Censoring dissenting voices is a danger to us all

by Tom Gutting

5 October 2001

Houston, U.S.A., Oct. 1, 2001 – In his address to the nation Sept. 20, President Bush warned the country that recent terrorist attacks would force all Americans to make sacrifices. I didn't realize how quickly my turn would come.

Two days after the president's speech, I used my regular column for the Texas City Sun to raise some doubts about the quality of his leadership. There was loud public outcry, and I was fired. What has happened to me as an individual isn't important. I'll be fine, though I am less naive about the commitment of editors and publishers to the ideals of free speech. It is important, however, for Americans to reflect on the dangers of silencing disagreement. During the past three weeks, there has been a great deal of talk about what it means to be an American. Citizens and leaders in our country have stood united, waved flags and sung God Bless America. Being American, however, means more than simple shows of patriotism. The strength of our nation does not come from flying the flag, but rather from our unique set of ideals.

Especially in times of crisis, it is important for Americans to adhere to the principles that have made us the flag bearer of democracy to the world.

That's why recent strong reactions against dissenting voices across the country have been so alarming. Granted, this is a time of unusually strong American unity. The crisis has given Bush what his election did not: a mandate. But as George Washington once said, "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is a force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."

Irresponsible action is a particular threat when vigilant critics are silenced. It is our obligation to freely debate the direction our country and our leaders are taking. The beauty of the republic comes from diversity of opinion, not unity of thought. If we squash debate, we crush the sacred duty of our citizens.

Many think constraints on public debate are part of the necessary trade-off between freedom and security, equating searches of airline passengers with censoring columnists. But except in the most extreme cases, such as revealing important government secrets or explicitly inciting rebellion, there is no gain to our security from restraining speech. The citizens of Texas City would not be more secure today if my column had not been printed.

In fact, the outraged citizens of Texas City are better off because my column appeared. If my criticisms of Bush were right, they heard a truth they needed to hear. But even if I was wrong, the fact that I spoke out makes the truths I contested stronger. John Stuart Mill had it right: "Complete liberty of contradicting our opinion is the very condition which justifies us in assuming its truth."

To be convinced of our beliefs, we must hold them up against the strongest arguments of those who disagree with us. If, after putting our views to the test, we still believe them, our principles will be all the more founded and strong.

America today is under the world microscope more than ever, and that means it is more important than ever to adhere to our ideals. In my case, this turned out to mean losing my job. I'm happy to have been able to answer the president's call for sacrifice.

[Tom Gutting's original column published in the Texas City Sun]

Bush has failed to lead U.S.

By Tom Gutting

9 October 2001

Sept. 22, 2001 - - I'm aware of the American custom not to criticize our country's leaders in times of crisis. But after George W. Bush's vague, trite speech Thursday night, it's time we snapped out of the "support our president" trance and start to be vigilant citizens, as our Constitution demands. Besides, I refuse to blindly follow any man who claims to be leading us into "war," particularly one who has shown such poor judgment and leadership.

Last year, when he won the presidency, we knew W. wasn't the smartest guy on the block. Nor was he a real policy wonk. The one thing W.'s handlers convinced people of was that he is a leader who would make decisions. He might not always be right, but he would lead, they assured us.

So last Tuesday, there was W. flying around the country like a scared child seeking refuge in his mother's bed after having a nightmare. When Dick Cheney went on "Meet the Press" last week, it became abundantly clear W. hadn't done the one thing he promised - lead. Cheney was making all the calls while Bush ran scared, thereby fulfilling the terrorists' wishes to make the most powerful man in the world fear them.

The very fact that whether Bush is up to handling this crisis has been such a point of contention tells you something about his leadership ability.

Fortunately, others have stepped up to the plate and taken charge. Look at Rudolph Giuliani, another Republican. Within hours of the attacks in New York, he was out on the streets, surveying the damage and encouraging rescuers. He never hesitated or made his personal well-being a top priority.

That was real leadership. And, in the days after the tragedy, Giuliani has continued to shine. He says the right things, is specific and leaves off the sugar-coating.

In addition, Giuliani makes a point to show terrorists he isn't afraid to continue doing everyday business. He's highly visible, not hiding underground in Nebraska. In fact, he's done such an admirable job, New Yorkers are talking about extending his term, which ends Dec. 31. W., on the other hand, has behaved like you would expect a first lady to.

This is the time, however, he should be flexing those leadership muscles we heard so much about. He should be defiant, compassionate and authoritative. He should be more like (gasp!) Bill Clinton. But what we are stuck with is a crippled president who continues to be controlled by his advisors. He's not a leader. He's a puppet, and it has never been more apparent.

Now W. is leading us into "war." He has dropped no hints, however, about what the objectives are. U.S. intelligence doesn't even know where most of the enemies are. He makes broad, sweeping statements about ridding the world of evil and delivering "infinite justice."

I feel like we're being led by the pied piper. We have pledged our full resources to something, and our citizens are frothing at the mouth to get involved, but we have no idea what lies ahead. And because of W.'s lack of experience and failure to lead since Sept. 11, I feel nervous our future. But we should have known better than to trust someone who wasn't capable. You get what you vote for.

Tom Gutting is a former city editor at the Texas City Sun.