an anti-war resistance
movement in the greater Boston area.

2. We believe that it is not enough to act as a defensive response to
military conflict. To bring an end to the global cycle of militaristic
violence we must develop a resistance movement that attacks the root
causes of war: capitalism, the State, and all forms of exploitation and

Autonomedia writes: "October 2 — Noam Chomsky, MIT Professor and outspoken critic of U.S. foreign policy, discusses U.S.-Muslim relations and possible reasons for the tensions between the two. Professor Chomsky addressed the MSNBC.com chat audience through a typist over the phone from Boston. Chat producer Will Femia moderates.


or to read the transcript without the ads go to:

Thanks to veve@netcabo.pt and A-Infos for "Six Questions to Noam Chomsky"

We have also received a story about an essay Christopher Hitchens wrote in the Nation where he attacked Noam Chomsky and others.

Here, Chomsky replies...

I have been asked to respond to recent articles by Christopher Hitchens
(webpage, Sept. 24; _Nation_, Oct. 8), and after refusing several times,
will do so, though only partially, and reluctantly. The reason for the
reluctance is that Hitchens cannot mean what he is saying. For that
alone -- there are others that should be obvious -- this is no proper
context for addressing serious issues relating to the Sept. 11

hydrarchist writes: "On Wednesday we published the article "Toni Negri -- Terrorism is an Essential Sickness of the System", having found it in French on italy.indymedia.org. The article was attributed to Toni Negri, for reasons which are plain from viewing the original french post. It has been brought to our attention that this article was in fact written by a Juan Domingo, participant in the Yahoo e-group on Toni Negri. Someone saw fit to repost his article with Toni Negri listed in both the subject line, and as author. The text has made its way rapidly around the net, and generated considerable confusion, as is clear from the messages in french which eventually clarified the mistake, which you can find in the comments section. We apologize to our readers and particularly to both Toni Negri and Juan Domingo for any confusion.

For purposes of transparency you can read the article and some correspondence below. There are also some short remarks by Michael Hardt which are verifiably his own!

TACTile1 writes: "Temporary Anti-Capitalist Teams

A Discussion Document

 how things are

Before we go
anywhere we need to look at what the "anti-Capitalist movement" means
(if it means anything at all) as a diverse political movement, how it works,
what it does and who it is. Whilst referencing the international links that
have been made and the global nature of the ideas that drive the movement, this
document is, in practical terms, talking mainly about the UK's contribution.

In terms of
activists, the real number of active people is vastly outweighed by spectators
and sympathisers, by the amount of activity carried out, and in turn by the
effect made on the wider political scene. Adding all the groups together, we
are really only talking about a couple of hundred activists as a maximum. Many
of these activists are firmly wedded not just to their particular political
specialism, but to their particular political group. This group chauvinism has
been a perpetual block on change and unity on the anti-Capitalist Left. Many
groups are quite convinced that their direction is the only direction - like
a Party line without the Party - and don't even have a desire to work within
a wider context.


What then, is patriotism? "Patriotism, sir, is the last resort of
scoundrels," said Dr. Johnson. Leo Tolstoy, the greatest anti-
patriot of our times, defines patriotism as the principle that will justify
the training of wholesale murderers; a trade that requires better
equipment for the excercise of man-kiling than the making of such
necessities of life as shoes, clothing, and houses; a trade that
guarantees better returns and greater glory than that of the
average workingman.