Outis

The image above is a statistical representation of “the war” coverage Americans have seen over the last month on the nation’s two leading cable news networks.

According to CampaignDesk.org and TVEyes, “a searchable database of television news:”

“Iraq” has been uttered 2,270 times on CNN, while the word “Vietnam” has come up 778 times. That means for every three mentions of Iraq, there has been a mention of Vietnam.

Fox, meanwhile, is even more obsessed with Vietnam than CNN. The channel has mentioned Iraq 2,708 times in the past month, and Vietnam 1,486 times — that’s fewer than two Iraq mentions for every one mention of Vietnam.

Expressed as a ratio of air-time devoted to discussion of historical events vs. air-time devoted to present-day news:

Moreover, the above-cited data from TVEyes also indicates that both networks were about twice as likely to be discussing Kerry’s military service in Vietnam and not that of the President, who trained as a pilot for the Texas Air National Guard during that war.

Conservatives love to talk about the Liberal Media.

But, they hate to admit to the ways in which media bias works to their advantage.

Fortunately for the history books, talk is cheap.

Seeing is believing.

Postscript [9/30/2004]

Unless, of course, your eyes have been gouged out by our supreme leader.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced that his new war against Chechen separatists (yes, the ones who, like the Russians, target innocent men, women and children) will extend to foreign lands.

Putin has all but foretold a campaign where Russian agents will hunt, kidnap and then torture or execute individuals exiled or otherwise residing outside of the Russian republic.

Europe, Asia, Africa and the United States of America may now be sucked into Russia’s dirty civil war. Moreover, unlike liberal civil governments, Russia’s current regime, headed by a former KGB chief, has no aversion to such tactics as kidnapping and drugging its own journalists.

Of particular significance: Putin’s claim that his attempts to expand his personal authority at home and project it abroad, within a legal vacuum, is based on the “doctrine of pre-emption” first advanced by U.S. President George W. Bush.

While Americans may wish to believe that such gangsterism in a three-piece suit is a bad Russian knock-off of more noble U.S. tactics, they would do well to consider America’s own headless chicken run towards counter-productive tactics after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

For who, if not the President himself, approved of the U.S. kidnapping of two men living in Sweden and their subsequent torture by Egyptian henchmen?

Perhaps, excellent intelligence came of this possibly extra-judicial and ostensibly illiberal operation. Perhaps.

Perhaps not.

War is itself, dirty enough. A civilized power should not allow terrorists to force its hand into the gutter.

As it is, the U.S., along with other civilized nations, is bound by very few constraints on its ability to wage war, kidnap, assasinate and/or torture human beings it declares enemy combatants.

These constraints were created, often by warriors, over hundreds if not thousands of years and they exist in the name of the hundreds of millions of human beings who were slaughtered, crushed, maimed and debased by the violent campaigns of yesteryear.

These constraints, our sole claim to being the children — and not the enemy — of God and nature, are not to be tossed aside so carelessly for partisan political gains.

For the re-election of one man is not the measure of a nation just as one tactical victory is no guarantee against a strategic defeat.

postscript

And what is this thing democracy for which it is always worth sacrificing one’s own life? (Though not, I must add, by taking the lives of our brothers and sisters.)

Democracy is being able to run for office and not having to worry about being poisoned, literally, by the incumbent.

Democracy is not allowing a presidential campaign to write speeches for a foreign leader to deliver before the U.S. Congress.

You Can Run The Show…
But You Can’t Hide from History

To the murderers who wash their hands with political and ideological excuses, you will be cast aside by your own shadow.

Romero was fatally shot March 24, 1980, while celebrating Mass in a church in San Salvador, El Salvador’s capital. He was revered in El Salvador for speaking against human-rights abuses.

His death ignited international protests, making him an icon on par with Martin Luther King and Gandhi. Romero’s death was unsolved and no one had been held responsible or prosecuted. He is in the process of being canonized as a saint.

Salvadorans called the historic ruling a victory for victims of human rights abuses.

“I had my doubts, but I had more trust in the judicial system of the United States,” said Luis Melendez, president of the Fresno Salvadoran Community.

“It’s a huge step to eliminate inhumane acts so that those who are in power can’t continue to do this,” Melendez said in Spanish.

“It brings hope. It’s like I’m able to breathe again.”

History absolves no man for crimes against humanity. Not yesterday, not tomorrow.

In the years to come, Putin and Basayev will both be asked: how dare you kill innocents to settle your political disputes?

Whether the interrogators are living or dead, this question will resound through the tissue of creation, for life itself is the ultimate arbiter and justice is but a natural process.

Whether humankind will continue to carry the mantle or some other species learns to lift up its eyes in prayer makes no difference whatsoever.

postscript [10/1/2004]

Actually, it appears you can hide for a very long time in Latin America. Take note, boys. (Thanks, Ana)