Anti-War Then (Fixed Bayonet)

The answer is in one word: draft.

 

The draft, and fear of the nation's children being sent to their deaths in a land which no one knew anything about (even I when I embarked for there), for a cause which was 'sold' to the American people, and without our nation's direct interest being at stake were the catalysts which brought together the 'anti-war- 'then' sentiment.

 

If the draft were brought back now, this was would end tomorrow or the next day; and the same with media coverage.

 

It isn't that the media is not wanting to cover the war, especially foreign media, but it's just too dangerous in an 'occupation' as this is no longera war -- we 'won' that long ago. This is a dangerous occupation against those who are inclined to shoot or behead journalists. So, the domestic news organizations will hire only native Iraqis (I'm speaking of Associated Press, etc., and the rest use 'fixers' who are native Iraqi whom they had to train to do journalistic tasks (with much success I might add, as one 'fixer' wrote about his work for a couple of US journalists in the NY Times recently (he is exiled from Iraq because of his work as a 'fixer' then as a full-fledged journalist, and now he's enrolled in a prestitious US grad student.

 

Just as former colleague Frank Snep II (Trey Snep) who went on to work with the CIA in Viet Nam, wrote in an unauthorized book, the US took off from Viet Nam without helping those it left behind. Snep thought this was dishonorable, wrote about it, it became a bestseller and the CIA objected saying the manuscript was not cleared in advance -- a pure contractual issue, and the Supreme Court of the US upheld the contract, and as damages, awarded the CIA Snep's earnings, which then were over $100,000 (like a half million to a million and a half today, depending on what he might have bought with that money.)

 

Simlarly, and even worse perhaps, we ain't letting any of those several millions of Iraqis (4 million I heard) who already are exiled from their own country and are living as refugees in Syria, Jordan and other nations, in part because they're Muslims and we all know Muslims are 'terrorists' aren't they? Never mind that it's the first or second largest religion in the world and it's on the Wahabbis who seem to be in Al Qaeds.

 

It was a change in mind set in the US when the Vietnames 'boat people' began to resettle in the US, and one can only wonder if that eventually will happen with Iraqis, but I think not, even after the xenophobic Bush Administration.

 

If the draft were brought back, as an occasional Democratic Congressional delegate will propose, this war would stop.

 

Bush has been clever in avoiding the draft -- and instead relying on mercenaries such as the now-becoming-infamous group, Blackwater, Corp., whose members perform essentially military duties but earn hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, and get many benefits while alongside troops who make one small portion of that, and keep getting redeployed. A 64 year old the other day was called up from Reserves for Iraqi duty -- they're scraping the bottom of the barrel, and that's to keep up appearances, since the nation can't be seen to be struggling under the weight of this occupation, even though it was long ago understood that our current military could not keep up the present size troop presence.

 

Maybe, Philip, you'd like to join Blackwater and earn several hundred thousand dollars a year and help Bush avoid the 'D' word (draft).

 

The draft brings out the media and no conglomerate could avoid carrying 'news' about anti-war protests if they were truly serious as they were in 1968 (when my school, Columbia was shut down and also San Francisco State had riots, which I photographed, and this was from the 'People's Park' disturbances at Berkeley, which ostensibly were over a 'piece of land being converted to building purposes, but in reality were against the war. So, this is a 'People's Park' photo, but nonetheless it was an anti-establishment which brought you the draft, protest.

 

I don't mind diatribes at all; it gives me a chance also to comment and also editorialize, because (unlike the short years I was a newsman), it allows me the opportunity to express opinions, which are pretty studied (just as yours is.) And of course, you are a KGO-AM listener, I am sure, listening to Bernie Ward, at night, which conveniently for those of us in Ukraine is available by internet on archive, as is Gene Burns, Ray Taliafero, etc.

 

I can sense it from your writing -- let me know if I'm wrong. But your ideas are not those they implanted there, they are shared by many very educated Americans. And they are good, correct thoughts, which have been overcome by a 'media blitz' and careful understanding of the media by Bush.

 

You have Clinton to thank for deretulating the airwaves -- one of the worst decisions made in contemporary America, but a much popular president. It's his shame, that deregulation, and the fostering of such conglomerates as Fox, etc., (which now owns the Wall Street Journal through owner Rupert Murdoch . . . . if that tells you anything).

 

My best to you for well thought editorializing -- always welcome here.

 

John (Crosley)

 

 

As always, a poignant and appropriate reply to commentary. I remember when this finally bubbled over into a violent situation and even who was shot and killed. It was a man by the name of James Richter. A tumultuous time at the very least. My father who was also a Berkeley graduate claimed it was as Nixon termed it, "All due to outside agitators inciting people to riot." The so called "establishment" couldn't stand to think that the universities were actually encouraging people to critically think about and analyze previously ignored policies and practices at all levels of government. In his words; "People should just accept what their leaders tell them."Now you can just substitute "establishment" for "corporate".

You're right about the KGO connection, I've learned a lot from Gene Burns, Bernie Ward, & John Rothman because I work at night. I'm also a fan of the Quake (KQKE), now called Green; with Dr. Rachel Maddow, Mike Malloy, and Randi Rhodes to mention a few. I just wanted to say that I concur wholeheartedly as to the way to bring about the end of this putrid war. I have often said that if the draft were re-enacted, as soon as a few Senator's kids were called off to war, there'd be an immediate halt.

I was speaking about the media's sanitized view of the war long before it became a dangerous place for any living thing to be found anywhere in Iraq. When journalist's were "embedded" they were halted from showing any real battle/skirmish images where anyone might have been wounded or killed even with any of the so-called "non-combatants" (the Iraqi people). The military has controlled all the imagery coming out of the occupation irregardless. One of the key reasons why Americans also rose up in protest to our involvement in the War in Vietnam was the fact that we were bombarded by television and photo-journalism coverage of the war. In fact everyone remembers (everyone who was of at least teenage age) the image of the girl running down a dirt road next to a rice paddy after her clothes had been burned off of her body by a Napalm attack. Or perhaps the famous image of the ARVN officer executing a suspected VC soldier/sympathizer who winced while this officer shot him in the head with his sidearm. That kind of imagery has never been shown of any of the atrocities that have befallen the Iraqi people or American soldiers. In fact they won't even allow the imagery of coffins coming back from the war to be televised or photographed. The war has been neatly sanitized and carefully marketed through sales campaigns of "Shock and Awe," or "Desert Storm II," for example. They think the American people should be watching for these new motion pictures coming to a theater near you, its all been done for effect! Watch out for this guy he's part of the "Axis of Evil." Maybe we should get a hold of those weapons of mass destruction and have a big fireworks celebration to herald our victory in Iraq too. Or maybe we should tell Bush he can only invade Iran with Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. He can use all of the weapons in Iraq he finds! Trouble is he'd lie about that too.

Bottom line is; this is the kind of image that could have contributed to a Pulitzer prize had it been published in a major magazine of the time (Life, Look, etc.), now it's the kind of image we refer to as a sixties icon, however appropriate at this time. Love to buy a print from you when you go to print this on photo paper. Thanks for the memories "Hell no we won't go!"

I couldn't add one thing to what you have written, it's all so true, and I agree with everything you've said, and taken note of the more personal things you've written (it's seldom I have little to add).

 

As to prints, I am working with a famous printer for ALL of my work, and he promises to introduce me to the highest level collectors, galleries, museums which I have verified he has exquisite 'connections' with,and I have one commitment from possibly America's finest gallery owner at least to review my work, as a result of his intervention on my behalf, pretty much unsolicited, and as far as I can tell, his recommendation is pure gold.

 

There currently is not one authorized print of this in existence that is not in my hands; it has never been sold or traded and is copyrighted.

 

When the appropriate time comes, I suspect it may highlight a gallery exhibition of my work (or at least I have substantial hopes that eventually may happen and possibly with a major photographic sales gallery).

 

If that event occurs, you will have my personal invitation to attend; I hope I can carry through on that promise, as it will mean my 'career' is being 'launched' which I'm working on right now.

