Saturday, August 27, 2005

The World Socialist Web Site On Why They Defended Judith Miller

The World Socialist Web Site has been a consistent opponent of journalist Judith Miller, attacking her inconsistenicies in her writings for the New York Times and exposing her connections to the Bush White House. So many readers where surprised and angry when the WSWS publicly stated that Judith Miller should not be jailed for defending her source from the investigators in the Valerie Plame Case. Wasn't her anonymous source responsible for outing Valerie Plame as an undercover CIA operative in retaliation for her husband Joseph Wilson's opposition to the Bush plans for war with Iraq? Wouldn't forcing her to reveal this anonymous source ensure that justice is carried out?

WSWS publishes the responses of some of these very angry readers and then the author of the original statement, Patrick Martin, responds to their arguments... are your enemies worth defending for a higher cause? How far do your beliefs about rights and justice extend? Is it "just-us" or justice for everyone? What is at stake in the struggle between the Bush administration and the American press?

Why the WSWS Opposes the Jailing of Judith Miller--A Reply to Readers

1 comment:

Michael said...

Karen,

My confusion is that you are calling the Red Hat Society a "movement"... which to me they are not, maybe a social group?

My understanding of "movement" would be a group of people coalescing around the possibility/need for social change, involving direct action to initiate/force that change, and ensuring that any social advances will be protected.

Something like these:

Crucial Texts on Social Movements

What is the Meaning of Radical Democracy

On Fomenting Positive Social Change

Thanks for replying to my comments at your site--obviously we just think of "movement" in different ways, although I have a feeling Cooper is conscious of the differences (as she opposes it to the first women's movement Feminism) and that does make me angry (nothing new there and doesn't mean that I am not still interested in hearing more about what she would say to my anger--I just find her attitude dismissive.

Onca again thanks for dropping by...