Dan Rather!? Where Was the Outrage When...
Laura Rozen is feeling intimidated when it comes to reporting on any news which may be construed as unfavorable to American power these days.
I want you to read her statement, and then I have a question upon which you may ponder and discuss with me:
The neocons call those reporting unfavorably on Iraq, on the FBI counterintelligence investigation of alleged espionage, and who allegedly leaked US Iran intel to Chalabi, etc. "McCarthyites". But who's really McCarthyite?
Let's be clear about what is going on here. They are trying to intimidate people from reporting on an existing investigation. To act as if it does not exist, as if that will make it go away. They are not just saying the allegations are not true, which they have a right to say, if that's their opinion. They are obviously not the judge or jury. They are trying to make it illegitimate to even report on the investigation at all. As if reporting on its existence is in and of itself an unethical act.
Think about it. Would they also want us not to report on allegations of, say, Saudi espionage in the US, or of Congressional investigations into terrorist finance? No, they champion that.
What about French espionage at, say, NATO? We've heard of those cases during the Kosovo war. No, they champion reporting on that.
They just want to prevent reporting on an existing investigation into who allegedly leaked US Iran intel to Chalabi and Aipac. Does that investigation make some of those people uncomfortable? Sure. Does that give them a right to try to threaten and intimidate people trying to report on it? To understand and report what the investigation is about? An investigation, after all, that the reporters did not create, but government agencies did?
That's insane.
Question:
Where was the outrage?
The Dan Rather flap is flitting all over media creration. It is saturating and drowning the American consciousness. It is sating the right wing pundits.
Where was the outrage when Bush's lies were exposed and we reached the tipping point when we realized there would be
no WMD found,
there was no imminent threat from Iraq,
there were to be no flowers nor would there be roses,
that civil war was fast approaching, a scenario which the Pentagon (unbelievably) never saw coming,
that over 1000 of our trusting troops' lives were erased by a sick foreign policy, manipulation of known-to-be shaky intelligence, and a poorly planned pre-emptive attack?
Where was the outrage?
Rather than crying for Rather's lather (pun intended), why is the American public not appropriately aware of the facts about what has become a far worse security mess than Vietnam ever was?
Is it because anyone in the media who dares to cross the Bush administration and/or the Neocons are turned to anti-Semitic toast the moment they get a bit too appropriately noticeable?
Consider me the canary in the coal mine.
I think some of us are in danger by speaking freely here in America.
You're free as long as you stick to the right-wing/neocon talking points.
I sense that our first amendment freedoms are not only being manipulated, but are being absolutely throttled by the fear of recrimination of a most personal nature. No tin foil hats here, people. This is the way it is in America at this sad moment in our history
Our troops may not realize it, but lately they are only fighting for 50% of America's freedom.
