Say a Bad Thing? Film for days! Publish nuke secrets? No biggie.
[Final version, I promise. I normally wouldn't do an edited repost like this, but the expansion of technical details makes it worth it. Sorry, gang!]
Even-handed treatment? We report, you decide. ;) Compare these two stories, both "covered" this week:
1. John Kerry says A Bad Thing
-- either (a) making a joke about Bad-Student Bush sticking us
in Iraq, or (b) suggesting that bad students might soon end up
in Iraq (which latter happens to be true, of course, and don't think servicepeople don't know it, but never mind that now).Kerry apologizes. It's still a three day story
(four, if you count my just hearing it again yesterday on NPR).
Bet you'd heard about that story. How 'bout this one:
2. Turns out back in March the Bush administration and its GOP allies publicly posted weapons secrets (adding, in recent weeks, previously secret nuclear triggering data) on the internet, where terrorists or rogue states could find and use them...and invited everyone who happens to be online to come check 'em out.
*No apology, of course. While mentioned, the whole thing is practically a non-event.
When the New York Times
bestirs itself to at least note that it happened:http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/04/world/middleeast/04nuke.html
the GOP attacks the Times
. I mean, what are they trying to do?! Help the terrorists?! -- i.e., more than the administration and GOP helped them already by publicly posting nuclear secrets for them on the internet?
I swear to God, the next person who tells me the media have a bias toward the Dems is getting covered in day-glo Silly String. I totally mean it. ;) ***
93 93/93 -- AJ
* Yes, that IS what I mean. In the effort to prove that Saddam Hussein had some kind of ongoing weapons program, the Administration and GOP Intelligence (sic) Committee leaders -- over the objections of John Negroponte, their own Intel czar, and even admitting
it was risky -- posted scads of unreviewed weapons-related documents publicly on the web, and invited
everyone with a computer and modem to study them to see whether they contained anything dangerous. In April the despised international types at the IAEA begged them to take down some specific chemical weapons documents, which they did...but they also kept adding new items (like the September "how to build and trigger a nuke" stuff). They've finally taken the site down, now, after eight months...but surely I'm not the only one who finds this troubling? (I just keep hearing Kim Jong-Il or Iran's Achmedinejad writing a thank-you note to Shrubby: "Dear Mr. President: Bitchen Cliff's Notes, dude! Major props!"
** The second GOP riposte (after "Oh, no! You just told terrorists how we helped them!") was "Oh, everyone knew those secrets already" -- a flat lie, per a weapons scientist interviewed on MSNBC. The third (and my personal favorite), was a clever subject-changer: "Well, hey, this proves Saddam WAS a threat!, 'cause they were HIS documents!" Of course he was, at least regionally...in 1990
. After 1991, he ended his nuclear program. Nice try, though. :/
*** I mean, think about it. Picture Bill Clinton and the Dems POSTING NUCLEAR SECRETS ON THE INTERNET, and INVITING PEOPLE TO TROLL THROUGH THEM TO SEE WHETHER THEY'RE DANGEROUS
. Do you honestly think it would have been considered impolite to dwell on that fact? Or have you already forgotten the likes of "Travelgate," in addition to that infamous beejay impeachment...?Anyway, remember, kids: this coming Tuesday, November 7, please vote for the party that doesn't give free nuke instructions to terrorists.
I mean, if that's not too much to ask. :/