

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
NEW YORK - NPR ombud Alicia Shepard responded to the over 1,500 activists who wrote individual letters to NPR regarding the Howard Zinn obituary that aired on All Things Considered.
Her response is below. Thanks to all of those on the list who wrote to NPR.
https://www.npr.org/ombudsman/2010/02/howard_zinns_obit.html
Activist Historian Howard Zinn's Obit Causes a Firestorm
There's a taboo not to speak ill of the dead. Or if you are going to,
then at least be nuanced and even-handed about it.
And that's what hundreds said about a Jan. 28 remembrance of Howard
Zinn, the activist historian who died Jan. 27.
Zinn was decidedly left of the American political spectrum and the
first to say he was biased. His best-known book, "A People's History of
the United States: 1492 to Present," was a surprise best-seller. It
told history from the point of view of those who had been vanquished or
oppressed by the powerful.
Zinn, 87, died of a heart attack last Wednesday while on a speaking
tour in California. NPR scrambled to get something on the air for All
Things Considered (ATC) the next night.
The four-minute piece by Allison Keyes quoted three sources: two who
praised Zinn and one, David Horowitz, who was harshly critical. It was
the commentary by Horowitz that led Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting
(FAIR), a left-leaning media watchdog group, to initiate a campaign
that resulted in over 1,600 emails, over 100 phone calls and 108
comments on npr.org. Others complained on air.
Horowitz, 71, is a former leftist radical who morphed into a right-wing
author and commentator in the early 1980s. He is also founder of
Students for Academic Freedom, a national watchdog group that promotes
tolerance of conservatives on college campuses.
Not surprisingly, he was no fan of Zinn's.
"There is absolutely nothing in Howard Zinn's intellectual output that
is worthy of any kind of respect," Horowitz declared in the NPR story.
"Zinn represents a fringe mentality which has unfortunately seduced
millions of people at this point in time. So he did certainly alter the
consciousness of millions of younger people for the worse."
Ouch.
"I thought it was not only disrespectful, but ridiculous--and so
typical of the 'liberal' media's desire to seek legitimacy by giving
credence to hateful right-wingers," wrote Laura Paskus, from Paonia,
CO. "I was one of those young people Zinn influenced; he didn't expect
people to blindly accept his version of history. Rather, he taught us
to question, probe, seek out alternative perspectives and to always be
fair."
Victor Tishop of Kent Cliffs, NY added this:
"You don't alter the minds of millions if you are a fringe mentality,"
he said. "That's a contradiction in terms. Horowitz's whole commentary
was specious and designed to destroy the works of Dr. Zinn. Many
right-wing spokespeople on NPR are allowed latitude that doesn't seem
to be accorded to quote unquote liberals on the left."
Many critics pointed to NPR's even-handed coverage of William F.
Buckley, "a figure as admired by the right as much as Zinn was on the
left," according to FAIR, which gave its members talking points and
urged them to contact the Ombudsman.
NPR was complimentary and respectful in memorializing Buckley, who died
in 2008. The network was equally nuanced in remembering pioneering
televangelist Oral Roberts (who died in December) and Robert Novak, a
conservative columnist who played a key role in the Valerie Plame
debacle and who died last August. NPR's obituaries of these men did not
contain mean-spirited, Horowitz-like comments.
It should be noted that Talk of the Nation did a segment on Zinn that
discussed all aspects of his life that FAIR overlooked.
Obituaries are news stories that place a person in time and history --
not tributes. For this reason, Zinn's obituary did need to mention that
he was controversial and that some historians were dismissive of his
work. But, several professional obituary writers said, Horowitz's harsh
comments about Zinn were not appropriate.
"Obviously the deceased has no ability to refute or discuss or explain
the accusation," said Carolyn Gilbert, founder of the International
Association of Obituarists. "To pick a fight in the obit is not in the
guidelines. It is a little too over the top and begins to open doors
that shouldn't be open in an obituary."
Adam Bernstein, the Washington Post's obituaries editor, also heard the Zinn obit.
