cannabisnews.com: Land Of The Free?





Land Of The Free?
Posted by FoM on September 24, 2001 at 13:44:53 PT
By Arianna Huffington
Source: Arianna On Line
Since Sept. 11, we've been told again and again that our failure to act in a certain way would be the moral equivalent of allowing the terrorists to win. As in: "If we don't get back to work, they win"; or "If we don't go ahead and play football this weekend, they win"; or "If this changes the way we think about Arab-Americans, they win." And, in a way, it's true -- few us of are going to be fighting the battle on the ground in Afghanistan, but there are ways in which we can all do our part. 
Ways that include resolutely defending values that define our country. But just as this new military battleground is going to be complicated and risky, so, too, is the one at home. And in the last few days, there is one front where it appears that our enemies might be winning: the First Amendment. To the extent that we give up our fundamental freedoms of expression and dissent, then, yes, "they" have clearly won. One of those battles is going on right now. It involves Bill Maher, who has been excoriated for what he said on "Politically Incorrect" last week. But excoriation -- a valuable form of free speech -- is not a problem. Censorship is. Aren't "they" winning when three ABC affiliates, including the Washington, D.C., station, cancel the show? Aren't "they" winning when networks cave in to rabble-rousing, self-promoting radio shock jocks like Dan Patrick from Houston who started this tempest in a teapot, and who midweek called the show to suggest himself as a guest? And aren't "they" winning when major sponsors like Federal Express and Sears put a higher price on their corporate image than on the essential democratic ingredient of free speech by pulling their ads? These companies have no problems defending capitalism, but they shrink from defending the values that make it possible. When the country just learned with such penetrating anguish what real terror is, how can the corporate logo polishers fear Bill Maher? Particularly when the point he was making was such an important one. So what, exactly, was his point? In response to guest Dinesh D'Souza's assertion that people who are willing to die in service to their cause, whatever else they may be, are not "cowards," Maher said: "We have been the cowards lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That's cowardly." I was sitting next to Bill when he said this. And not only did I not object, I wholeheartedly agreed. In fact, in the past, I've made much the same criticism of a foreign policy that obliges our military to fight at great remove from the theater of battle. It was a mistake when we bombed a pharmaceutical factory in the Sudan, and it was a mistake when we killed the very Albanian refugees we were trying to protect with our indiscriminate carpet-bombing of Kosovo. President Bush, himself, has been making much the same point that Bill Maher did: "It will not look like the air war above Kosovo two years ago, where no ground troops were used and not a single American was lost in combat." Presumably, if Maher had made those same comments on Sept. 10, nobody would have batted an eyelid. But by uttering the same opinion seven days later, he put the very existence of his show at risk. Have we all gone mad? What becomes of a country when opinions considered perfectly legitimate -- and indeed uttered by hundreds of academics, journalists and members of Congress -- suddenly become a crime worthy of the media death penalty? If the attacks on innocent American lives end up making us more like our attackers, don't they most spectacularly win? And don't the corporate sponsors, the affiliates and ABC itself see the inconsistency in the fact that, as a way of showing solidarity against the Taliban, they are using the Taliban's trademark weapon -- the stifling of dissent? Isn't freedom what we're fighting for? And isn't lack of freedom -- including freedom of the press -- the hallmark of our enemies? "Cowardly" was the injurious word uttered by Maher. Well, let me use it now where it really belongs -- to describe ABC if it decides to cancel a show that is, after all, called "Politically Incorrect." The show in question was the first since the attack. At curtain time, the studio was electric with anxiety. "Politically Incorrect," though it deals with serious subjects, is, after all, a satirical program. So we all held our breath as Bill stepped onto the tightrope. Maher's tone-setting opening comments, which took the place of his usual monologue, were nothing short of brilliant and -- in light of the media firestorm that followed -- remarkably prescient. "I do not relinquish," he said, "nor should any of you, the right to criticize, even as we support, our government. This is still a democracy, and they're still politicians ... Political correctness itself is something we can no longer afford. Feelings are gonna get hurt so that actual people won't, and that will be a good thing." At the end of the show, the audience rose in a standing ovation -- something I had never seen before. As well as being the host of the show, Bill is my friend. And, as his friend, I was really proud of him. Proud of how perfect a note he had struck between rallying around the flag, showing grief and expressing dissent. How he had shown that they are not mutually contradictory. And everything that has happened since has only made me prouder of him -- and more disgusted at the politically correct cowards who are trying to stifle him. We cannot let them succeed, for, as Benjamin Franklin put it, "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech." Newshawk: ddddSource: Arianna On Line (CA)Author: Arianna HuffingtonPublished: September 24, 2001 Copyright: 1998-2001 Christabella, Inc.Contact:  arianna ariannaonline.comWebsite: http://www.ariannaonline.com/Related Article & Web Site:Politically Incorrecthttp://abc.go.com/primetime/politicallyincorrect/Bill Maher was Right http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10945.shtmlCivil Liberties and the Hill http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10940.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #14 posted by FoM on September 26, 2001 at 21:39:49 PT
Murple
That's good to read. They didn't take PI off the air on DTV. They went on air with no sponsors. Bill Maher thanked ABC for their stand. They did get a sponsor but Bill Maher didn't know it until they went to the first break. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by Murple on September 26, 2001 at 20:48:37 PT
Update
An update... The ABC station in DC has put P.I. back on the air. Thanks to all who wrote in and called!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by Poisoned1528Days on September 26, 2001 at 09:48:49 PT
not cowardly, freedon of spe
Seems like there are two issues here:
 1) Cowardly actions
 2) Freedon of speech1) Its quite possible that cruise missles
are not cowardly. The president's tools
are quite limited. Body bags can quickly
kill any military initiative. Cruise missles
may have been the only tool available. He
had to respond to a provocation and perhaps
did so to make the hawks happy without 
getting any of our guys killed. And we really
do not know why that target was chosen. CIA
had to know something.2) Far more important - Freedon of speech. 
