Ah, the security of the Politically Correct.

Sowell builds a pretty good case, but he offers scant examples of the transgressions of the citizenry or the media which motivate his railings against abuse of Freedom of Speech.

Stupid or insensitve remarks invite rebuttal, and it appears that this is happening. The system works, and all is well. I see no cause for alarm or even concern on this issue.

As for the NY Times story on the helicopter raids, well, who knows? No raids so far, and if they were to occur, there should be no great surprise, not because a prominent newspaper predicted it, but because that tactic has long been a mainstay of any U.S. military ground action. And if they don't occur, well, again no surprise. Aghanistan may be hell for helicopters, especially in the winter.

Can it be news to anyone that the media is used for disinformation. This occurred during WWII, when the Brits were able to throw off Nazi rocket and missile attacks by printing phoney impact and damage reports, and also to keep the Nazis guessing about the attack on the Western Front, and it was done during the Gulf War when press releases made it appear that Patriot missiles were protecting the Israelis, to say nothing of our own troops, from Iraqi Scuds.

And then there was Vietnam, the “Five 'O Clock Follies,” and the Credibility Gap.

And it has been used elsewhere.

So it cuts both ways here too. There may be a sensational story about impending U.S. action in the NY Times, but can you really trust the information, and does it tell you anything you don't already know? What about really critical information like the date and time of the suppossed attack?

Too much hand-wringing and arm-waving over trivial transgressions like this would seem to invite further attacks on our civil rights and intrusion into our lives.

In rallying to fight terrorism, we need to keep in sight just what it is we're fighting for. If this country truly is the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave, I doubt we need fear a few misguided comments or a speculative article in the New York Times.

sp