I knew of his work because six months before this column was published, Goldberg’s book, full title Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News, reached No. 1 on the New York Times Best Sellers list for nonfiction. Goldberg benefited from the fact that President George W. Bush was famously photographed holding the book while walking past the camera-ready media to board Marine One on a trip to Maine. The New York Times’s Eric Alterman referenced the photo in a March 2003 article, stating that Bush carried the book “quite conspicuously” and suggested that the president was giving “the so-called ‘liberal media’ . . . a presidential thumb in the eye.”
As it turns out, Goldberg was writing me to seek permission to use this column in his next book, Arrogance: Rescuing America from the Media Elite (2003), which I gladly provided, and so he did.
THAT APOLOGY?—IT’S BUNK
Philadelphia Daily News, Thursday, September 5, 2002
REPUBLICAN BOSS BILLY MEEHAN was fond of telling candidates seeking his blessing that he could be for them or against them, whichever would help more.
I was reminded of those words as I debated whether to write in support of Daily News editor Zack Stalberg and managing editor Ellen Foley. (I wondered, a la Billy Meehan, if they would be better served by my opposition!)
But I gotta go with my gut on this one.
I think any of the original criticism of the paper for the August 21 cover showing the city’s most-wanted fugitives is off base and that the DN’s recent apology was unwarranted—and probably counterproductive.
I wish the paper had responded to the criticism of a few with a demand for dialogue about the very real problem highlighted in photos and print that day. Instead, the capitulation of the DN does nothing but prove that, as a society, we remain unwilling to broach any subject that involves substantive dialogue about race.
I’m not surprised by this.
I learned my lesson recently by weighing in on slavery reparations. What did I say? First, that there exists a real disparity between the races; second, that slavery played a role in the origin of the disparity; third, that society must do something to level the playing field; and fourth, that a new commitment to minority education was the best answer.
What did it get me? Hate mail.
So I knew when I picked up my copy of the paper at a Wawa down the shore at 6 A.M. that Thursday that there’d be hell to pay for the cover. But not for any reason having to do with the facts. And on this I have been proven correct. Note that nowhere among the criticism is anybody saying the Daily News got anything wrong.
The controversial cover of the Philadelphia Daily News on August 21, 2002. Photo courtesy of the Daily News.
To review, the homicide unit identified 56 individuals wanted in the city for murder. The DN then profiled 27 of them, which I consider to have been a public service. The cover featured mugs shots of 15 of the fugitives.
None of the 56 individuals identified by homicide is white—and there’s the rub. Of course, it’s not the DN’s fault that 56 nonwhites are being sought for murder, but in the twisted racial world in which we live, this is perceived by a few to be the fault of the newspaper.
So here we go again. Instead of discussing why black-on-black crime threatens the city—minorities in particular—we’re caught up in a bogus debate as to whether the paper should have presented the information the way it did.
Meanwhile, the crime continues and energy that should be dedicated to ending it is wasted by debate on the propriety of the DN telling it like it is.
Not long ago, the William Penn Foundation funded a study by Public/ Private Ventures, which was published in the spring of 2001 and titled Murder Is No Mystery. It is an analysis of Philadelphia homicides from 1996 to 1999. Then–police commissioner John Timoney wrote the foreword. The introduction sums up the study this way:
And the tragedy of all is that murder, in this city at least, is not exactly a mystery. A look at the homicides committed between 1996 and 1999 reveals a pattern: 9 out of 10 victims were men, and over half were young men between 18 and 34 years old. Three victims out of four were African-American. Four victims out of five were shot to death with handguns. Virtually all alleged murderers were the same race as their victims, with over 90 percent of African Americans dying at the hands of another African-American.
Further along, the study reported that whites made up over half of the city’s population but represented only 5 percent of its alleged murderers, while African Americans made up less than half the population—but represented over three-quarters of its alleged murderers.
In the August 21 cover, the pictures told the story.
But, Shhhhhhh—don’t talk about it.