Arianna is right on. In fact she is so
on she is positively Gulliver's Travelsesque
in what she said without saying it. Especially
that last paragraph.And thanks for the John Prine reference. I
will have to cjheck that out!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by Doug on September 25, 2001 at 15:53:31 PT
John Prine
Relavant here, the first John Prine song I ever heard, and probably the first most people heard, that was sung by him: Illegal Smile.You can see me tonight with an illegal smile
It don't cost very much but lasts a long while
Please tell the Man I didn't kill anyone
I'm just trying to have me some funAside from the dated 'it don't cost very much' these lyrics are still timely.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by the lioness on September 25, 2001 at 05:16:33 PT
Mr. greengenes
Love John Prine!!!!  So many people never heard of him. And yes that song really holds some meaning now.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by dddd on September 25, 2001 at 00:37:24 PT
PBS...
PBS,,has become more and more corporate subsidized,along with NPR.A large amount of programming on PBS,is taken up by grotesque children shows,,and if you think about it,there is not much "public" about it!Do we hear the voice of dissent on PBS?..Do you think that even the most polite and cleaned up version of "The dddd Show",would have a chance of being broadcast,without funding from Verizon,or ADM?..Do you suppose the Annenburg CPB project would consider funding opposing viewpoints,,Thje only way you would have a chance of getting on PBS,,is if you cleverly disguised the show as a quilting,or sewing and painting show...."The New World of Quilting and Painting",,with your host 4d........Your comments are excellent,and I agree Cannabis Dave,,,but I dont think PBS is quite as publicly user friendly as you seem to think....What is the public interest in kiddy shows?Why should there be publicly subsidized kiddy shows?Puppet Broadcasting Sham
Probably Bought by Sears
Public Bull Sh*tPBS,is little more than a branch of the propaganda machine,that has been largely rendered harmless by corporate sponsorship,and too many kiddy shows....dddd
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by CongressmanSuet on September 24, 2001 at 23:26:03 PT:
Cannabis Dave...
 BRAVO! Those are my thoughts exactly.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by Murple on September 24, 2001 at 18:52:52 PT:
Contact
Please take a moment to write to the DC area ABC station, which has pulled Politically Incorrect from their line-up. You can send a comment to them at the following web site. For Department, select "ABC7 Programming" or "ABC7 General Manager" and politely ask them to stop censoring this show.">http://www.wjla.com/getcontent.hrb?s=contact">
http://www.wjla.com/getcontent.hrb?s=contactYou can also contact them by phone at (202) 364-7777.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by Cannabis Dave on September 24, 2001 at 18:12:22 PT
The CIA controls all the major media - right?
