A needed step - but with caution

Submitted by David B. Aronin (United States), Aug 4, 2005 at 12:32

Quite a dilemma. On the one hand the common-sense understandings that in most similar circumstances - up until the second half of the Vietnam War and Watergate - imbued most media professionals and politicians with self-imposed restraint, so as not to convey information, or deliver stringing public critique that any child could understand to be detrimental to national security in time of war - seems to have largely disappeared - replaced by a culture of relentless and unbridled opposition, the notion of journalists as "neutral observers, and fair critics" rather than as active participants in national struggles, and an unthinking devotion to a ethic of multi-cultural internationalism, from within which any notion of traditional patriotism is seen as a form of mental disorder - at best.

Which state-of-affairs leave little hope that those in the media will "...On their own initiative ... exclude the enemy's apologists and advocates." Hopefully though they can still be intimidated into such policies by loud and ongoing expressions of public anger and disgust focused on the clear role failure to do so has in swelling enemy ranks, discouraging potential allies, and contributing to the tally of American and Coalition casualties, as well as those innocent civilians caught in the cross-fires.

This is much preferable to the need for real governmental censorship - which would normally be simply as common-sense measure in wartime - as, the last forty years has shown that any inch of leverage in the direction towards suppression of political expression via actual regulation - regardless of how narrowly crafted or well-intended - can and will be used by this very same happy band of left-wing totalitarians, jihadists and their sympathizers, as a weighted club with which to suppress expressions of any views other than their own - if they have any chance at all to do so. And anyone dubious of the actual potential for the those people to have that opportunity need to ask themselves "WWHD?" - "What Will Hillary Do?" And yes, it is perfectly feasible that someone from the left may actually act as a Hawk on the war - while using powers obtained for such to suppress everything from opposition to Affirmative Action, to home schooling, and Biblical quotations against actions there labelled as immoral. A sad state of affairs.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".