Message-ID: From: "merriman" To: "Friends of KPFT - a discussion group for KPFT listeners and activists" Cc: Subject: [friendsofkpft] Re: friendsofkpft digest: September 02, 2002 Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 15:45:16 -0500 X-List-Host: Reply-To: "Friends of KPFT - a discussion group for KPFT listeners and activists" X-Message-Id: <000f01c2551d$24a682e0$78a85a42@stans> This is in reply to both Covert and Woodson. I want you to know that in my opinion, your very limited exposure to Greg Gieselman has not enabled you to make a sound judgement on him. My view of Greg is likely very biased, but based on a friendship which has developed over the past year after an initial waryness when we first met. So, indulge me. Greg is a classical iconoclast. The Jesuits who tried to teach me gave me a great appreciation for iconoclasts. Every organization needs one because they constantly challenge your assumptions and comfortable intellectual resting places. They force you to reexamine your beliefs. That is one characterisitic a value in Greg. But this particular iconoclast is not without both a terrific sense of humor as well as set of well massaged convictions. They range from radical to conservative, depending on the issue. But all of his convictions were formed by an awesome volume of reading over the years combined with an utterly intimidating recall of that reading, usually involving a range of opinion and disagreement. Add to the reading a travel itinerary more extensive than anyone I have known, which has also shaped his worldview. Don't get me wrong; Greg and I disagree vehemently on many issues. We debate all the time. I love those encounters and relish the jousting. Greg does sometimes provoke for the sheer delight of testing another's mental muscle. But he is never malicious, he is always thoughtful and best of all, he really listens, even if I am rocky intellectual ground. I am a better person for knowing him and as a member of a community of interest, even though he is often maligned and misrepresented, he is as committed to the mission of peace and justice as anyone I have ever known. Stan Merriman ----- Original Message ----- From: "Friends of KPFT - a discussion group for KPFT listeners and activists digest" To: "friendsofkpft digest recipients" Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 2:00 AM Subject: friendsofkpft digest: September 02, 2002 > FRIENDSOFKPFT Digest for Monday, September 02, 2002. > > 1. The Hijackers Never Went Away > 2. Philosophy > 3. Re: The Hijackers Never Went Away > 4. Re: The Hijackers Never Went Away > 5. Re: The Hijackers Never Went Away > 6. curiouser and curiouser > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: The Hijackers Never Went Away > From: "Rick Covert" > Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 13:39:14 -0500 > X-Message-Number: 1 > > > I read with dismay frustration and anger over the vote on whether to m= > ove the Pacifica Offices back to Berkely where they should have never left = > in the first place. It is imporatant to know that the move was instigated b= > y the previous Murdoch faction in a move which could only be seen as a proc= > ess of corporatizing the station. Those who voted in favor of halting the m= > ove to Berkely have made it evident that they are not in favor of restoring= > Pacifica back to its roots as a muck raking station that is a home for the= > powerless, the oppressed and the voicless. The people who lined up in this= > vote was interesting to say the least. I recognized George Barnstone and T= > heresa Allen. I also noticed that Rob Robinson had also voted with this gro= > up. It is also worth noting that I have noticed that Barnstone was part of = > an investigation into the Buzzanco/Jewish Voices incident and that Theresa = > Allen seems to bend to the prevailing wind. Rob Robinson also appears to kn= > ow which way the wind blows. I also have learned how they appear to bend to= > the interests of Greg Geiselman. After having spent time in conversation w= > ith Greg Geiselman I have to say I was dismayed. How could a man who airs t= > he views he does be within 100 yards of KPFT or any Pacifica station. > > I read the entry by Michael Woodson and he described his encounter wit= > h Greg Geiselman. I felt that I should add my two cents worth. > > First I want you to know a little about myself. I have been involved w= > ith KPFT for the last 11 years. I started as a listener in the fall of 1990= > when I became discouraged by the mainstream media=92s cheerleading up to t= > he engagement of the so-called Gulf War of 1991. I was particularly attract= > ed to the comments of one speaker called Noam Chomsky because he argued aga= > inst the war with such persuasive logic and argued against it on moral grou= > nds. I became a pledge taker and a pledge giver during the second fund dri= > ve in 1991. I met some really interesting people. I met Otis McClay, Wally = > James and many others committed to a progressive vision of a world free fro= > m war and embracing justice. As I