America’s prison for terrorists often held the wrong men

An eight-month McClatchy investigation of the detention system created after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks has found that the U.S. imprisoned innocent men, subjected them to abuse, stripped them of their legal rights and allowed Islamic militants to turn the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba into a school for jihad.

“The McClatchy investigation found that top Bush administration officials knew within months of opening the Guantanamo detention center that many of the prisoners there weren’t “the worst of the worst.” From the moment that Guantanamo opened in early 2002, former Secretary of the Army Thomas White said, it was obvious that at least a third of the population didn’t belong there.”

Stories like this one — and the way those accused respond to them — raise a troubling (to me) question about American journalism. Why can’t we have one news organization that everyone can agree is factual and fair. Just one. “Truthiness” is no longer a joke.

Somewhere in the White House and the Pentagon, men and women are figuring out ways to discredit this story and the people who reported it. I won’t try to list the tactics they employee because we are all too familiar with them.

And those who chose not to believe stories like this one need only the flimsiest excuse (“There goes the Liberal Media again.” or “Fox News says it’s not true.”).

Remember how skeptical the world was of the claims by German citizens that they didn’t know what was going on in the concentration camps?

“Whoa! Hold on there smays.com! You aren’t comparing Guantanamo to Auschwitz are you?”

No. I’m talking about what we, the American people, allow our government to do on our behalf. If we’ve been holding hundreds of innocent men for five or six years and –in some cases– torturing (I know, I know… water boarding is not torture) them, will our best explanation be, “We were at war.”

Ich bin beschämt

Radio for the blind and print-disabled

The Kansas Audio-Reader Network is “a reading and information service for blind, visually impaired, and print disabled individuals in Kansas and western Missouri. Services are offered free of charge to anyone in our listening area who is unable to read normal printed material.”

AUDIO: Excerpt from audio-reader network 6 min MP3

This would seem to be an invaluable service for those who cannot read a newspaper. I wonder what impact, if any, the Internet is having on services like this. I understand that not everyone has a computer and access to the web but that number is shrinking daily.

I assume the blind or visually impaired can have the text on any web page translated to spoken audio. While this would give the user more control over the information she consumes, it might be more… entertaining? …to have a human read it aloud. Or why not have both.

Already missing Tim Russert (and my dad)

Johnmays250

And I’m not sure why. I didn’t “know” the man but, like many of his faithful viewers, felt as though I did. NBC devoted the full half-hour of the evening newscast to memories of Tim (“Mr. Russert” doesn’t feel right).

Maybe it’s my new-found interest in politics… or Father’s Day rolling around again… but I’m reminded of my pop, who died six years ago.

Dad was not the “family man” Tim Russert was reported to be. At least not demonstrably so. But he had his passions and radio was one of them. One I shared.

So, in memory of Tim Russert –and my dad– I share this interview I did with my dad shortly before he retired from radio.

Competition still hot for domain names

 

If you missed this story on NPR’s Morning Edition last week, it’s worth a listen (4 min). Seems the market for web site domain names is on the rise. Last month, the name Gasprices.com sold for $300,000.

Back when we registered Legislature.com, we could not believe it was still available. I mean, ALL one-word domains were gone by that time. But for some reason, not Legislature.com. We jumped on it. Would we sell it? In a New York minute. Dot com.