Tuesday, October 23, 2001

Blind faith may destroy the nation
Commentary by Steve Skutnik

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free ... it expects what never was and never will be.” — Thomas Jefferson

A pertinent yet understated question about our “War on Terrorism” as of late has been, “Where’s the proof?” The U.S. government has constantly reassured us that we possess “concrete evidence” of a link between Osama bin Laden et al and the events of Sept. 11, as well as official support on the part of the Taliban to bin Laden’s activities, yet the American people have seen almost none of this in the interests of “national security.”

In fact it seems that every major party involved in the international dispute with Afghanistan has seen the evidence except for two parties — the victim and the accused.

We are already engaged in a de facto war with Afghanistan, yet the American public has still to see a shred of evidence that we belong there.

This is not to say the evidence does not exist, but rather that to “bomb Afghanistan back to the Stone Age” without even giving their leaders a chance to respond to (and even possibly redress) the charges set before them is ludicrous — almost analogous to convicting and executing a criminal before any form of trial.

In essence, America’s leaders have asked the Taliban and, more importantly, the American public to take their actions on “faith;” faith that everyone should simply trust the government’s judgment without further question. Unfortunately, only places like Iraq, Cuba and the China work like that. America is a nation that works off proof, not faith.

Our system of justice is based on the principle of varying degrees of burden of proof, from the requirements to obtain a search warrant to the criterion for conviction in a court of law. Why, then, should our leaders suddenly expect to overturn this well-established precedent which has worked so well in guaranteeing our liberties?

Critics and members of the government have argued that such disclosure of evidence would compromise the current operations. Nothing could be further from the truth.

This argument only works if the actual sources of evidence are disclosed, which is not what skeptics and the media have been asking for.

Interested members of the public simply want to know, as Joe Friday would say, “Just the facts, ma’am.” The public deserves to know the grounds on which we should be expected to send our sons and daughters off to a remote corner of the world where they may not come back alive.

The public deserves to know how sure we are that we’re risking our soldier’s lives going after the right threat, not letting the real culprits escape in the process. We deserve to know why we must fight a war of attrition which may spark more terror attacks against our country. We deserve to know how much we actually know about the events of Sept. 11 and how much is mere speculation.

Critics of liberty argue that disclosure to the public jeopardizes the safety of our troops. Yet without a well-informed public, our liberty itself is in peril — isn’t the reason that we’re going to war in the first place to protect our freedom? What kind of victory can these critics expect if we give up exactly what we’re fighting for in the name of national security?

Demanding proof from our leaders is not an “un-American” concept, but rather the most patriotic thing an ordinary citizen can do — provide a constant check upon the infringement of our fundamental rights.

As Wendell Phillips once said, “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” The only thing these skeptics demand is that we have justifiable cause to go to war in the form of evidence rather than conjecture, which is hardly an unpatriotic thing to do.

Constant vigilance is a crucial factor in maintaining our liberties — disparaging the people who keep a close eye on our government’s actions is no better than spitting on our troops who risk their lives for freedom when all other avenues have been exhausted.

Vigilance and rational skepticism are the two greatest safeguards to liberty.

Complacency, trust and blind faith are the most dangerous invitations to tyranny.

Steve Skutnik is a columnist for the Iowa State Daily at Iowa State University. This column was distributed by U-Wire.