No wonder nothing ever changes.
AFTERWORD
As I say in my book Muzzled:
I remember where I was when I first saw that cover. That’s how startling it was. As we like to say in Philadelphia, I was “down the shore” in Ocean City, New Jersey, on vacation. On a humid, early-August morning, while en route to a workout with my friend, the fitness guru and former president of the 76ers, Pat Croce, I stopped at Wawa for a newspaper and cup of coffee.
It was a Thursday, the day my own weekly column [ran] in the Daily News, and I was eager to see what headline my editor, Michael Schefer, had put on a column I had filed before going away with my family.
By pure coincidence, the column I’d written for that day’s paper also dealt with race, under the headline (which I didn’t write): “Reparations: Ending the Guilt Trip.” In it I argue that educational opportunities are the only legitimate form of modern redress:
So much of what ails us is attributable to the lack of strong fathers in African American households. . . .
How do we [fix] that? Through reparations. Not the Farrakhan land giveaway kind. The only way to really repair black America is through unprecedented educational opportunities for black youth. That must be our chief focus on a local, state, and national level.
And in my column a week later (August 29, 2002), I addressed the public reaction to my reparations column from the week before:
My column got picked up by Newsmax.com, so I got reaction from all across the country. . . . [T]he most disappointing reaction came from a few knuckleheads—some of whom actually showed up at my law office with hateful signs the day after my column appeared—who refused to look beyond the fact that I was a white guy with something to say about reparations. . . . Their virulence is exactly why many whites don’t share my willingness to discuss the issue [at] any level deeper than a sound bite.
Until I started compiling this book, I had completely forgotten that the protest of my column extended to the sidewalk in front of my law office!
REBUILD ’EM!
Philadelphia Daily News, Thursday, September 12, 2002
I ATTENDED THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY of the events of September 11 at the former site of the World Trade Center yesterday, and broadcast my radio show while the president stopped by to pay his respects.
It was a scene I will never forget.
I have visited this area often over the years: a job interview. Dinner at Windows on the World. The PATH train.
And, like all Americans, I’ve watched the televised changes at this location for a solid year. But no matter how many times I’ve seen the footage, I was not prepared for the enormity and emptiness of the 16-acre hole in the ground.
I’m sure my emotions would be magnified if I had been there before the debris was removed.
But today, the day after the first anniversary, I want to look forward, not back.
Maybe patriotic fervor has clouded my judgment because it is hard not to survey the scene without a numbing of the senses, but I came home believing that the WTC needs to be rebuilt—just as it existed. Both towers should soar at least as high as they were before the attack.
Earlier in the summer, the Lower Manhattan Development Corp. presented six proposals for the rebuilding of the site. I looked them over
on the Internet. Each called for replacing the 11 million square feet of office and retail space lost in the Trade Center attack. Each used the word “memorial” in its title.
One would feature eight acres of open space and a free-standing tower. Another would create several triangular parks and triangular building sites. Another would have a six-acre park.
I’m not surprised that people were underwhelmed by what they saw. It’s not possible to come up with any replacement plan that will represent a consensus, particularly since you can’t help but compare any proposal to the unique architectural feat that they seek to replace. There are just too many divergent opinions, all well-intentioned, and no one wants to offend the victims’ families.
Even former mayor Giuliani has recently written that the entire site should be set aside as a memorial, befitting the burial ground that it represents.
And I recognize that there are other reasons not to rebuild what existed pre-9/11: Potential occupancy problems. Security concerns. Insurance woes.
America can overcome them all. And, collectively, the arguments against what I will call the “replica plan” are outweighed by the spectacular opportunity we have to construct the ultimate monument to American resilience. Imagine the message that would send to friends and foes alike. We would be saying that absolutely nothing can deter the American spirit.
That’s the same spirit embodied in the actions of the passengers of Flight 93 who fought back. We have them to thank for the failure of the terrorist mission to reach Washington. Why should we let the terrorists succeed in their mission to permanently remove the WTC from America’s skyline when we have the ability to deny them their goal?
