|
Dear Auntie Pinko,
Should I be amazed, amused, or intimidated by the Bush government's attempts to "keep us safe" from criminal terror attacks? And are they criminal attacks, or are they 'acts of war?' Who knows, anymore? Who is it safe to listen to? Who should I believe? Is anyone just reporting news anymore, without spinning it wildly in whatever political direction suits their convenience or plays to their constituency?
Do terrorists really watch the US news carefully and time their attacks to coincide with the efforts of traitor wussy Democrats to undermine the fierce resolve of our Wartime President?
Levin,
Philadelphia, PA
Dear Levin,
Your sarcasm is very understandable. The repeated coincidence of new reasons for the American public to worry intensely about terrorist attacks and media attention unfavorable to Mr. Bush's government's policies and actions is quite astonishing, isn't it? Especially when further examination reveals that the specifics of the alerts are often information the government has had for a considerable time, or that its sources and reliability are less than impressive.
It is particularly problematic when it becomes clear, as seems the case in the current instance, that there is a genuine threat to be countered, and that political expediency may have trumped sound criminal investigation principles in determining the timing for releasing information to the public. While I am most reluctant to engage in fearmongering myself, I do advocate for a sensible awareness that risks exist and the cooperation of the greater American public is occasionally needed to reduce our vulnerability to terrorist attacks. Not that I think it's necessary for Auntie to remind anyone, with Mr. Bush's propaganda machine so zealously devoting itself to keeping us on our toes. (Or perhaps, under our beds?)
I do wish that Mr. Bush and company would remember the moral of the story about the boy who cried 'wolf!': when the real threat materialized, no one took action. For whatever reason, interfering with air travel appears to be an ongoing focus for some ideologically-motivated criminals, and we have known this for a good many years. Yet, rather than putting real investment into restructuring our air travel system to make it less vulnerable, we have poured money into patchwork attempts to making marginal increases in the safety of the existing structure.
For an administration that promised to run America with the efficiency and strategic orientation that has made big business so powerful and effective, this represents a serious failure. I can't imagine a single effective CEO looking over a corporate division with outdated equipment and processes, an unacceptable failure rate, and high levels of customer dissatisfaction, and being content to tweak it a little here and there in the hopes that all those problems would go away. If that division was critical to the company's core function, a good CEO would see that it was re-engineered from the ground up, investing whatever it takes to make it work properly.
Another very instructive aspect to the particular criminal conspiracy currently under scrutiny is how the British law enforcement establishment handled the matter. Britain's national security service identified the nature of the threat, and worked closely with law enforcement agencies to gather evidence, identify individual suspects, and interfere with its execution. They relied on good police work as well as the intelligence-gathering and analysis capabilities of their security agency. Americans should be demanding the same kind of businesslike cooperation and quiet, matter-of-fact law enforcement techniques from our various security and police agencies.
I hope that more Americans are becoming aware of just how damaging are the effects of our government's relentless efforts to politicize these threats. I hope more Americans are becoming motivated to soberly examine the real value of the return we are getting for the vast sums of money Mr. Bush and Congress have directed at what they call the "War on Terror." Choosing to sink enormous sums in Iraq -dollars that could have been spent on restructuring our air travel system, ensuring more secure ports and borders, and enhancing the ability of our law enforcement and intelligence agencies to identify and investigate real threats- has not made me feel safer. Democratic leaders and candidates for office who don't clearly point out the security failures of this administration, and showcase a compelling alternative are failing Americans who want to feel safe.
In the mean time, Levin, take the reportage about terrorist threats with both a healthy cynicism and a healthy respect. Real threats do exist, and real, dedicated law enforcement and other government employees are working hard to protect us. They are unfortunately handicapped by the unblushing determination of Mr. Bush's political strategists to use their efforts for partisan advantage, but that doesn't mean they aren't doing their best. The media, as always, will go with whatever 'spin' gives them the most eyes and ears on their specific channel, website, or page. There are plenty of responsible journalists, and they're trying to present real information against the tide of corporate hype. The best we can do is develop our individual critical thinking and analysis skills, and use them! Thanks for asking Auntie Pinko!
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(46 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
