 |
 |
words
latest musings
top ten
nasty past
contact sfh
facebook |
 In times like these, you will read pious, aphoristic moralizing wherever you happen to be. You cannot escape it. And, in times like these, there is no more sententious sentiment than that of the California Governor and Senator, Hiram W. Johnson. You know the one: The first casualty when war comes is truth. The departed Senator, a Progressive, did many things of note during his passage through public life, but none have become as ubiquitous as that pithy maxim - which is hauled out, dusted off, and parroted by media pundits whenever the storm clouds of war are looming overhead. Most often, the commentariat use Senator Johnsons observation as a club with which to beat an adversary. The medias chosen adversary, in this case, is Prime Minister Jean Chretien. Having failed to vanquish him - or persuade the Canadian people - with picayune fantasies like APEC, HRDC and Shawinigate, the Prime Ministers detractors have gleefully seized upon a new legerdemain. And that is the governments shameful and scandalous conduct in the newest war, the one against terrorism. Having written an entire book on the subject some years ago, it comes as a delightful surprise to me that so many terrorism/military/foreign policy experts are employed by the nations newspaper editorial boards. If one is to take seriously anything that these exceedingly clever strategic analysts have to say, it is necessary that one accept the following as a truism: namely, Canada aspires to be a military superpower, possessing all the resources necessary to crush Osama bin Laden and his ilk in a single afternoon. How else to explain the fulminations of popular columnist Rosie DiManno, who recently tilted at this and other windmills. Declared Ms. DiManno: Ours is a toy army, a Dinky-toy army, and deliberately rendered so. I do not recall an instance, ever, of the newspaper that her employs Ms. DiManno - the Toronto Star - lending its support to unbridled militarization, but perhaps I missed that edition. Another canard making the rounds, these days, is that Mr. Chretien has not done nearly enough in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks. The National Posts Christie Blatchford, another gifted writer, therefore likened the Prime Minister to a social worker, and called him (or Canada) tepid, confusing and squishy. It would be easy to dismiss that sort of criticism as standard Post anti-Liberal fare, were it not for the fact that others have opined similarly. No mention was made in Ms. Blatchfords piece about the governments Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which even her newspapers chosen political hobby-horse, the Canadian Alliance, has previously condemned for being too tough. No mention, either, of the freezing of the assets of terrorist groups. No mention of changes to the Charities Registration Act, to halt the funding of terrorists by front organizations. No mention of the $1.5 billion received by the RCMP, CSIS, Canada Customs and Citizenship in the most-recent federal budget. No, none of that, because it is does not fit the thesis of the moment - and because the Prime Minister is not the Northern Barry Goldwater longed for by Ms. Blatchford and the Post. Another piece of sophistry wending its way through the editorial pages is this one, offered up (surprisingly) by the Globe and Mails Edward Greenspon: to wit, the Prime Minister has been highly conditional in his support for the United States. Is that so? President George W. Bush, who can be fairly regarded as someone qualified to speak on behalf of the U.S., calls Canada the brother of his nation. I am reliably informed, in fact, that the President - having been briefed about the dissembling being done in the Canadian media, and by the Canadian political opposition - was livid that anyone could suggest, with a straight face, that Canada has been anything less than resolute in its support. He accordingly insisted on publicly condemning the criticism, and did so. There is more, of course: on September 11, the Prime Minister should have immediately summoned his War Cabinet (even if there is no such thing). The Prime Minister should have travelled to New York, in order that his picture could be taken (by the same media that would condemn him for his insensitivity in travelling to a gravesite to get his picture taken). The Prime Ministers staff has done a terrible job at public relations (source: an MP who, formerly, robbed banks). And so on and so on. The first casualties in this war, at least, are media context, balance and common sense. Truth, one assumes, will be killed off at a later date.
All contents copyright 2006 warrenkinsella.com. No reproduction whatsoever, in any form, without permission. |
|