Zodiac: GET A CLUE! revisited
Rubyg580 at aol.com
Rubyg580 at aol.com
Wed May 8 15:51:59 MDT 1996
Look Ken, maybe you are exactly what you claim to be. But my point
in GET A CLUE is that what you face and what others in the world face
are two immensely different things.
Have you ever helped a friend move in the middle of the night because
the FBI came knocking looking for them? Have you ever known someone
who had to climb out the back window, jump the back fence, run to a
relative's house and be driven to the airport without even a change of
to get out of the country because the soldiers were knocking on his front
door? Have you ever faced torture, rape, imprisonment on suspicion,
disappearances of loved ones, their bodies later turning up in a ditch with
signs of torture?
Don't expect people who know these things first hand to automatically
extend trust to you just because you approach them in a friendly manner
and claim the loftiest purposes. Yes, trust is important but it has to be
earned. It is not earned by plying question after question. It is not
by throwing your own hissy fit when the questions are denied answers;
it is DEFINITELY not earned by posting "humorous"allegations of criminal
activity and pornography.
I also notice you chose not to refer to the sections of my original post
where I raise similar questions, but you concentrate on those that offend
your sense of fairness and your own legitimacy. That's why I still have
to say, get a clue. The world is not so clean and simple as you seem to
think where the worst offense is for your private e-mail to be made public
(when it wasn't even revealing any personal info about you, so what's the
problem?)or you may get fired. People lose their LIVES based on answers
to prying questions, and you need to understand that.
You don't seem to grasp that even supporting revolution for many people
is not just a risk of losing a job or having one's e-mail made public, it is
issue of life and death, and of the future of the world.
This is the part of the original post you didn't respond to:
>Your "humorous satire" pretending to link the New Flag with illegal
>activities is about as funny as a pig throw-down gun, or a Rodney
>King video. GET A CLUE!
>If your publication is so damn radical, how come you act oblivious
>to INS raids, deportations and death squads? Do the names
>Sacco and Vanzetti mean nothing to you? How about Big Bill
>Haywood? Fred Hampton? Leonard Peltier? Geronimo Pratt?
>Mumia Abu-Jamal? "War on Drugs"? COINTELPRO? What kind
>of "radical journalist"is so unaware of the reprecussions of prying
>questions and "humorous" allegations? (and I'm not just talking
>about job loss). GET A CLUE!
> Start acting like people's lives are in the balance
>in questions of People's War and revolution. ...
I admit that the tone may be a bit too harsh, but the realities of life are
harsh, and you seem at best oblivious to these realities. If your publication
is distributed in Windsor, can you let me know wher ? I'd like to check it
In a message dated 96-05-07 17:03:23 EDT, you write:
>I hate to belabor this, but there are a couple of technical points on
>Gina's post I simply have to answer:
>>an incredibly naive neophyte who needs to get a clue
>>that support work for a real revolution, where people are giving their
>>lives for the future society is not some sort of a game for publicity
>We all work in our job environments, and support means doing what we can
>within that work environment to help what we think is a worthy cause. I did
>that within my own work environment, which happens to be the media. I hope
>people talk about the issue in their own workplaces.
>>Congratulations for being a fine white boy (I presume) in a wonderful
>>liberal province of a rich imperialist country who could tatoo President
>>Gonzalo's name on your forehead without major repercussions! Don't
>>you understand that 99% of the people of the world do not have that
>>freedom? GET A CLUE!
>Exactly. I agree. That is why I suggest people not contact Quispe and
>affiliated North American PCP support groups because 99% of the people of
>the world do not have my luxury of not being fired for extremely
>controversial political opinions. Their email may be released, jobs lost,
>I wish I knew if Quispe is representative of the entire North American PCP
>support movement or not. One person did write, and I thank them for their
>kind words. But their conclusion was: "I'm sorry you got caught in the
>middle, but I don't want to speak up and become an issue myself."
>That's not very encouraging...
>>It's a little hypocritical and ridiculous for you to whine about someone
>>publishing your "private e-mail" questions when said "private e-mail"
>>was presented in the first place as an interview FOR PUBLICATION.
>>Presumably you intended to publish both the sensitive questions
>>and their answers. GET A CLUE!
>To denigrate the issue of trust helps better define your political line.
>1. As the email released shows, there was no request for interview when I
>gave my statement of support, that interview request/questions came at the
>end -- which is when I was told the story about Stalin killing journalists.
>At the beginning, I was -- as I remain -- simply someone who supports the
>insurgency and wanted to try to help make other people in my own community
>see the issue more clearly. As I pointed out above, my kind of help means I
>could direct people to information sources outside the mainstream media.
>2. As the email shows, when I did once specifically ask if I could use a
>quote, Quispe requested I not use it. I honored that request. The quote
>>Essentially, if you really are a radical journalist and not a pig, then
>>start acting like one. Start acting like people's lives are in the
>>balance in questions of People's War and revolution.
>I am not a "radical journalist." I have never professed to be such a
>pretentious, petty bourgeois thing. I don't write for a red journal,
>anarchist journal, or anything like that. I am a cog in a larger capitalist
>enterprise. The people who manage it just happen to be rather radically
>liberal in their personal opinions.
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism