Robert Kaiser, the associate editor of the Washington Post, tells us why is was so important to expose the American government's alleged tactic of "overseas renditions":
...Downie [Leonard, executive editor of the WaPost] rejected the suggestion that he kill the story altogether. "It raised important issues for American voters about how their country was treating prisoners, and it raised significant civil liberties issues," he said. Journalists are inclined to publish what we learn -- that's our job.
But did it really raise any important issues, boys? Note the lack of hue and cry by the American "voters" {also note the choice of words - "voters", not "citizens"? That's because the editors of the Post want to influence voters, not inform citizens...} over the renditions; they understood the logic of this type of manuevering during this type of warfare. The only ones who raised any "issues" were the usual suspects - diehard Bush critics in Congress, liberal media outlets, and bureucrats in the EU nations named in the rendition reports.
But it certainly did curtail the alleged practice of rendition, and maybe that's a result of the WaPost reporting based on what apparently it believed (and few others outside their immediate mindset) was a "significant civil liberties issue".
Well, the truth always comes out, and now matter how bipartisan Kaiser tries to lead us to believe his thought process is, he finally loses it at the end:
Intimidation by classification already seems to be a hallmark of this administration, which has created classified secrets at an unprecedented pace -- 14 million in fiscal 2005, compared with 8 million in 2001, according to the National Archives. The Bush administration has encouraged the use of more than 60 new categories ("sensitive but unclassified," for example) to control the distribution of millions more facts and documents.
Steven Aftergood, who works on classification issues for the Federation of American Scientists, calls the administration's approach to secrets "a cultivation of fear as a policy driver." He adds: "We are being told that nothing is more important than the external threat that confronts us, and nothing is more valuable than security in the face of that threat." Aftergood calls this "craven, and an insult to the millions of Americans who have given their lives to defend this country."
Personal bile, supported by the rantings of some unknown Beltway "scientist", is what drives the Washington Post to reveal every government secret it feels may harm the presidency, and the governing party's policies. The rest of this piece is simply a cover.
'ol Kaiser just had to lift up his skirt...!
3 comments:
Voters vs. citizens, indeed~ point really shows the motivation of the WAPOST in printing the allegations to begin with
Dana Priest and her story might have been built of Legos, not just "Like a Lego skyscraper". Dick Marty, the very guy heading the EU investigation, said in his report that "proof, in the classical meaning of the word, is not yet available". How's that for dickspeak?
Why don't we just get rid of the press altogether? The President will tell us what we need to know.
Post a Comment