intra-links between the now
20 pages of this blog at the end
Dear Mrrs. Sulzberger
It appears that your paper when it comes to matters of this kind takes a kind of whole-sale approach worthy of the background color on which I am writing this.
Your coverage of the De Haag trials was so limited I can't tell whether it was the small amount you devoted to it or Ms. Marlise Simon's fault. Perhaps you ought to give your wonderful film critics and Mr. Pogue and Ms. Angier some time in the field to address question of that kind with their literary and technical ability to discern and give just accounts.
I put it to you, you too might redeem your paper by publishing a translation of Handke's recent The Cuckoos of Velica Hoca. Mr. Handke, who became roadkill in this country for taking a different and much better informed position and who as a writer on the order of Flaubert, Goethe [as a person I feel deeply ambivalent although I know that he can be an angel and not only as a writer] and who as a writer is the best that the West affords our melancholy monkey spirits, has finally stopped just cussing at journalists, and proves to set the bar so high with that short book that there is something better to aim at than George Orwell.
My very best to you all.
I am proposing to do an online inquiry, a post mortem, on the two matters in the subject
line of this communication, two related subjects, the second arising out of the former,
at the developing http://handke-yugo.blogspot.
and wanted to ask you to join in or forward this communication to
those who you think might be interested in:
[1] A narrowly focused discussion on how it came to be that the Serbians and then Milosevic
were made responsible for the disintegration and the great majority of war crimes committed there; while
each of the formers parts of the federation were encouraged in their nationalist longings but for the Serbians.
For both my points I use as a focus the following observation of Noam Chomsky's:
"The nefarious atrocities regularly elicit religious
fervor, dramatic posturing, baseless claims to inflate
them as much as possible - and fury if anyone does
not blindly join the parade, but seeks to determine
the truth, cites the most reputable authorities
exposes the innumerable fabrications.
The common reaction to such treachery is an impressive
torrent of deceit. There is an instructive record,
quite well documented in many cases. The reasons are
not hard to explain. The topic should be pursued
systematically, but that is unlikely, obviously." Naom Chomsky
http://news.independent.co.uk/
[2] why was Peter Handke, [a] as a the person, and then [b] his writing showered and continues to be with such
obloquy for having a different view of this matter, and writing about it in a language of his own.
Is this a question of mass psychology, the mass in this case being the bien pensant - in France, Germany, the UK and here in the US ?
I am launching it now herewith after having put a fair amount of primary material on to the blog
and beginning it with a decimation of what I regard as a typical piece of writing on the subject of both Yugoslavia and Peter Handke, it is a review of "JOURNEY TO THE RIVERS [JUSTICE FOR SERBIA] by Davied Rieff and appeared in the L.A. Times Book Review which at that timewas edited by Steve Wasserman.
Let me summarize my own, at this point, fairly firmly held positions - elaborated on line at http://handke-yugo.blogspot.
[A] pertaining to the history of the disintegration, of what I regard as having been a tinderbox in the making, in part due to the economic warfare conducted by the Reagan Administration; where the assigning of blame however, so I hope, will give way to what an analyst calls "understanding" - i.e. I am examining a "cold case" - that dog is dead - how did he die - why does the corpse look like that - why did so many peoples whose "goodness" and good intentions I do not question [though well I might] arrive at those conclusions [I mean I know some of the answers of course, or at least think I do] and why did they become so vengeful to anyone who disagreed with their position. and if they were editors of magazines, the new york review, the new republic, the ny times magazine to mention only a few, close their pages to disagreement, including their letter to the editors space.
[2], how Handke, who took a very different opposing tack to the general humanity hyenas,
and refused to talk their language, then became as it were "collateral" damage;
I wish that Handke himself were St. Francis and pure
as the driven snow, but that is not the case either, since being in the opposition,
being righteous in his own particular
way invariably involves exhibitionistic, self-displaying motives.,
and his public comments, as compared to his writings, manifested rather uncivilized manners,
he of course is/ was scarcely the only one
so motivated. good girl good American girl Susan Sontag rehearsing endgame of whatever in Sarajevo,
was another but entirely one-eyed humanity hyena.
Most material is posted already, as is a sharp polemic addressed
to one particular piece of writing which manifests the points I have in mind.
I can also send the pieces and the background material either as word docs or as pdf if you dislike reading on the web
best ever,
I am proposing to do an online inquiry, a post mortem, on the two matters in the subject
line of this communication, two related subjects, the second arising out of the former,
at the developing http://handke-yugo.blogspot.
and wanted to ask you to join in or forward this communication to
those who you think might be interested in:
[1] A narrowly focused discussion on how it came to be that the Serbians and then Milosevic
were made responsible for the disintegration and the great majority of war crimes committed there; while
each of the formers parts of the federation were encouraged in their nationalist longings but for the Serbians.
