Geographical Correctness Could Be A Jolt

And now, a news dispatch from the Media Twilight Zone...

WASHINGTON -- There were unconfirmed reports yesterday that the United States is not the center of the world.

The White House had no immediate comment on the reports, which set off a firestorm of controversy in the nation's capital.

Speaking on background, a high-ranking official at the State Department discounted the possibility that the reports would turn out to be true. "If that were the case," he said, "don't you think we would have known about it a long time ago?"

On Capitol Hill, leaders of both parties were quick to rebut the assertion. "That certain news organizations would run with such a poorly sourced and obviously slanted story tells us that the liberal media are still up to their old tricks, despite the current crisis," a GOP lawmaker fumed. A prominent Democrat, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said that classified briefings to congressional intelligence panels had disproved such claims long ago.

Scholars at leading think tanks were more restrained, and some said

Congressman Ron Paul

Mr. Speaker:

We have been told on numerous occasions to expect a long and protracted war. This is not necessary if one can identify the target- the enemy- and then stay focused on that target. It's impossible to keep one's eye on a target and hit it if one does not precisely understand it and identify it. In pursuing any military undertaking, it's the responsibility of Congress to know exactly why it appropriates the funding. Today, unlike any time in our history, the enemy and its location remain vague and pervasive. In the undeclared wars of Vietnam and Korea, the enemy was known and clearly defined, even though our policies were confused and contradictory. Today our policies relating to the growth of terrorism are also confused and contradictory; however, the precise enemy and its location are not known by anyone. Until the enemy is defined and understood, it cannot be accurately targeted or vanquished.

The terrorist enemy is no more an entity than the "mob"or some international criminal gang. It certainly is not a country, nor is it the Afghan people. The Taliban is obviously a strong sympathizer with bin Laden and his

H-E-R-E'S the Silver Lining!

It had seemed to me that one absolutely certain fact, beyond all dispute or question, is that the terror attacks of Sept. 11 had no silver lining, no unexpectedly beneficial fallout. It was, is and will be a terrible business with endlessly terrible consequences. It killed thousands, and impelled a punitive expedition that will almost certainly procreate further martial forays. The war party is agitating for an onslaught on Iraq, maybe on North Korea. Here in America, the backwash of Sept. 11 has shriveled civil liberties and political dissent, and we will spend the rest of our lives trying to recapture lost ground.

But no. The editor of the Nation, Katrina vanden Heuvel, (whose periodical has promoted the notion of a "just war" in Afghanistan) has now coauthored a column with Joel Rogers of the University of Wisconsin/ Madison, published in the Los Angeles Times on Nov. 25, proposing the following:

"If anything, the war on terrorism creates an opening for progressives, not closure -- indeed, it presents the opportunity of a lifetime ... War's mobilization of the populace against a shared threat also

Decline and Fall of Taliban -- What Next?

The Fall of Taliban regime from most of the parts of Afghanistan was something like a nation taking full breath after she had entered a sinister tunnel, whose other end they were desperately looking for since last five years of brutal Taliban rule, and abruptly they got it when their hope of to have the air of freedom in lungs was getting to vanish with every passing day.

No Time To Quit Worrying

AUSTIN -- Now is no time to quit worrying. Keep up that nail-biting, team. Foreign policy is like chess: It's necessary to think at least three or four moves ahead. According to The New York Times, the Pakistanis are deeply unhappy with us. They don't trust the Northern Alliance worth squat. Unhappy Pakistanis may strike you as no skin off your nose, but the problem is that Gen. Pervez Musharraf is not firmly in the saddle, as it were.

Since he took over in a coup, his support base is the military, and the Pakistani Army has a lot of Islamic hard-liners. Bush told Musharraf we would keep the Northern Alliance out of Kabul, but we couldn't stop them. Then they slaughtered at least 100 Pakistani fighters holed up in a school in the battle for Mazar-i-Sharif.

From the Pakistani point of view, it looks as though their enemies in the Alliance are taking over the whole country, and that the everybody-in government we promised them is a pipe dream.

If Musharraf falls to an Islamist coup, that puts 20 nukes in the hands of some loony mullahs, in turn causing India, also a nuclear

A Sweet Message for Americans -- 'We Are Family'

On the magazine cover, the big headline next to Oprah's shoulder is as warm and cuddly as the pair of cocker spaniels in her lap. "WE ARE FAMILY," it says. "Now more than ever: the power and pleasure of feeling connected."

Inside this new issue of O -- "The Oprah Magazine" -- the editorial director's lead-off article offers a profound explanation. "Our vision of family has been expanded," writes Oprah Winfrey. "From the ashes of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and that field in Pennsylvania arose a new spirit of unity. We realize that we are all part of the family of America."

It's an appealing concept, especially during these uncertain times. Ever since Sept. 11, countless media outlets have provided similar themes. The December issue of O deftly hits the now-familiar high notes. Three-quarters of the way through the thick, glossy, ad-filled magazine, "We Are Family" reappears in large type, under an American flag and over another message from Oprah. "America is a vast and complicated family," she declares, "but -- as the smoke clears and the dust settles -- a family nonetheless."

Where Were They When It Counted?

The weekend before Thanksgiving, as the Taliban fled into the Hindu Kush and America's children flocked to "Harry Potter," the nation's opinion-formers discovered that the Bush administration had hijacked the Constitution with the Patriot Act and the military tribunals. Time magazine burst out that "war is hell on your civil liberties." The New York Times suddenly began to run big news stories about John Ashcroft as if he were running an off-the-shelf operation, a latter-day Oliver North.

On Nov. 15, the Washington Post's Richard Cohen discarded his earlier defenses of Ashcroft and declared the U.S. attorney general to be "the scariest man in government." Five days earlier, The New York Times editorial was particularly incensed about suspension of client-attorney privileges in federal jails, with monitoring of all conversations. For the Hearst papers, Helen Thomas reported on Nov. 17 that Attorney General Ashcroft "is riding roughshod over the Bill of Rights.

In this outburst of urgent barks from the watchdogs of the fourth estate, the first yelp came on Nov. 15 from William Safire. In a fine

Civil Liberties

AUSTIN -- WHOA! The problem is the premise. We are having one of those circular arguments about how many civil liberties we can trade away in order to make ourselves safe from terrorism, without even looking at the assumption -- can we can make ourselves safer by making ourselves less free? There is no inverse relationship between freedom and security. Less of one does not lead to more of the other. People with no rights are not safe from terrorist attack.

Exactly what do we want to strike out of the U.S. Constitution that we think would prevent terrorist attacks? Let's see, if civil liberties had been suspended before Sept. 11, would law enforcement have noticed Mohamed Atta? Would the FBI have opened an investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui, as Minneapolis agents wanted to do? The CIA had several of the 9-11 actors on their lists of suspected terrorists. Exactly what civil liberty prevented them from doing anything about it?

In the case of a suspected terrorist, the government already had the right to search, wiretap, intercept, detain, examine computer and

HRC praises state activists for solid victories in four of five referendums

Clean Sweep in Michigan Deals Major Defeat to American Family Association, Says HRC

Two Major Miami Victories Help Reverse Legacy of Anita Bryant

Houston Voters Barely Reject Health Benefits for Domestic Partners

WASHINGTON - The Human Rights Campaign today applauded state organizations and activists for winning four out of five ballot measures on gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality. The encouraging results show that voters are increasingly rejecting discrimination and want to see all citizens treated fairly, says HRC.

"The smashing success of these campaigns signals a trend where voters are increasingly supporting equality and resoundingly defeating discrimination," said HRC National Field Director Seth Kilbourn. "Nowhere was this more apparent than in Michigan, where voters overwhelmingly rejected a divisive anti-gay misinformation campaign by the American Family Association and chose fairness."

Voters went to the polls yesterday to vote on GLBT issues in Houston, Miami Beach, Fla. and the Michigan cities of Huntington Woods,

Fear and Numbing in the TV Zone

For most people in the United States, the picture of events since Sept. 11 has been largely framed by television. When pollsters with Princeton Survey Research asked "Where have you gotten most of your news about the attacks?" more than a week later, a whopping 87 percent of adults gave TV as the answer.

While newscasts are still apt to be disturbing, television is mostly back to normal. Some commercials pay respect to patriotic themes, and Old Glory continues to get a lot of screen time. But an ultimate expression of media normalcy -- the relentless barrage of TV ads -- returned to full strength after a mid-September hiatus of several days. The one-two punch of mind-numbing commercials and checked-out entertainment has never packed more of a wallop than it does now.

Overall, the media disconnect is pretty extreme: Journalists and a range of commentators have told us that our world changed profoundly and irreversibly on Sept. 11. Yet the vast majority of what's on television is in the same old groove.

In our society, the one-track momentum of commercialism has so

Pages

Subscribe to Freepress.org RSS