|
|||||||||
Posted November 3, 2001
Advertising
...I just sent a contribution to y'all as my way of saying thank you for a superb website. However, I do have one question. Why is it that you want to keep Antiwar.com free of advertising? Soliciting for donations seems to me to be an inefficient method of securing financial support. Your time is better spent on the "front lines" doing battle with the War Party for the hearts and minds of our fellow citizens. Of course, donations are important but why limit your funding by excluding advertisers?
The "Backtalk" editor replies:
Antiwar.com did post banner ads at one time, and many readers complained. Since the dot-com crash, the possible revenue from banner ads has dropped dramatically, making such advertising even less appealing.
Spin and Sanitation
I've been a fan of Antiwar.com for about six months when I stumbled across it as a libertarian link on a different page. I kick myself for not having stumbled across it sooner. I'm sure there are many people who desire non-big media news, with all the spin and sanitation that comes with it, but its difficult finding news and commentary sites like Antiwar.com without a lot of searching.
Yahoo! News Full Coverage is my main source of current news because it is relatively complete and up to date. I was very pleased to see Antiwar.com linked in one of the Opinion & Editorials ("Collateral Damage," Alan Bock, October 24, on Yahoo!...).
...Hopefully
the "mainstream" audience
will get some much-needed exposure
to you guys.
~ Derek D.
Business
as Usual
[Regarding Justin Raimondo's column of October 22, "Noonan's Madness":]
Excellent
piece! I'm glad that someone is
talking some common sense these
days.
If people would do a little bit
of basic research on the Net,
they'd stop worrying. The Pentagon
has its war, the AG has his surveillance
powers, the Bush and Bin Laden
families have their fortunes increased
with the oil pipeline shortly
to be built through the soon-to-be
conquered Afghanistan.
The
Terror has had its desired political
effect. It's business as usual!
Gerald L., Canada
Old W
...I checked out your site and I really liked. We need more sites like yours in these times. While there are some things I might not agree with (I fully support Israel and her people, not the Palestinians), over-all you have my full support.
Me personally, I think the US government was behind the whole bombing and this new Anthrax scare as a means of stripping away our rights and installing old W as our first king.
Keep up the good work.
Musharraf
Not
long
ago,
this
guy
Musharraf
toppled
the
legitimate
government
in
a
rebellion,
making
himself
dictator.
Only
very
recently
did
he,
without
benefit
of
election,
change
his
title
to
"President,"
in
order
to
appear
the
legitimate
head
of
the
country.
His
ploy
seems
to
have
worked.
But
one
has
to
wonder
if
we
should
bolster
that
phony
appearance,
by
treating
him
as
the
legitimate
ruler
of
the
country.
An Arabic pun, by the way, translates his name into "don't know."
More 'Mind Your Own Business'
"Backtalk," thanks for your work.
We need a whole lot more "mind your own business" -- nobody elected us king of the world.
...I saw GW on TV, whining to Islamic people about how the US policy in Kosovo, Bosnia, and Iraq is so pro-Islam; it seems pathetic to know that he does not get it. It's not up to us to parse good and evil in other people's countries. Sure, we think we are backing the "right" side. That's not the point. The point is respect for other people's sovereign countries, and the adoption of a more businesslike relationship, not based on promoting our version of good and evil in the world.
Undertow of Continued Aggression
Regarding Justin Raimondo's article, dated May 23, 2001, "Why Lie about Pearl Harbor":
I hope it doesn't take 50 years for the truth to be made known about the September attack & the current crusade against "terrorism." Wake up, all you flag-wavers! Do not allow yourselves to be caught up in the war rhetoric and undertow of continued aggression. It's time to realize that there is a world out there and the USA does not own exclusive rights to it.
~ Ralph V.