------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDIX - "Looking Toward A More Open Future"; re national
progressive cable channel
------------------------------------------------------------------

We are all familiar with the preemptive "damage- control" exercised by
Administrations via the manipulation of public perceptions at the
outset of a new program or proposal, or especially a military action.
We also recall what happened at the outset of the Panama invasion:
during the early, critical hours and days, the public was fed, through
a media straw (and cheerleader), an essentially pure infant formula of
disinformation and propaganda, complements of the White House Kitchen;

It is the early hours which matter, for it is far less "damaging" (to
the Administration) when is it revealed, weeks later, what the death
toll, and physical damage of the assault was; it is far less damaging,
when the absurdity of the justifications given for the invasion is
discussed, briefly, by some in the media, long after the early stages
of the invasion; it is far less damaging, to hear later of the
civilians killed and neighborhoods bombed, of the real CIA-Noriega
links, and the real reasons for the "souring" of the relationship,
after the wave of flag waving and Congress' seal of approval already
took place; by then, it is too late.

Let's imagine how different the situation could have been, had we, at
the outset of the invasion, just *one* open and honest source of
information which was widely distributed and available to the public
-say a national newspaper or a cable channel (things the religious
Right, and far Right, already have and are expanding). Imagine the
details of CIA involvement (illegal use of Canal Zone for operations
against Nicaragua; Noriega's refusal to participate in a U.S. plan to
"discover" a shipment of weapons to El Salvador from Nicaragua, etc),
but most of all imagine the broadcast to the American public of
information and especially images, of the destruction and mayhem of
the U.S. invasion, complete with interviews of civilian victims, and
international and human rights observers [living rooms across
America]. (or imagine the Lies Of Our Time cover photo of the U.S.
soldier getting a shoe shine from a subservient Panamanian appearing
on the cover of a national progressive newspaper at newstands
everywhere (of course, *getting* the newstands to carry it would be
perhaps as difficult as putting together such a paper; so alternative
approaches much be sought))

It is clear, then, how different public opinion would have been if
what they were seeing and hearing was not so tightly controlled by the
Administration, and had it been more difficult for Congress, as a
result, to wave flags first, and ask questions later.

The successful coverup following the Iran-contra scandal-turned-
"affair" is another example to contemplate in judging the critical
role the control of information and its availability plays in domestic
thought control, and hence in domestic and foreign policy; to put it
bluntly, the secrecy and disinformation are necessary precisely
because, as we all know damn well, the American public, not just the
"leftists" or "radicals," wouldn't stand for a moment for the antics
and crimes commited by the CIA and other govenrment agencies worldwide
(or domestic tax and budgetary policy for example) if it were fully
informed about them. It seems, however, that those in power who employ
this deception are sometimes more aware of this than the "radicals"
who oppose them.