In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together.
Page Not FoundWe need to be united in the fight against fascism and repression.
In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together. |
||
Page Not FoundWe need to be united in the fight against fascism and repression.
In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together. |
||
Page Not FoundWe need to be united in the fight against fascism and repression.
In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together. |
||
Page Not FoundWe need to be united in the fight against fascism and repression.
In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together.
War is peace. Now we know.
It's only going to get worse.
The Metaphysical Club
U.N. diplomats give Bush a blank check.
Next Stop, Southeast Asia?
The United States may have a new target.
Nation building vs. globalization.
Anthrax is bad, but smallpox is worse — much worse.
At the Gates of Power.
I cannot find the glory in this day.
Patriots and scoundrels.
Appall-o-Meter
Israel's Labor Party is silenced as violence erupts.
Bush administration hawks want to deploy "mini-nukes" against Osama bin Laden.
Under cover of war, the Bush administration pushes for fast track.
Freddy Falls
Green takes the runoff amid charges of race-baiting and miscounted votes.
Crude Justice
Ecuadorian Indians fight Texaco with U.S. tort law.
Punitive Measures
Suffering in solitary confinement.
ART: William Kentridge's animated politics.
Gun Crazy
BOOKS: The story of Arming America.
|
October 26, 2001
At The Gates Of Power
In These Times is not a legitimate media outlet, or so says Mark Abraham
of the Photographers’ Gallery on Capitol Hill. In September, he denied
photographer Jeremy Bigwood press credentials because one of his letters of
reference was from In These Times, which, according to Abraham, was “too
editorial.” In These Times does take editorial positions. And yes, In These Times
reporters present a point of view, but so do their mainstream counterparts.
It’s just the agendas that are different. And yes, we are outraged at being
excluded by Congress’ media gatekeepers. On the other hand, we can’t help but take that rejection as a backhanded
compliment. In These Times stands out these days because the for-profit
media has been so uniformly gung-ho in endorsing the Bush administration’s
wartime strategies. Indeed, if this magazine were serving up what now passes
for news, we would not be living up to our mission to provide “an accessible
forum for debate about the public policies that shape our future.” No public
policy will shape our future, and that of our children, more than how the administration
responds to the threat posed by Islamic extremists. A united front is helpful in time of war. But when that front is being constructed
by the same officials who oppose the Kyoto treaty on global warming, who have
tried to scuttle the International Criminal Court and who, through the feint
“economic stimulus,” give the rich huge tax breaks (did someone say
war profiteers?), we must turn a critical eye to the strategies being proposed—and
blindly endorsed by the mainstream media under the banner of national unity. Where in the media is an ongoing debate over U.S. policies that have fueled
anger across the Islamic world? The sanctions and air strikes against Iraq have
contributed to a humanitarian disaster that in the past 11 years has taken more
than a million lives. These sanctions are needed, the U.S. government claims,
to prod Iraq into compliance with U.N. resolutions. The United States has no
corresponding compunction against Israel’s refusal to comply with U.N.
Security Council resolutions, supported by the United States, that call on Israel
to dismantle its settlements and then withdraw from the territories it occupied
during the 1967 War. Further, would it be too much to expect the media to explore the implications
posed by casualty figures of the Palestinian Intifada. The Israeli Information
Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories reports that from September
29, 2000 to October 23, 2001, Israel security forces killed 603 Palestinians,
including 492 civilians (40 of whom were extrajudicially executed) and 106 members
of Palestinian security forces, while Israeli citizens killed 11 Palestinians.
In the same period, Palestinian security forces killed eight members of Israeli
security forces, while Palestinian civilians killed 165 Israelis, including
125 civilians and 40 members of Israeli security forces. Though all the deaths are tragic, the situations of the combatants are hardly
parallel. On one side, the armed forces of a democratic state supported with
billions of dollars in U.S. aid are doing the killing. On the other, the killing
is committed by terrorists who operate outside the control of the Palestinian
National Authority. Yet the Bush administration has been hesitant to condemn the Israeli military
attacks on the Occupied Territories, much less endorse the Palestinian struggle
for independence or demand the dismantlement of Israeli settlements—a stance
that is endorsed, indeed encouraged, by the mainstream press. Many in the Islamic world believe that U.S. policies put little value on Muslim
lives—a perception not easily refuted. Add the bombing of Afghanistan,
which has already taken civilian lives, and one can make a case that Osama bin
Laden is only the beginning. All of which raises obvious questions about the
wisdom of current U.S. policy—questions that have yet to be granted a hearing
by those members of the press deemed worthy of congressional press credentials.
|
|
In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together.