I thought it was common knowledge that the CIA controls all major media? I wasn't aware of the situation with Bill Maher until reading this, but I totally agree with what he said and am not surprised at the response by the networks. Maybe he should switch to PBS so he can speak his mind in the future? Hopefully the CIA doesn't have too much influence on PBS programming. I keep hearing Bush say we have "hard evidence" against the terrorist organizations we are going to "war" against, but now he says it's "top secret" so he can't show us the proof. Do they REALLY have "hard evidense", or are they just going to war for the sake of the military industrial complex and the international energy conglomerates? Did they really know a big terrorist attack was coming and do nothing about it to take the heat off the administration for the current economic resession? I used to think Bush didn't have any chance of getting re-elected next time considering he "stole" the last election, but now his chances look much better. This whole tragic terrorist episode helps Bush ENORMOUSLY, so I can't help but wonder if he planned on the outcome. I don't mean to say they knew the WTC and Pentagon (etc.) in particular were going to be hit, but it sure seems like they knew a major terrorist attack was going to happen, and they didn't do much to try and stop it. Look at how fast the notoriously inefficient FBI is moving on this case now - it seems like they must have already had a lot of information before it happened. I sure would like to see the "hard evidence" they have against Bin Ladin. We should have continued negotiating with the Taliban rather than issuing the ultimatum they couldn't accept. All they asked for was proof - that was reasonable. Bush is forcing them into a war, and Bin Ladin is making it look like a "crusade" against Islamic people now. Bush seems to be playing right into his hands - surely the terrorists knew their attack would lead to a retalliation/war. If he sends ground troops to fight the Taliban it will be a big mistake, but that seems to be the direction this is heading. Terrorism can't be stopped, just as drugs can't be stopped, and the only way to deal with those problems is at the SOURCE. We must end the conditions that breed terrorism and drug addiction, or they will never be stopped. They can never be stopped completely, but by using harm reduction tactics we could make them managable. The problem is that our government uses tactics that benefit big business at the expense of human life and the environments health. Here we go into the 21st century with the same psychos in control - God help us all!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by mr greengenes on September 24, 2001 at 17:03:11 PT
Blast from the past
A john Prine song from 1972 that may become popular again in these uncertain times.Your Flag Decal Won't Get You Into Heaven Anymore
© John Prine While digesting Reader's Digest
In the back of a dirty book store,
A plastic flag, with gum on the back,
Fell out on the floor.
Well, I picked it up and I ran outside
Slapped on my window shield,
And if I could see old Betsy Ross
I tell her how good I feel.Chorus:
But your flag decal won't get you
Into Heaven any more.
They're already overcrowded
From your dirty little war.
Now Jesus don't like killin'
No matter what the reason's for,
And your flag decal won't get you
Into Heaven any more. Well, I went to the bank this morning
And the cashier he said to me,
"If you join the Christmas club
We'll give you ten of them flags for free."
Well, I didn't mess around a bit
I took her up on what he said.
And I stuck them stickers all over my car
And one on my wife's forehead.Repeat Chorus:Well, I got my window shield so filled
With flags I couldn't see.
So, I ran the car upside a curb
And right into a tree.
By the time they got a doctor down
I was already dead.
And I'll never understand why the man
Standing in the Pearly Gates said...But your flag decal won't get you
Into Heaven any more.
We're already overcrowded
From your dirty little war.
Now Jesus don't like killin'
No matter what the reason's for,
And your flag decal won't get you
Into Heaven any more. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Silent_Observer on September 24, 2001 at 16:31:58 PT
Its time to..
think Libertarian in a BIG way..
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by xxdr_zombiexx on September 24, 2001 at 15:46:28 PT:
FREEDOM of SPEECH
In 1988 there was a summit Meeting proposed at the UN: the UNGASS, or United Nations General Assembly on Substance abuse.The conference was called by Mexico as they were having a terrible time trying to do what America demands they do. Theyw anted to discuss other strategies for dealing with "drugs".This conference was essentially hijacked and turned into a giant cheerleading event for the war on drugs. The Prom Theme was "A Drug-Free World - We can do it!". Yay team.I watched this even rather closely and focused on this man named Pino Arlacchi, a high-powered judicial-type who reportedly took down a sizable portion of organized crime in Italy. He was the head of this function, possibly the UN "drug czar": if there was such a thing. It was largley his suggestion that was endorsed by all present that "countries with free-speech policies review them" in order to begin to limit dissent in the war on drugs. Certainly this could not have included the USA, could it? we have a xconstitution! we have rights... don't we??I dont watch TV so I have not seen or actually heard anybody talk about the incident with Mr. Maher. I do gather he made a point that we bomb people, poorly, from afar yet call others cowards. I agree and I understand. It is our Politicians that are the cowards. The guys on the front line don't get to make the decisions: the fault is that of the Politicians.Politics hates what Maher did: express a genuine point effectively AND on national television. Televison makes things "real" If you seen it on the TV it musta been right. right?The Justice Departemnt is scrambling to ram through a set of laws granting them dangerous power over americans under the rube of "maintaining national security". Relaxations of laws, tolerance of unconstitutional activities ostensibly for pursuit of terrorists will immmediately be put to use against americans that smoke cannabis. Numerous bad things will come out of these acts. Ashcroft is the wrong person to hand above-the-law kinds of powers: most of the people in office dont need the power they have. And we dont need any new laws!We need to properly enforce the ones we already have. Thats why we're in this mess to begin with.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by E_Johnson on September 24, 2001 at 14:30:57 PT
But some were brought in chains
We all immigrated here. Only the time differed. All except for that slavery thing...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Ethan Russo MD on September 24, 2001 at 14:16:51 PT:
Real Americans
I wonder how much hate mail Arianna will receive claiming that she is not a real American due to her foreign birth.Guess again, knee-jerk reactionaries. We all immigrated here. Only the time differed. I applaud the Arianna's and Bill Maher's of the world that speak their minds. There is nothing more American than that. If that right and privilege is lost, it will really be the time to look for a better place. It should never be allowed to happen.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment