SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JohnM who wrote (108511)7/28/2003 10:52:08 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
I never had heard of the BBC/Churchill standoff in the 30s.

Churchill Would Understand
by Carlos Ball - Tech Central Station

We often hear about the importance of the separation of power among the executive, the legislative, and the judiciary. But for the general welfare it is just as important to maintain a clear separation of government and the Fourth Estate, as Thomas Carlyle, the English 19th Century historian, called the press.



Dr. David Kelly, a 59-year-old scientist, was found dead on July 18 with his wrists slit. He was the British government's expert believed to be the source for the BBC's accusations against the Blair administration of having "sexed up" a government dossier on the threat from Iraq 's chemical and biological weapons. The BBC said that the source was from the intelligence services, and when that turned out to be false, some of the blame initially directed at Tony Blair shifted to the BBC.



A July 23 editorial in London's Daily Telegraph points out that "BBC journalism exhibits the same 'agenda-setting' mentality? The BBC's bias against the war led it into grotesque distortion of reality." History repeats itself. Winston Churchill's access to the radio broadcasting state monopoly in the 1930s was blocked by John Reith, the BBC director, who was an admirer of both Hitler and Mussolini. Radio broadcasting was then the only way Churchill could reach the masses and inform Britons about the growing Nazi threat. But Reith was an appeaser, like Prime Ministers Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlain. Reith wrote in his diary that the Nazis "would clean things up," and about Churchill: "I absolutely hate him." He must have turned in his grave when, last November, it was announced that Churchill was the winner of BBC's poll on the greatest Briton ever.



The BBC started as a private company with an exclusive license in 1922, and became a state broadcasting monopoly in 1927. According to historian A.J.P. Taylor, the arrangement suited both political parties: "Conservatives liked authority; Labour disliked private enterprise." Among the BBC apparatchiks it was considered in bad taste to talk about ratings. After all, it was they who defined what good taste meant in Britain. Since every TV set in the U.K. pays a tax that goes directly to the BBC, its income does not depend on viewers' acceptance or advertisers. BBC ceased to be a television monopoly in 1955 when a license was granted to Sidney Bernstein, a Socialist who launched Granada Television. Today, Britons can watch over 100 channels, but BBC's clout remains powerful.



The English poet John Milton wrote in defense of the free press in "Areopagitica", as far back as 1644, arguing for unlicensed printings and the free competition of ideas. In the U.S. , hundreds of successful penny dailies started publication in the early 1800's. But the British government kept economic control of the press until 1861. A tax on advertising (until 1853) and the newspaper stamp duty (discontinued in 1855) prevented a popular press from developing. The first mass circulation British newspaper, Daily Mail, was launched in 1896.



Walter Bagehot (1826-1877), editor of The Economist and one of the most influential journalists of his time, spoke of a natural weight of the different sections of public opinion, warning that once force is thrown into the balance it is a matter of chance whether it is thrown on the side of the false or the true result.



In the U.S. , both National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) enjoy the privilege of government support, and their programs are often accused of a leftist bias. But at least in this country, thanks to our Founding Fathers, we do not have government news agencies, like France's Agence France-Presse, Spain's Agencia EFE, and Mexico 's Notimex, nor the many other news services of Latin American countries that feed government propaganda to deceive their own people.



Just as a clear separation of Church and State ensures our freedom of religion, the non-involvement of the government and political parties in the media should be one of our top goals in the new century.



Mr. Ball is editor of AIPE, a Spanish-language news organization based in Florida, and an adjunct scholar with the Cato Institute.

techcentralstation.be



To: JohnM who wrote (108511)7/28/2003 11:18:10 AM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Absurd coup has a sting in the tail
By A Lin Neumann

Sunday's shopping-mall putsch in the Philippines gave us just what we have come to expect from the failed Philippine political system: absurdist entertainment.

Some 300 heavily armed soldiers stole through the night, apparently unnoticed despite a week of coup warnings preceding the event, seized the richest chunk of the capital city, cordoned off their prize with explosive charges and proceeded to hold forth on their gripes to a rapt television audience.

"We are not attempting to grab power - we are just trying to express our grievances," one of their leaders, Lieutenant Antonio Trillanes, told reporters as the group detailed alleged abuses of power and corruption in the ranks of the armed forces.

At the conclusion of this soap opera, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, on the eve of her annual State of the Nation address, asserted her claim to legitimacy and raised her hands in triumph, a broad smile on her face, when the rebellion ended. "I assure the world that this event does not in any way injure our national security and political stability," she said. "Once more, this has been a triumph for democracy."

Arroyo is dead wrong in saying the country's stability was not hurt. This replay of the many coup attempts against the Corazon Aquino government in the 1980s is more than just made-for-TV melodrama. It is a demonstration that, at its core, the Philippines seems to be a country that remains unreliable, unstable and, very possibly, ungovernable.

This latest fiasco comes just two weeks after convicted terrorist Fathur Rohman al-Ghozi, said to be a key link to al-Qaeda, walked out of a Manila jail cell apparently unnoticed by his sleeping guards. That a major terror figure jailed by a key US ally could simply stroll away from captivity pointed to the porous nature of the corrupt Philippine security apparatus and was a major embarrassment to both Manila and Washington.

The shopping-center stare-down is more than an embarrassment. Arroyo's government is reaping the whirlwind sown by its own popularly backed successful coup against the corrupt, but lawfully elected, regime of her predecessor, Joseph Estrada. That event, in January 2001, saw a coalition of political, church and military leaders short-circuit a stalled impeachment process by seizing power in the streets with military support to install then-vice president Arroyo in power. Estrada remains in jail on corruption charges.

Arroyo loyalists seemed to worry on Sunday that this coup could catch fire and depose their boss. "So far the situation is in hand," a senior intelligence official told Asia Times Online by telephone during the Sunday crisis. "But we have to worry about popular support spreading." Could that happen? "It is always a possibility," said the official.

Arroyo will likely not be forcibly removed from office. She is unpopular but probably not that unpopular, and besides, the joint pillars of the Catholic Church and business that brought her to power have not entirely dropped their support for her. They seem content to wait for the 2004 elections, in which she has promised not to run.

Still, the laments of the dissatisfied and idealistic young officers resonate strongly and underscore the many seemingly insoluble crises besetting the United States' chief ally in Southeast Asia. That raising grievances through force of arms is considered a viable option by elite young officers is itself a dramatic example of how far the rule of law has been eroded in the Philippines and how deeply corruption undermines confidence in the country's many failed institutions.

"They are absolutely right in what they are saying, and unfortunately they will get nowhere," said a wealthy Filipino businesswoman reached by phone on Sunday. "These officers are just trying to change things."

Their demands, their concerns, their excellent command of English and their status as graduates of the elite Philippine Military Academy put these young officers in the tradition of charismatic reformists trying to change a corrupt system. They are very similar to the young captains and majors who led the military revolt against Ferdinand Marcos in 1986.

Now the soldiers, many of them combat veterans, complain that senior military officers are colluding with Muslim rebel groups in the south, supplying them with weapons and materiel. The government, they say, even staged a deadly bombing in Mindanao recently in order to strengthen calls for more aid from Washington. Arroyo has now ordered an investigation into the charges but, sadly, there is nothing new in such allegations and they have long been talked about in diplomatic, intelligence and military circles in Manila.

Gracia Burnham, the former American missionary who was held hostage by Abu Sayyaf rebels for more than a year before a botched rescue attempt saved her but killed her husband, said nearly the same thing in a recent book. "You may wonder how such a group as the Abu Sayyaf seemed to be well supplied with weaponry. Were their al-Qaeda friends sending them supply boats in the middle of the night? No, no - nothing so exotic as that," Burnham wrote in her book In the Presence of My Enemies, published in May. "The Abu Sayyaf told us [its] source was none other than the Philippine army itself ... I was amazed. The fact that such firepower could quite possibly wind up killing one's fellow soldiers seemed not to matter at all."