"I think the Zinn story misses the mark for two reasons," said
Bernstein. "It quotes people with a vested interest in celebrating the
man and then quotes a man who vividly despises what Zinn represents."
Neither works well.
The Horowitz quote "seems a low blow that doesn't add much insight to
the reader or listener," said Bernstein. "It seems to me your story
would have been better to get a more-neutral authority who expresses
why Zinn was influential and helps the reader/listener understand why
many scholars -- not just conservative firebombers like Horowitz --
felt Zinn was not a force for good in academia."
NPR doesn't have a full-time obit reporter. Last year, the network ran
317 obits and the year before 327. So when someone dies, pieces are
often crafted at the time of death. [NPR does prepare advance
obituaries of many prominent people. For example, Neda Ulaby had
already done a piece on J.D. Salinger, who also died last week, in
anticipation of the 91-year-old author's death.]
The Zinn obit was assigned to Karen Grigsby-Bates late on the day he
died but she had difficulty getting callbacks that day. Keyes got the
assignment the next day to do the story for ATC that night.
"She reached out to as many voices on both sides about Mr. Zinn as she
could," said managing editor David Sweeney. "Some were not available or
refused to talk." Keyes reached Horowitz, who was willing to talk.
Keyes declined to be interviewed.
After the flood of emails, I asked Sweeney to take another listen.
He agreed the Horowitz quote is harsh in tone. "That doesn't undermine
the legitimacy of using his point of view," said Sweeney. "If there is
a problem with what Horowitz has to say, it's that he's allowed to
wield a sharp tongue without providing any justification or evidence to
support his words: more heat than light."
I also asked Alana Baranick, author of "Life on the Death Beat: A
Handbook for Obituary Writers," to listen to the story. She wrote obits
for the Cleveland Plain Dealer for 16 years. She thought it was fair to
use Horowitz to balance out leftist academic Noam Chomsky, who said
"Zinn had changed the conscience of a generation."
"If I had been doing that NPR obit, I would not have cited Horowitz or
Chomsky," said Baranick. "I would have looked to less controversial
figures for comments. [Quoting] historians, who are not considered
political activists, would have been more appropriate."
Writing an obituary can be a challenging assignment because it is often
the last thing that will be said about someone, and the subject can no
longer speak on his own behalf. It must be fair. It must provide
context and it must tell warts and all -- all in a limited space.
Critics are right that NPR was not respectful of Zinn. It would have
been better to wait a day and find a more nuanced critic -- as the
Washington Post did two days after Zinn died --than rushing a flawed
obituary on air.
FAIR, the national media watch group, has been offering well-documented criticism of media bias and censorship since 1986. We work to invigorate the First Amendment by advocating for greater diversity in the press and by scrutinizing media practices that marginalize public interest, minority and dissenting viewpoints.
"One of the biggest implications of this war is how badly Europe miscalculated," said one analyst.
As President Donald Trump made his most explicitly genocidal threat yet against Iran on Tuesday, one historian based in Tehran suggested that countries which have aided and abetted the rapidly intensifying US-Israeli assault on the Middle Eastern country are coming face-to-face with the fact that appeasing Trump has been a grave error.
Trump's threat that "a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again"—referring to Iran's population of 93 million people—was the "textbook definition of genocide," said Narjes Rahmati. "Those who could have intervened but did not will come to regret it."
Trump has lashed out at numerous European countries for being insufficiently supportive of the US-Israeli war, which has killed more than 2,000 people in Iran, nearly 1,500 in Lebanon, and hundreds across the Middle East, but countries including the United Kingdom have provided various support to the US and Israel since they abruptly cut off diplomatic talks and began bombing the country in February.
While UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has attempted to distance his government from the conflict, saying, "This is not our war," the UK has allowed US bombers to use British military bases for "defensive" missions. Late last month the UK also authorized the US to use military bases for strikes against Iranian missile sites that were targeting ships in the Strait of Hormuz. The country has ramped up its military resources in the region in recent weeks.
Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats Party in the UK, said Tuesday that Starmer and his Labour government face "a choice" about continuing to back the US and Israel in light of Trump's latest threat on what the president previously referred to as "Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day."
"The UK must immediately and unequivocally suspend support for the US military," added Zack Polanski, the British Green Party leader. "The government have tried to appease him, then they tried to say they're standing up to him. Words aren't enough—it's time for action."
Philippe Dam, European Union director for Human Rights Watch, also condemned the European Commission for its tepid response to Trump's threat against "a whole civilization."
Anitta Hipper, foreign affairs spokesperson for the commission, said it rejects threats to attack critical civilian infrastructure, warning that "such attacks risk impacting millions of people across the Middle East and beyond, and also may lead to further dangerous escalation."
Dam warned that "international law is eroded by those who flout it as much as by those who fail to speak up."
"Despite renewed threats of attacks on civilian infrastructures in Iran—would be war crimes and possible crimes against humanity—EU leaders still fail to name USA and Israel in their statements," said Dam.
The US has also received varying degrees of military support from Portugal, Italy, Germany, and France, though the French and Italian governments have angered Trump in recent weeks by blocking the US from using certain military bases and barring military flights from French airspace. Spanish President Pedro Sánchez has stood out among North Atlantic Treaty Organization leaders, leading the way in refusing to allow the US to use its bases for Iran attacks.
Sina Toossi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, said European leaders over the last several weeks "had [a] real chance to help make diplomacy succeed. Instead, they aligned with and enabled Trump’s worst instincts."
Adil Haque, a Rutgers University law professor and executive editor of Just Security, called on "all states" to "immediately condemn Trump's threat; deny the use of their territory and airspace by US forces to attack Iran; demand an immediate, unconditional, and permanent end to the war."
"Hormuz can be dealt with separately," he said, referring to Iran's closure of the strait, a key trade waterway. "Enough is enough."
The representative for Iran's Jewish community in Parliament said Israel "showed no mercy... during the Jewish holidays and attacked one of our ancient and holy synagogues."
US-Israeli airstrikes early Tuesday morning reduced a synagogue in Tehran to rubble, according to local reports and footage posted to social media.
The Iranian newspaper Shargh reported on Tuesday that the Rafi-Nia Synagogue, which it described as “one of the most important places for Khorasan Jews to gather and celebrate,” was “completely destroyed” as the US and Israel launched attacks across the city.
Iran's semi-official Mehr news agency reported that the temple was hit when the residential building next door was attacked. Attacks across Iran overnight reportedly killed more than a dozen people.
A video shows Rabbi Younes Hammami Lalezar, a leader of the country's Jewish community, walking amongst the still-smoking wreckage with emergency response teams. Other photos show Hebrew-language prayer books scattered among the rubble.
Rafi-Nia is one of about 100 synagogues in Iran, including 30 in Tehran, that serve as houses of worship for Iran's Jewish community, the largest in the Middle East outside Israel. The attack came on the sixth day of the Passover holiday.
“The Zionist regime showed no mercy towards this community during the Jewish holidays and attacked one of our ancient and holy synagogues,” said Homayoun Sameyah Najafabadi, the Jewish community's representative in the Iranian Parliament. “Unfortunately, during this attack, the synagogue building was completely destroyed, and Torah scrolls remain under the rubble.”
While it's the first report of a synagogue being destroyed since the war was launched on February 28, dozens of other religious and historical sites have been damaged and destroyed by US-Israeli bombings.
Israel has denied responsibility for the attack, with an unnamed official telling The Times of Israel that "Israel doesn’t target synagogues."
A separate statement from the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said: “Iran is firing missiles at civilians, Israel is striking terror infrastructure. Missiles on civilians versus precision strikes on terror targets. That’s the difference.”
The comments echoed earlier denials from the US and Israel after a school in Minab, Iran, was one of the first targets of the bombing campaign, killing 168 people, including more than 100 children. The US couldn't have been behind the attack, said Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, because “the only side that targets civilians is Iran.”
