[Mb-civic] American's Right to Know War News

[Bahram Maskanian]

  Published on Sunday, May 15, 2005 by CommonDreams.org

American's Right to Know War News

An astonishing message came forth on May 12, 2005 from ABC News 
political unit's The Note. I shall quote verbatim from Mark Halperin and 
his associate editors: "We say with all the genuine apolitical and 
non-partisan human concern that we can muster that the death and carnage 
in Iraq is truly staggering. And/but we are sort of resigned to the 
Notion that it simply isn't going to break through to American news 
organizations, or, for the most part, Americans."

"Democrats are so thoroughly spooked by John Kerry's loss - and 
Republicans so inspired by their stay-the-course Commander in Chief - 
that what is hands down the biggest story every day in the world will 
get almost no coverage. No conflict at home = no coverage."

How to respond? There are several ways. First, ABC is right in saying 
there is no opposition Party on the Iraq war - as a Party. From the 
Democratic National Committee to the Democratic leadership in the House 
and Senate, the party line is "wish Bush success, support the troops to 
die and destroy in Iraq, and keep voting $80 billion or more a year for 
that illegal quagmire which is breeding more terrorists and is turning 
the world against Washington." That is not exactly the way the Democrats 
are verbalizing their position, but that is what they are doing and what 
they are thinking in private conversations, whatever the semantic gloss 
they are applying.

The Democrats are taking this prolonged dive in spite of a growing 
majority of Americans wanting out of Iraq, now believing it was a 
mistake to invade Iraq (since there are no WMDs or al-Qaeda 
connections), and even larger majorities do not think the war-occupation 
is worth the price in human casualties and taxpayer dollars needed here 
at home. Moreover, most of the retired Generals, Admirals, diplomatic 
and intelligence officials were against this war of choice from the 
beginning as being against our national security interests.

What more do the Democrats need to take a stand, to demand a responsible 
exit strategy with a timetable so as to give Iraq back to the Iraqis and 
pull the bottom out of the resistance? Well, what about massive 
corruption and waste by the Halliburtons and other corporations ripping 
off Uncle Sam and you the taxpayers. Maybe the Democratic leadership 
should pause in their incessant fundraising from corporate interests and 
read the daily documentation of this corruption and waste by their own 
Cong. Henry Waxman (D-CA) (see 
www.democrats.reform.house.gov/investigations.asp?Issue=Iraq=Reconstruction).

And what about Bush not supporting the troops - first by putting them in 
harm's way with an illegal war, then not providing them with adequate 
body armor and vehicle armor (outraging military families in their 
grief), then cutting their health benefits and other services when they 
come back home?

And what about the first President in U.S. history deliberately 
lowballing U.S. casualties so as not to further arouse public opposition 
to his war crimes. American men and women injured, sickened or severely 
mentally traumatized in Iraq, but not in actual combat, are not counted 
in the casualty toll. Tens of thousands not counted disrespecting them 
and their parents.

What else do the Democrats need to jettison their chronic cowardliness? 
Well they can sign on to Cong. House Congressional Resolution 35, urging 
Bush "to develop and implement a plan to begin the immediate withdrawal 
of U.S. armed forces from Iraq. Led by Rep. Lynn Woolsey and about 30 
other Democrats, the Party can at least take this modest step.

Or they can hold Senator John W. Warner (R-VA), Senator John McCain 
(R-AZ) and Senator Lindsey O. Graham (R-SC) to their strong 
determination last year to hold anyone culpable for torture at Abu 
Ghraib and other prisons accountable, no matter how senior. Torture 
policies, lack of proper supervision from the top of the Bush regime, 
ignoring information brought to their attention by human rights groups 
have ranged from Guantanemo to Iraq to Afghanistan, repeated 
documentation demonstrates. This is a no-fault, out of control Bush 
government. Yet the Democratic Party sleeps.

Still, is ABC's excuse wholly understandable? Can't this and other 
networks do much more to investigate what has been going on and then ask 
the Democrats when they interview them about their findings? Can't the 
networks provide more coverage to the conflict represented by the 
dissenting military families, by the coalitions of labor, religious, 
civic, veterans and other groups (see Veteransforpeace.org and 
DemocracyRising.US).

These same networks certainly did not show such inhibitions when they 
went out of their way day after day to hoopla the coming invasion of 
Iraq and not question the unsupported claims for going to war by Bush, 
Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell. The networks in varying decrees were 
either cheerleaders or ditto machines.

Passing the buck can be very costly to the American people's right to 
know - in time.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20050516/73bd8fa6/attachment.htm