 

And of course, this being my most clicked on single photo (another is the most viewed, but it's in color and black and white, and neither's views add up to as much as this single b&w photo) I would expect it to help highlight any work being displayed. Wish me luck on that, would you.

 

If I were ever to print it, I have no doubt I would have lots of takers; right now there's one print in existence and no negative, but the print is world class or nearly so, and it has been scanned at the highest resolution by one of the world's best scanners.

 

But I note your interest; this maybe subject to gallery sales restrictions, and I am loathe to let authorized copies out before prices have been determined or do anything else that may interfere with any gallery owner's sales prospects and/or plans.

 

(of course, there's the 'right-click' option, which I can't authorize, but ;-))

 

Yes, this is an iconic image, but similar or just as touching imagees were daily grist from the Berkeley campus and the press was just weary of them, and this was duplicated by other photographers, or at least there were photos by lots of photographers at the same scenem, but I've never seen anything like this in print - not ever.

 

Remember the photo in Newsweek of a girl sticking a flower down a gun barrel? I think that may have been at Kent State, but it hardly matters.

 

(I'd have to look).

 

The printer took me to a gallery opening of a gallery he says he will introduce me to, and Nick Ut, the photographer who took that iconic image of the napalmed girl was there (unless I miss my guess, or the man was misidentified to me) as well as Leonardo DiCaprio and Heidi Klum (whom I purposely didn't photograph depite numerous urgings by others who were celebrity hounds). I even learned a paparazzo trick from one of them (he used a hand-held point and shoot with flash and 'face recognition' and just pointed and shot -- he didn't stick out and looked like a casual 'snapshooter', but I learned different from him.

 

He talked glowingly about getting $250 a print for some of his work, and even more, and I thought 'what a pitiable amount for a printed work that sells millions of tabloid newspapers', but then he thought small. Others in his line of work (note I didn't say 'profesion') make a huge living at paparazzi work, but not me, probably never (unless I'm absolutely starving) . . . as I haven't the stomach for it, and my talent has other outlets.

 

So, I'll either be living out of my car or living the good life a year from now; we'll see. I remember Roseanne Barr (Arnold) at one time lived out of her car before she became a big hit on television and earned megamillions.

 

I'll never earn too much with my photography, I suppose, but there's always hope.

 

And critics like you who fill my life with gladness.

 

Thank you so much.

 

And take a listen, also to 'God Talk' with Bernie on Sunday mornings, which is not just for 'believers'; skeptics also listen in, as it's fertile ground for thought.

 

I am an enthusiastic supporter of KGO, and regret I can't get the 'Quake' when I'm in America as I stay too distant for their signal. I have heard Randi Rhodes, and at least she's a real broadcaster, which that network didn't have too many of.

 

A good broadcaster can get anyone to listen to almost anything he/she talks about -- it's as much in the presentation as in the message, and Air America stumbled when it hired people for 'viewpoints' without hiring skilled broadcasters (Randi Rhodes being an exception).

 

'Hell No, We Won't Go'

 

'LBJ, How Many Kids Did You Kill Today?'

 

and so on.

 

Bring back more memories?

 

My very best to you; you are more than welcome here at any time.

 

John (Crosley)

Such a strong photo. Still so hard to comment it in any way. I can only say that you did a great job with it.

A few congratulatory words are enough. No analysis of this photo is necessary; it is my most viewed in black and white only (another posted in B&W and color of a less iconic scene has more total views for an image).

 

Thank you for taking the time and effort to write.

 

John (Crosley)

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

This is the revised URL of the Project for a New American Century's Neocon manifesto, a reboiled over idea from the 1980s or before about projecting US military might world wide that was signed on by prominent proBush NeoCons and included Cheney, Condaleeza Rice, Scooter Libbey, and numerous others.

