es their own party leaders, a lot of right-wing Republicans recently hurled the word at opponents of George Bush's needless war. As they saw it (or as they wished others to see it), those war protestors should have demonstrated just as furiously against Bill Clinton when he used American military might.

There were those who did object to Clinton's more moderate military ventures, including Republican congressmen who accused him of trying to distract the public from his domestic problems. Even if Clinton had acted as unilaterally and recklessly as Bush, and even if he had cowed Congress into the infringement of as many civil liberties, I doubt we would have seen such massive anti-administration demonstrations as descended on our cities last winter. The main reason for that is the recent surge in internet use.

The internet grew to maturity during Clinton's administration, but as late as the waning years of his presidency it had not invaded the homes of most Americans. It was not until 1998 that I connected at home, and even then I used it only for occasional communication with a few chosen friends. Searching the web proved too tedious and time-consuming, yielding spotty, unreliable information. It was not until the last year or two that I began checking newspapers and university websites for useful material. Now I can read this morning's news from Britain, France, or anywhere else with a decipherable language, and that access has been especially important since network television and radio started pandering to popular sentiment.

Reuters reported last week that the head of the British Broadcasting System was "shocked" by the unquestioning regurgitation of government propaganda by U.S. networks. While Fox News drew his greatest scorn, BBC Director General Greg Dyke also specifically named Clear Channel Communications, a radio conglomerate owned by a friend of the Bush family, which Dyke criticized for organizing pro-war rallies to accompany its news. "For the health of our democracy," said Dyke, "it's vital that we don't follow the path of many American networks. If Iraq proved anything, it was that the BBC cannot afford to mix patriotism and journalism. This is happening in the United States and, if it continues, will undermine the credibility of the U.S. electronic news media."

For my money, that credibility evaporated a long time ago, and I stopped watching television altogether in 1998. I have never seen Fox News, but the quotes of its announcers are all I need to convince me of its newsworthlessness. When Dan Rather melodramatically remarked to an interviewer that he would "go anywhere my president tells me," I wrote him off as not being any kind of a journalist. Now that Disney owns ABC, I consider ABC News just another animation of cartoon characters. A powerful few now control our once-independent news media, using it as little more than a means of manipulating the public to favor this-or-that war, this-or-that candidate, or whatever legislation might be most favorable to their corporations.

Over the internet this winter came news from countries with truly independent presses, allowing potential dissenters to make more informed decisions. When dissent reached a certain threshold, antiwar websites appeared, giving readers an opportunity to discover that they were not alone in their concerns. That encouraged activism and enabled the quick and efficient organization of protests electronically. I decided to attend the February 15 demonstration in New York only nine hours ahead of time because a group email acquainted me with a bus that was leaving Portsmouth. I attended the March 22-24 veterans' protest in Washington because of a similar last-minute announcement.

That explains in large part why the latest Bush war drew so much more heat. That is also why I expect the Republicans to act soon to regulate and tax the internet: if they do not cripple it as a means for the people to communicate, the people might take the information highway as the path to real freedom.

Note: William Marvel is a freelance writer in New Hampshire and served in the U.S. Army from 1968-1971. His many books include the award-winning Andersonville: The Last Depot and Lee's Last Retreat: The Flight to Appomattox.

=====

"The ground of liberty is to be gained by inches, and we must be contented to secure what we can get from time to time and eternally press forward for what is yet to get. It takes time to persuade men to do even what is for their own good." --Thomas Jefferson to Charles Clay, 1790

http://www.geocities.com/silent_legacy2000 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/silentlegacy2000

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------