15 February 2005

Freedom of the Press or Responsibility?

Ah, this is a brainteaser. The Bushites are taking a page straight out of Hitlers diary: terror will always suceed unless opposed by equal or greater terror [Mein Kampf]. The Bush regime has systematically punished with full force anyone that even slightly speaks poorly about their performance, direction, leadership, in fact anything that casts them in their true dingy light. The nazis were masters at this game, which helps to explain why they climbed to power with such a small percentage of popular support before they seized power and brought Germany to dictatorship. We all saw dozens of high profile examples of the Bush regime illegitimately attacking its foes in a dirty game last year.

Now, enter Joseph Wilson, a former diplomat who was highly critical of Bush and his starch collared cronies. Mysteriously, the name of his wife, an undercover CIA agent, was leaked to the press shortly after publication of his book. Hmm, coincidence? By the way, his book exposed the fact that there was never any Uranium from africa being sent to Saddam Hussein, and Bush knew this when he claimed it to be true in his push to war in Iraq.

Now heres the brainteaser, I've always believed that the press need to have the right to protect their sources, lest they become mere tools of government propaganda (like Fox News has). But when neocons in the Bush regime or its supporters pull some crap like this, weakening our countries position for a political vendetta, should those sources be named? I dont know how to answer this question, but I do know one thing for sure, the Bush camp knows how to exploit the cracks in the system with a dangerous efficiency. You can read a short article on this at the BBC News.