The previous' 'blind link' was outdated above, and as of today 5-18-2010, this is a good link.  Please go to page 51, where it states in pertinent part:

'Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a slow one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- LIKE  A NEW PEARL HARBOR [EMPHASIS ADDED]

The document was signed by NeoCons, including Cheney and Rice in 2000, Bush was elected President, 9-11 happened and it was widely seen as a 'new Pearl Harbor' or worse and then America did project itself militarily into the Middle East, one of the goals of the Project for a New American Century and its primary authors (not necessarily meaning its signers but the people who dreamed up the whole idea).

Coincidence?

I make no accusations, and know nothing special.

I worry when Cheney destroys all his e-mails and Instant Messages, possibly irretrievably.

It appears, as I was taught in law school evidence class, evidence of 'guilt' though it may be less.

Who knows?

Not me.

I invite you to click on the rather dull document, read it, read history, view past events, and then keep all that in mind as history's judgment unfolds, no matter what the avuncular (now) Karl Rove tells us on Fox Television.

It is in his best interest, or that of his Mormon soul that history view him kindly, I think he believes, and he appears to be trying hard to ensure history has a kind view of him, Bush and fellow Neocons who started the Iraq war.

Or was it really Saddam Hussein, and was he really building nukes to send over the Atlantic on drones to bomb the East Coast as Condaleeza Rice intimated to us, and was Hussein really buying 'yellowcake uranium' in Niger to make those alleged 'nukes', even though his entire air force was grounded under UN sanctions and so was his military?

History will make the call.

Not me.

john

5-18-2010

John, my goal is to view and study all your images as I find, just at a quick glance, they are engaging and create intrigue. I'm starting with this one as you have placed in a folder titled "Best Of The Best" so I could I not start here?

 

I'm 52 and can remember images of the protests and such being reported every day

 

The composition is powerful with the sole figure, armed with a weapon, composing at least 1/3 or the image (possibly 1/2). What stikes me first is the calm appearance and posture of the crowd against the imposing authority. Then, without a doubt, the sea of peace signs are really the story here! What is done as a fun gesture now days was a new born sign/gesture back then that could speak volumes in a situation where voices could not reach out and speak or be heard.

 

I think when I really study this image, I see it in three parts: the authority of the world, the masses of the world and the freedom of the world beyond the trees.

 

I think this image is powerful, at face value, as well all the underlying messages it also reflects.

 

Every moment in life is history, but not every moment is captured. Sometimes moments that are captured not only freeze that moment,in time, it captures the mood of the world at that exact moment and in my opinion, that is just what this image does and will always do.

 

I don't know if time allowed you to compose this image as it's shown or if it was one of those great moments in which you had only seconds to capture it and the photography gods were smiling down on you. Either way, it's an excellent image on so many levels!

 

deb

 

 

 

I indeed did have time to compose this image, and very carefully.

See the crowds through the ocular of the National Guardsman, the angle of the bayonet bearing rifle and how the image is divided.  It was very carefully thought out, but did not take but a very small time to do so.

There were others similar, but this was the best, and one shot film then, so there weren't too many similar captures.

Others also made similar captures, but I haven't see one since that year; it was dismissed as 'trite' when taken (no violence).

In this photo, the composition was everything and was designed to convey the image that you see, but then images of confrontation and violence were 'selling' and this was simply dismissed.  Amazing how times have changed and this has elevated to 'historical' status, isn't it.

You are right about its present status and how it symbolizes an era.  Ordinarily students were involved in confrontation, the National Guard here was over prepared, a move the students specifically planned for, and took advantage of by staging a non-violent sit-in complete with balloons, making some bayonet bearing and gas-mask wearing guardsmen actually cry from the irony and embarrassment at their superior's stupid decision to show what is excessive force.

You have bit off a big bone to chew, I hope you enjoy the task.  (You may wish to pass swiftly over some of the earlier posts that are marked 'secondary' as they were meant not to be critiqued, but posted for things such as to demark 'photos from one day each season' or some such.

Happy hunting.

(there are some gems; I hope you enjoy them . . . and I'll be interested in which you feel are 'gems' and which you feel are overrated . . . it's always an  interesting process to see my portfolio through somebody else's eyes.

john

John (Crosley)