I’m not the first to make this suggestion. There is a group dedicated to this goal—but the idea of rebuilding what existed isn’t getting serious consideration for reasons I don’t quite understand.
The group has a website, teamtwintowers.org.
They are correct when they state that “building anything shorter, or smaller, than the Twin Towers is tantamount to kneeling to terrorism.”
AFTERWORD
As you can tell, I was in a patriotic, chest-thumping mood when I wrote this on the first anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. On that day, I did my morning radio program from a building adjacent to Ground Zero, where I watched President George W. Bush lay a wreath. Obviously that location was not ultimately rebuilt in the mirror image of the Twin Towers, and I’m fine with the result. Instead, 15 years later, the Freedom Tower was completed on a site that also includes the incredible National September 11 Memorial and Museum, which I have visited several times.
I’m proud of the fact that a Zeta Psi fraternity brother of mine at Lehigh University, the engineer Jim Durkin, was the construction manager for the WTC Transportation Hub, an important part of the overall site development. Coincidentally, his father, Francis “Frank” Durkin, an engineer who graduated from the Citadel, had been a resident engineer for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey during the construction of the original Twin Towers. As Jim described to me, his father was involved in the construction of the towers “from the foundation stage when they found an old anchor from a schooner to the day that Philippe Petit did his high-wire act between the towers.” So a father-son engineering duo was instrumental to both projects. Pretty cool.
WANT RATINGS?
BRING BACK THE BEAUTY
Philadelphia Daily News, Thursday, September 26, 2002
THE FOLKS WHO RUN the Miss America pageant got exactly what they wanted.
A brainiac, but not necessarily a beauty.
“You have a Miss America that absolutely personifies what this program is about and where we’re going,” said George Bauer, the interim CEO of the pageant, after the crowning. “The walk is matching the talk.”
It sure is. And that’s too bad for television viewers and the future of the pageant.
Miss Illinois, Erika Harold, is the Harvard law student who won the title Saturday night.
Don’t get me wrong, she’s an attractive woman, but she is not a “10.” Or a 9. Or even an 8. Frankly, she’s a good-looking Paula Jones. And I suspect that suits the PC crowd who run the pageant just fine. The last thing they seem to want is a raving beauty whose well-rounded-ness might be overshadowed by good looks.
After all, they’ve stacked the deck against a “10” winning the thing. Good looks have been minimized, and to acknowledge them is taboo.
Just consider the scoring in the finals:
•Composite attributes: 40 percent.
•Lifestyle and fitness in swimsuit: 10 percent.
•Presence and poise in evening wear: 10 percent.
•Artistic expression in talent: 20 percent.
•Peer respect and leadership: 10 percent.
•Top five knowledge and understanding quiz: 10 percent.
Lifestyle and fitness in swimsuit? Presence and poise in evening wear?
What exactly does that mean? Heaven forbid one of the contestants would have a shapely frame that looks good in both a bikini and a Vera Wang.
Someone has decided that more important are the competitors’ platforms on issues, like they were political candidates running for office. And on this score, only the PC need apply. This year’s winner intends to promote anti-violence and anti-bullying.
No wonder the TV ratings are in a tailspin.
Left unsaid is that we all love to look at attractive women. The current pageant dismisses the time-honored custom of Americans gathering in living rooms and voting among friends on which of several competing beauties should win. And I’m not just talking about guys. Women love to check out other women. Just think about how they scrutinize one another in social settings.
The scoring system needs to be changed to reflect a woman’s ability to turn heads on Walnut Street. There is nothing wrong with requiring that Miss America be a showstopper. Guess what—there are plenty of them who are also fit, poised, artistic, and smart. (Vanessa Williams was all of the above. She just happened to have a few other less-sedate items on her curriculum vitae.)
In other words, I think we can have the best of both worlds. But let’s stop the ridiculous trend toward ignoring looks.