became more deeply involved in the statio= > n I began to provide news for the program Enfoque Latino. At this time I co= > uld see the changes that were taking place to mainstream the station and I = > didn=92t like it. After the changes were made to mainstream the station I b= > ecause disenchanted and became less involved with the goings on of the stat= > ion after 1996. I continued to provide the news and air it but the station= > =92s heart and soul where cut out. So it was with great joy that I returned= > to the station in as many years last March during the fundraiser that I me= > t a person by the name of Greg Geiselman. > > At first Greg Geiselman seemed very appealing. He was talking about bringin= > g local news back to KPFT. I agreed with him that KPFT needed local news. H= > e also talked about reporting about the working people over in the refinery= > areas and so-on. This sounded very positive since KPFT had not had a news = > director since Kyle Huckins (sp?) left back in the mid 90s. When I first me= > t Geiselman back in March he said he was on a local news committee set up b= > y the Houston LAB and invited me on the committee. The things he told me la= > ter, however, deeply disturbed me. He told me at one point that he thought = > that we should concede the war (The war in Afghanistan/Terror, et-al) to th= > e powers that be in order to get what we want. I was utterly shocked by thi= > s statement. He also indicated to me that Noam Chomsky had made many inaccu= > rate claims or drawn false conclusions that he, Greg Geiselman, felt that C= > homsky should retract or come clean on. He referred to Native American scho= > lar Ward Churchill as a =91nutcase=92. When I asked Geiselman exactly what = > did Churchill say that he deserved this label he said that Churchill was pu= > rveying this conspiracy that the government conspired against activists and= > so on. When I told him that, in fact, the government did conspire against = > activists and the FBI ran a program called Cointelpro he scoffed that this = > information had already been known. He also made accusations against Dennis= > Bernstein that I believe he said he had picked up in a news group. He accu= > sed Bernstein of being a misogynist and accused him of being anti-Semitic b= > ecause of an alleged conversation he claimed he had where Dennis Bernstein = > was supposed to have said, =93The truth is what I say it is,=94 in response= > to Geiselman=92s accusation that his coverage was biased in favor of the P= > alestinians and that it needed =91balance.=92 He has told me that he believ= > ed Berkeley was getting to much air play here on KPFT. He also referred to = > the volunteers at Berkeley as =91aging hippies.=92 It seemed to me that he = > was stereotyping the Berkeley croud. He also referred to Free Speech Radio = > News once as Free Speech Rookie News because he said it was populated with = > activists. He forgot to mention that FSRN was comprised of former stringers= > from Pacifica Network News who struck against PNN because of the corporate= > inspired direction that the old Murdoch crowed was taking Pacifica. Closer= > to home he had problems with Otis Hardy McClay though he didn't elaborate = > the specifics with me. He also told me on a few occasions that Bob Buzzanco= > was part of a faction that was trying to conduct an ideological purge of a= > nyone that didn=92t measure up to his, Buzzanco=92s, political agenda. I kn= > ew Bob for quite a while, not on personal terms, but through his work on Pr= > ogressive Forum where I provide and sometimes report the news and having me= > t Bob a couple of times I felt this was an unfair judgement and uncharacter= > istic of Bob Buzzanco. > > It seems that Geiselman has it in for anything that is progressive. And to= > =91concede=92 to any war to get something in return for the public is immo= > ral. For Geiselman to smear people of integrity like Noam Chomsky and Denni= > s Bernstein and to attack, what is at heart what Lew Hill's vision of a sta= > tion free of corporate or government influence, by conceding to this war ru= > ns contrary to the fundamental values of the Pacifica Charter. We live in p= > erilous times and history has demonstrated that if you make concessions to = > those things which you find are morally indefensible then you are worse the= > n them because it is because of acquiescence of good people to war and inju= > stice that these evils can flourish. If people like Otis, Bob Buzzanco and = > Janice Blue are pointing out that KPFT is about exposing these injustices t= > hen they are demonstrating the proper stewardship that KPFT needs to fulfil= > l Lew Hill=92s vision. > > Rick Covert > > EMAIL: Rick.Covert@ev1.net > HAM RADIO: WD5L EXTRA CLASS > > "If you assume there's no hope, you guarantee there will be > no hope. If you assume that there is an instinct for freedom, > there are opportunities to change things." - Noam Chomsky > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [remainder of very long digest of messages deleted -- Mark S Bilk]