'Death of Dissent' a myth: Refuting the doomsayers by Matt Welch
It was the first thing that caught my eye when looking for something to counter the claim that dissent is has been stifled because of the American government's reaction to September 11th.
“Newsrooms may have shut down their foreign bureaus, but individuals have learned how to scour the Internet for the latest news and opinion from the Middle East (and elsewhere), and then publish their findings online. A single Los Angeles Web designer and part-time musician named Charles Johnson (http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/weblog.php) attracts thousands of readers each week with his eagle-eyed watchdogging of the Arab and Israeli press.”
I'm a little disappointed that Welch didn't talk more about weblogging, because weblogs are a huge source of dissent (and even support) of American policies concerning terrorism and the military. Oh well, there has been a lot of dissent, but those who say it's being stifled either don't see it or are dissenters themselves and have something to gain (publicity) by saying it is stifled.
"You might think that an over-extended country, which spends far more of its gross domestic product on the military than any other major power, would react to a horrendously effective potshot by reconsidering its sprawling and occasionally heavy-handed engagement with the world. But you would be wrong."
This quote contains the problem I have with this article. I actually think that, for the size of it and the technology it possesses, the United States is under-extended militarily.