Thursday, May 27, 2004
Please Don't Disturb the Ostriches
The para below comes as the second in the above quoted article -- Opinion Journal WSJ. I thought it so remarkable that it deserved mention in and of itself.We realize that even raising this subject now is politically incorrect.
And that is, of course, the first and most fundamental priority of a national news organ dissemination instrument -- never to disturb the prejudices of its readers.
It is an article of faith among war opponents that there were no links whatsoever--that "secular" Saddam and fundamentalist Islamic terrorists didn't mix.
Unless, maybe, one looks at the history of the fundamentalist Islamist movement after the fall of the Caliphate and the Ottoman Empire, the Pan-Arab movement after WWI and the origins of the Ba'athist Party [Resistance Party]...
But John Ashcroft's press conference yesterday reminds us that the terror threat remains, ...
You had forgotten ... I see.
...and it seems especially irresponsible for journalists not to be open to new evidence.
"Especially Irresponsible" Boy, that oughta be carved over the door of every journalism school -- "it is especially irresponsible not to be open to new evidence when your country's people are under threat of death -- otherwise, ah whatever..."
If the CIA was wrong about WMD, couldn't it have also missed Saddam's terror links?
Well, ok. It's a shift. As someone recently said, ya gotta take people as you find them. My Pollyanna-mind wants very much to believe that the press, conscious of the growing weight of evidence, is about to pull a Jerry Brown and run out in front of the trend, pretending it was their idea all along. My Reality-mind says, "come off it, dear, and go scrub the bathroom." ThanQ! Jud Spangler [West Chester PA] for the title -- it was just too good not to nick!
Statistics
This page has been viewed 18346542 times
Total Entries: 5718
Total Comments: 4193
Total Trackbacks: 714
Most Recent Entry: 06/14/2011 06:44 am
Most Recent Comment on: 11/27/2011 05:18 pm
{/if}