US investigators later found evidence that the US was behind the attack.
According to the Human Rights Activist Network, a US-based human rights monitor for Iran, at least 1,665 civilians, including 248 children, have been killed in US and Israeli strikes since the war began more than a month ago.
Similar to the destruction of Israel's US-backed war on Gaza, tens of thousands of civilian buildings, including homes, hospitals, schools, and religious sites, have been damaged or destroyed, according to the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
The synagogue attack also comes after US President Donald Trump threatened on Easter Sunday to target civilian infrastructure in Iran, including bridges and power plants, and said he was “considering blowing everything up” in Iran if it did not negotiate to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
On Tuesday, Trump issued his most explicitly genocidal threat yet, saying that if Iran did not negotiate, a "whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again."
Iran’s minister of culture and Islamic guidance, Abbas Salehi, said that "damage and destruction of the Jewish synagogue building in central Tehran is bitter and distressing.”
“The American-Zionist warmongers have targeted religious sites and Iran’s civilizational heritage. For them, it makes no difference whether one is Muslim, Christian, or Jewish,” he said. "They have targeted the Iranian people, but Iran will remain, and they will be gone."
Najafabadi accused Israel of using “Judaism as a pretext to legitimize their actions,” and accused them of targeting the synagogue “in light of the [Iranian Jewish] community’s firm stance in condemning the regime’s actions and its anti-Zionist positions.”
"After bombing a school and massacring young girls, the war criminal in the White House is threatening genocide," said Rep. Rashida Tlaib.
US Rep. Rashida Tlaib on Tuesday urged President Donald Trump's Cabinet to immediately invoke the 25th Amendment and remove him from office following his genocidal threat to wipe out the "whole civilization" of Iran.
"After bombing a school and massacring young girls, the war criminal in the White House is threatening genocide," Tlaib (D-Mich.) wrote on social media. "It's time to invoke the 25th Amendment. This maniac should be removed from office."
Some of Tlaib's colleagues echoed her demand. Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) wrote that "Trump is too unhinged, dangerous, and deranged to have the nuclear codes."
"25th Amendment RIGHT NOW," Pocan added.
Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.) said in response to Trump's openly genocidal Truth Social post Trump "just threatened to slaughter 100 million people."
"It's clear he's unfit to be president, the 25th Amendment must be invoked," wrote Thanedar. "If Vance, Rubio, and the others continue to be spineless cowards, Congress must do everything possible to stop Trump and this war."
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who led the push in the US House for a war powers resolution to stop Trump's illegal assault on Iran, told Common Dreams that he also thought the president should be removed.
"When an American president threatens the extinction of a civilization," said Khanna, "we should be looking to invoke the 25th and remove him if Congress is to have value and independence."
The 25th Amendment gives the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet—or a majority of a body established by Congress—to declare the president "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office" and remove him from the position, elevating the vice president to serve as acting president.
Given the composition of Trump's Cabinet—which is filled with sycophants who lavish the president with praise at every opportunity—any 25th Amendment push would likely be doomed to fail.
But Trump's Cabinet has nevertheless faced growing calls to use the tool since the president's Easter-morning outburst warning Iranian leaders to "open the Fuckin’ Strait [of Hormuz], you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell."
Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, warned the president's Cabinet officials on Tuesday that "if you take any part in assisting this, you too will be guilty of the crime of genocide."
"Use the 25th Amendment now to lawfully remove Trump from office," Williams urged. "Congress: This is an impeachable offense. Come back to DC now ready to impeach and convict Trump."
The National Iranian American Council said in a statement that the president's "insane, genocidal" threat to wipe out the "whole civilization" of Iran must be "wholeheartedly condemned."
"Military leaders are not bound to follow unlawful orders, including but not limited to the destruction of civilian targets and making good on this outrageous threat," the group added. "We call on President Trump to recant this abominable threat against 92 million Iranians. If he does not, both Congress and his Cabinet must be prepared to remove him from office via lawful means."
This story has been updated with comment from Rep. Ro Khanna.