Replies

The time and money -- not to mention the news-media overkill -- spent on historical hindsight by the 9-11 commission is worthwhile because it is aimed at understanding why the system in place was unable to prevent the tragedy. Yet it is just as important to think about the present and what the lack of a repeat incident says about the future.
Obviously, a similar public investigation into why nothing has happened would be impractical, given the hypothetical nature of the whole exercise.

A fine article, but IMHO the first paragraph above is negated by the last two. In fact, "the news-media overkill spent on historical hindsight by the 9-11 commission" is NOT worthwhile because it is aimed, NOT at "understanding why the system in place was unable to prevent the tragedy," but at second guessing the Bush Administration.

This is obvious in the composition of the Coverup Commission:

members such as Bob Kerry are institutionally disposed to protect Democrats in Congress
members such as Slade Gordon who are institutionally disposed to protect Republicans in Congress
members such as Gorelick and ben Veniste who are institutionally disposed toe protect the Clinton Administration
no members who are institutionally disposed to protect the Bush Administration.
And that expresses itself in demands for public testimony by Bush Administration officials such as Rice and (though even more so than Rice, he extracted a price) Ashcroft, which turn into shouting matches because ben Veniste in particular and Democrats in general patently have the knives out.
And that expresses itself in the fatuous defense by Kean of the indefensible composition of "his" committee. The Gorelick Commission contains the "Number 2" ("Number 1" having been a figurehead) in the Clinton Justice Department. A person who, as Ashcroft's testimony makes clear, would be the single best witness for the committee to grill under oath.
The Gorelick Commission is constructed not to produce a reliable history but to perpetrate objective journalism^TM. To produce, that is, fodder for reports which are wise ("objective") in their authors' own conceit but in fact are heavily slanted against the middle class which the Republican Party represents. No less obviously than the questions of the "objective" reporters in the recent press conference were intended to produce a sound bite for the Kerry campaign.
No attacks in U.S. since 9-11: Why?
Orlando Sentinel ^ | 4/16/04 | Peter Brown

Several of Gorelick's colleagues on the commission rushed to her defense, characterizing her as qualified and nonpartisan

Here is how the Gorelick directive describes itself:

These procedures, which go beyond what is legally required, will prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation.

. . . and all this profile in courage cost was four airliners, the twin towers, a wing of the Pentagon, three thousand lives, and a Depression in the airline industry.

"The September 11 Commission" is structured to protect Congress in general and the Democrats therein in particular and, with ben Veniste and especially Gorelick on it, emphatically to protect the Clinton Administration in particular. Notwithstanding the zero-sum nature of the blame to be distributed, a group which is loaded against attacks on the Clinton Administration has no member who is an obvious loyalist of the Bush Administration.

It is no accident that the slant of the commission is exactly the slant we observed in the questioning by "objective journalists" at the recent presidential news conference, since the political coloration of objective journalism^TM drove the composition and indeed the very creation of the commission.

That political coloration is hostility to individual responsibility. That political coloration is expressed as hostility to the party which represents the class which is defined by the individual responsibility of its members. the political coloration of objective journalism^TM is hostility to the middle class and to its political manifestation known as the Republican Party.

The political coloration of objective journalism^TM is betrayed by its insistence that it has no political coloration at all - that its members have no individual responsibility for their own viewpoints and indeed that its members have no viewpoint.

Liberal Bias: The Media Deny It, But What About...
HumanEvents ^ | 4/15/04 | Chris Field

7 Principles of Media Objectivity

How can readers discern the truth between the lines? Listed here are common methods employed by the media -- intentionally or not -- to influence public opinion. By being aware of these methods, we can avoid becoming a pawn in the media war.

Here are the "7 Violations of Media Objectivity":

Violation #1 Misleading definitions and terminology.
By using terminology and definitions in a way that implies accepted fact, the media injects bias under the guise of objectivity.

Violation #2 Imbalanced reporting.
Media reports frequently skew the picture by presenting only one side of the story.

Violation #3 Opinions disguised as news.
An objective reporter should not use adjectives or adverbs, unless they are part of a quotation. Also, the source for any facts and opinions should be clear from the report, or alternatively it should be stated that source is intentionally undisclosed.

Violation #4 Lack of context.
By failing to provide proper context and full background information, journalists can dramatically distort the true picture.

Violation #5 Selective omission.
By choosing to report certain events over others, the media controls access to information and manipulates public sentiment.

Violation #6 Using true facts to draw false conclusions.
Media reports frequently use true facts to draw erroneous conclusions.

Violation #7 Distortion of facts.
In today's competitive media world, reporters frequently do not have the time, inclination or resources to properly verify information before submitting a story for publication.

See Media Ethics
http://www.people.vcu.edu/~jcsouth/hotlists/ethics.htm

http://www.aish.com/Israel/articles/7_Principles_of_Media_Objectivity_p.asp