If the pageant wants to become a televised Mensa meeting, that’s their choice. But I have a hunch America wouldn’t mind a little more of an old-fashioned beauty pageant. Bring back the busty baton twirler.
Until then, Bert Parks will continue to roll over in his grave.
AFTERWORD
The subsequent television ratings would seem to support my thesis. In the ensuing years, viewership declined as the pageant bounced between venues and networks. Take a look at the ratings. The total number of viewers (in millions) for the next few years after this column was published were as follows: 2003: ABC (12); 2004: ABC (10.3); 2005: ABC (9.8); 2006: CMT (3.1); 2007: CMT (2.4); 2008: TLC (3.6). Those numbers, by anyone’s standards, are not pretty.
CONSPIRACY:
THE OKLAHOMA CITY–SEPTEMBER 11 CONNECTION
Philadelphia Daily News, Thursday, October 3, 2002
I’M NOT A CONSPIRACY GUY. I think Oswald killed Kennedy, and that he acted alone. And, like all Americans, I figured that the tragic bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City was the work of two sick ex-Army guys, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols.
Now I’m not so sure.
Last night, my radio station, the Big Talker 1210, brought three speakers to town for a remarkable presentation: Jayna Davis, a reporter from Oklahoma City; Larry Johnson, ex–deputy director of the State Department’s office of counterterrorism; and Patrick Lang, Middle East expert formerly of the Defense Intelligence Agency.
In a spellbinding presentation, they made the case for a connection between Middle Eastern terrorism, the Murrah bombing—and the attacks on the Twin Towers.
Now I know why former CIA director James Woolsey has been quoted as saying that when the full truth is known about these acts of terrorism, the nation will owe Davis “
a debt of gratitude.”
Why her name is not already a household word is the greatest mystery of all. Just this week, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that U.S. intelligence has “bulletproof” evidence of links between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. Rumsfeld didn’t offer specifics. But here is what we know from the work of Davis.
When the Murrah bombing occurred at 9:02 A.M. on April 19, 1995, Davis was a reporter for the NBC affiliate in Oklahoma City. She was among the first journalists to broadcast that an enormous truck bomb had rocked the heartland, killing 168 and injuring hundreds.
In the immediate aftermath of the explosion, the FBI launched an international pursuit of several Middle Eastern–looking men seen fleeing the Murrah Building in a brown Chevy pickup right before the blast. Without explanation, that all-points bulletin was later canceled. Two days later, Timothy McVeigh was a household name. So was Terry Nichols.
And that’s where most of us left the tale. Stunned, but convinced that two Army buddies, homegrown terrorists, acted alone.
Thankfully, Davis didn’t close this book as quickly as most of us did. She pursued the APB and set off to track reports of multiple sightings of McVeigh with an elusive dark-haired accomplice. The infamous sketch of John Doe No. 2 was always tucked firmly in her grip.
Davis soon uncovered that several employees at an Oklahoma City property-management company said they had seen a brown Chevy truck like the getaway vehicle aggressively pursued by law enforcement parked outside their office in the days before the bombing. The company’s owner was a Palestinian with a rap sheet and suspected ties to the PLO.
Davis learned that, six months before the bombing, the Palestinian hired a handful of ex-Iraqi soldiers to do maintenance at his rental houses. Eyewitnesses told Davis that they celebrated the bombing.
She was also made aware that these same men were absent from work on April 17, 1995, the day McVeigh rented the Ryder truck that carried the bomb.
While pursuing the story of these Middle Eastern men, Davis also became aware of another ex-Iraqi soldier in Oklahoma City named Hussain Hashem Al-Hussaini. She was taken aback to see that Al-Hussaini’s picture, when overlaid with the government sketch of John Doe No. 2, was arguably a perfect match. He even sported a tattoo on his upper left arm indicating that he likely had served in Saddam Hussein’s Republican Guard.
Clowns to the Left of Me, Jokers to the Right Page 4