For both my points I use as a focus the following observation of Noam Chomsky's:
"The nefarious atrocities regularly elicit religious
fervor, dramatic posturing, baseless claims to inflate
them as much as possible - and fury if anyone does
not blindly join the parade, but seeks to determine
the truth, cites the most reputable authorities
exposes the innumerable fabrications.
The common reaction to such treachery is an impressive
torrent of deceit. There is an instructive record,
quite well documented in many cases. The reasons are
not hard to explain. The topic should be pursued
systematically, but that is unlikely, obviously." Naom Chomsky
http://news.independent.co.uk/
[2] why was Peter Handke, [a] as a the person, and then [b] his writing showered and continues to be with such
obloquy for having a different view of this matter, and writing about it in a language of his own.
Is this a question of mass psychology, the mass in this case being the bien pensant - in France, Germany, the UK and here in the US ?
I am launching it now herewith after having put a fair amount of primary material on to the blog
and beginning it with a decimation of what I regard as a typical piece of writing on the subject of both Yugoslavia and Peter Handke, it is a review of "JOURNEY TO THE RIVERS [JUSTICE FOR SERBIA] by Davied Rieff and appeared in the L.A. Times Book Review which at that timewas edited by Steve Wasserman.
Let me summarize my own, at this point, fairly firmly held positions - elaborated on line at http://handke-yugo.blogspot.
[A] pertaining to the history of the disintegration, of what I regard as having been a tinderbox in the making, in part due to the economic warfare conducted by the Reagan Administration; where the assigning of blame however, so I hope, will give way to what an analyst calls "understanding" - i.e. I am examining a "cold case" - that dog is dead - how did he die - why does the corpse look like that - why did so many peoples whose "goodness" and good intentions I do not question [though well I might] arrive at those conclusions [I mean I know some of the answers of course, or at least think I do] and why did they become so vengeful to anyone who disagreed with their position. and if they were editors of magazines, the new york review, the new republic, the ny times magazine to mention only a few, close their pages to disagreement, including their letter to the editors space.
[2], how Handke, who took a very different opposing tack to the general humanity hyenas,
and refused to talk their language, then became as it were "collateral" damage;
I wish that Handke himself were St. Francis and pure
as the driven snow, but that is not the case either, since being in the opposition,
being righteous in his own particular
way invariably involves exhibitionistic, self-displaying motives.,
and his public comments, as compared to his writings, manifested rather uncivilized manners,
he of course is/ was scarcely the only one
so motivated. good girl good American girl Susan Sontag rehearsing endgame of whatever in Sarajevo,
was another but entirely one-eyed humanity hyena.
Most material is posted already, as is a sharp polemic addressed
to one particular piece of writing which manifests the points I have in mind.
I can also send the pieces and the background material either as word docs or as pdf if you dislike reading on the web
best ever,
http://handke-yugo.blogspot.com/2010/05/links-to-scott-abbotts-work-on-handke.html
I dare anyone to find a piece by Roger Cohen or any of the Op-Ed contributors to the NY Times, or in the pages of the NY Times Magazine
or
who mention the culpability of any of the other tribes,
question any of the underlying assumptions
any of the legalities
provide a time line
express the slightest interest in the question of
"interests"
have a historians, not necessarily overly complex
take on the disintegration of the 2nd Federation
or who mention the US National Security Directives from the 80s.
If there has ever been a Serb and Milosevic hunt it occurred in the NY Times...not until a recent obit for a Bosniam Muslim General is there mention of the 1000 Mujahadeem fighting along side, wherever they came from, who created them, ex nihilo it appear
Human rights hyenas... the only variation being in their shrillness... overall becomes a uniform, overwhelming chorus... legal scholars, journalists, writers.
An amazing instance of brainwashing by a major newspaper.
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/contributors/index.html?match=any&query=serbia&submit.x=18&submit.y=11&submit=Search
INTRA-LINK PAGES FOR THE HANDKE-YUGO.BLOGSPOT (24)
24]
Inbox X
I dare anyone to find a piece by Roger Cohen or any of the Op-Ed contributors to the NY Times, or in the pages of the NY Times Magazine
who mention the culpability of any of the other tribes,
any of the legalities
provide a time line
express the slightest interest in the question of
"interests"
have a historians, not necessarily overly complex
take on the disintegration of the 2nd Federation
or who mention the US National Security Directives from the 80s.
If there has ever been a Serb and Milosevic hunt it occurred in the NY Times...not until a recent obit for a Bosniam Muslim General is there mention of the 1000 Mujahadeem fighting along side, wherever they came from, who created them, ex nihilo it appear
Human rights hyenas... the only variation being in their shrillness... overall becomes a uniform, overwhelming chorus... legal scholars, journalists, writers.
An amazing instance of brainwashing by a major newspaper.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment