Print My Letter! I'm Important Too!

Wow.

To the Editor:

In January, I submitted a letter to this newspaper concerning the terrorist surveillance program and the absurdity of those who believe that terrorists, once on our shores, have some right to privacy as they plot against us. I submitted the letter nine separate times over the course of three months. The paper did not print it or answer why. I, of course, know why - the point offered was contrary to the view of the editorial staff and exposed some of the dangers of liberalism.

Now I hope this paper will see fit to print this letter. I sincerely hope it will be printed in its entirety in the Saturday edition next to the political cartoons. You see, once upon a time in America, when our nation was at war, newspapers across the country actually published cartoons that rallied Americans to support our efforts. Some cartoons even mocked our enemies. Today we see a different story. The cartoons printed portray our leadership as evil and mock our troops. Some cartoons actually vilify our troops as if the few involved in abuses at Abu Ghraib were representative of our entire military. What we do not see in these cartoons are any representation of the actual evils of our enemy. In fact, our enemies are rarely portrayed at all, as if they don't exist. Newspapers seemingly do not wish to be viewed as taking our side. Be assured, you are not.

David

Maybe they didn't print your letter because it was just as poorly written and as pointless as this one. More so, actually, because they printed this one. The paper prints letters that are far more vitriolic and anti-liberal than yours all the time... not as often as I'd like, given what I do here, but certainly often enough to show that they're willing to run them. Most of my entries here reflect one or two instances of some nut-bag fanatic right-winger getting his letter published. And that's just the raisin cakes... I don't bother with letters from rational, moderate conservatives, which are printed at least as frequently.

Your original letter was about the absurdity of thinking that terrorists in this country shouldn't be spied on. I don't think anyone would disagree with you, frankly. If the government were getting warrants to listen to the conversations of known terrorists, there wouldn't be an issue. Your original letter probably showed the same lack of comprehension this one does, which may explain why you had to pester the paper ten times to get something published. The issue is not, and never has been, about the legal process of spying on terrorists. The issue is that the government is spying on tens of millions of Americans to try to find out if any of them might be terrorists, all the while stepping on the civil liberties of innocent people, and without the warrants required to conduct such activity legally. We want them to listen in on the terrorists, but not at the expense of the freedom and liberty we're supposed to be defending. Does that make the job harder? Absolutely. Freedom and liberty always make justice and order more difficult to maintain. People willing to take those risks founded the United States of America. If the government could search every house in America, they could probably uncover a lot of terrorists. Should they be allowed to do so? Should they be allowed to tear your house apart to find out if you're a terrorist? Where do you draw the line? How much freedom are you willing to give up for a mission that is ostensibly to defend freedom? I keep hearing that our soldiers are in Iraq defending our freedom, but I haven't had any freedom taken away by an Iraqi yet. I've had plenty revoked by my own government.

Now you're bitching about cartoons? Maybe they're not depicting our enemy because nobody is exactly sure who our enemies are. Sure, there's Osama Bin Laden, but we gave up looking for him, so he can't be that important. There's Musab al-Zarqawi, but he's been focusing on stirring up Shiite/Sunni violence, not fighting American soldiers. Who can we use as a symbol of the enemy? We're supposedly at war, but we have historically fought wars against other nations, not shadowy, undefined, unorganized criminal groups. Our enemies wear no uniforms, carry no banner, and have no capital. We know the enemy exists. We also know that our enemy had no presence in Iraq until after we'd invaded. Remember, the war in Iraq was begun over concerns that Saddam would give weapons of mass destruction to terrorists, not because the terrorists were in Iraq. Iraq is not our enemy. Iraqis are not our enemy. We aren't at war with an enemy. We're not at war at all. We're involved in an occupation that is supposed to make us feel safe. What we are in fact doing is giving terrorists the best recruitment tool they could ask for. Our troops in Iraq are only fighting the terrorists who choose to go there. The rest of the recruits? We don't know where they are, and you can't fight a war against an enemy you can't even locate.

Regardless, maybe cartoons in the newspaper shouldn't be your main concern. They're not really for you. Political cartoons were originally created to make unpopular statements that couldn't be written, or to attack established political or social powerhouses that could not be easily reigned in. That tradition has had its ups and downs, but today we are seeing an established, deeply entrenched majority government in this country that is more secretive than any in recent history, and that views the media and other tools of the public as obstacles in the way of its power. The role of the political cartoon is antiestablishment, not cheap propaganda. If that's what you're looking for, there's plenty of it available. Fox News, talk radio, conservative journals and right-wing newspapers are chock full of all the line-toeing and administrative ass-kissing you could want. Satire, however, is a tool used by the underclass against the more powerful. The more power the current administration brings to bear against our liberties, the less likely you will be to find satire to your liking.