After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States, US military aid to the Philippines was increased to more than US$100 million from just $1.9 million the previous year in order to combat Abu Sayyaf. In May, when Arroyo visited Washington, President George W Bush pledged an additional $65 million in aid to battle terrorists, 30 helicopters and heightened status for the Philippines as a "major non-NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] ally" of Washington.

With many of the young officers prosecuting that "war on terror" in revolt against the government and a chief terror suspect on the run, Bush may have trouble getting new aid through Congress.

But it is not only Manila's security relationships that stand to suffer from the further unraveling of confidence in the government. The Philippine economy, long in the doldrums, is likely to be pushed even farther off the radar screens of investors. "This comes close to what I would call a worst-case scenario," said Peter Wallace, a leading business consultant in Manila. "But the Philippines is already a subsistence economy and things cannot get much worse than they already are. In a subsistence economy you are just getting by, and that describes the Philippines."

If these young officers represent a core of resentment in the fractious military, the stage could be set for the Philippines to return to the years of instability and negative growth rates that characterized the post-Marcos period. While countries such as South Korea and Thailand have largely solved the deadly cycle of military intervention in politics, the Philippines has yet to implement an effective method of democratic transition - leaving the military as a crucial arbiter of power. Since Marcos declared martial law in 1972, only two Philippine presidents, Estrada and retired General Fidel Ramos, have been elected to office.

With elections scheduled for next year, things might get even worse. Two of the leading contenders are celebrities - a newscaster and an action star - and neither has any substantial experience in government.

The real loser in all of this, of course, is the Philippine public, already battered by rampant poverty, neglected infrastructure, overpopulation and a host of other ills. It does not look set to get any better any time soon. "The reputation of the country is hitting its nadir," said Today newspaper in an editorial after the Sunday rebellion. "The question the citizen must ask is that with things such a mess, what would make this country worth wanting to rule?"

A Lin Neumann is the Asia consultant to the Committee to Protect Journalists.

(Copyright 2003 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for information on our sales and syndication policies.)



To: JohnM who wrote (108511)7/28/2003 3:59:12 PM
From: Maurice Winn  Respond to of 281500
 
<>>Meanwhile, you are hereby banned from the discussion for two days for breaching rules as established by Faultline. I have just appointed myself as the adjudicator, for now anyway, in Faultline's absence.
<<
Been curious as to who would be the first to do this. Never, ever thought you would, Mq. ;-)
>

John, you are hereby banned for half a day for off topic, trivial posting of a personal nature - I am not approving metadiscussions about the discussions. These should be conducted by PM.

I am enjoying some megalomania. Now I see why Saddam was so enthusiastic and why King George II will brook no opposition. Self-appointed power is fun!

You may start posting again immediately if you email me some money. I recommend US$100 via PayPal. First offences are cheap. Please send it to my usual account at MquriceTheGreat@WeTheSheeple.com

Neocon, you were nearly banned for a series of one-liner sheep droppings which were completely unnecessary.

Chuckie, for insolence you are hereby given a $1000 ban! You may not post again until you pay. If you do post and don't pay I will send cyberspace gremlins into your computer and blow up your hard drive after copying its contents to the NSA. You are harming the USA by polluting the top Foreign Affairs stream and failing to comply with WWKT Homeland Security requirements of good behaviour according to approved Patriot Act laws.

Mqurice The Great.

PS: Others may send Tribute to show their joy at my coronation. 29 July is hereby declared an International Holiday to celebrate Mqurice The Great. That's NZ time...

With Uday and Qusay no longer in contention, Saddam on the lam, King George II's popularity plunging with each dead American soldier and Tony Blair not so hot, Kim not a keeper, Hu busy enough and Helen Clark going the UN route, and not many other pretenders to the throne, there's a bit of a power vacuum, so being an opportunist, thought I might as well see if there's a buck and some fun in it. Girls are welcome too....