4 OPINION Page 4 Wednesday, January 6, 1988 The Michigan Daily Pentagon stifles Gulf reports By Muzammil Ahmed While the Persian Gulf has not captured front page headlines in the last few weeks, the U.S. is still maintaining its largest naval presence since the Korean War there. And considering the votality of the region, the Persian Gulf is likely to resurface to headline news in the near future. Unfortunately, such news will probably not contain a warning that some of it was reviewed by a military censor before being released. The military censor of some American press reports from the Gulf is the Pentagon. Since the U.S. invasion of Grenada several years ago, during which the Pentagon im- posed a news blackout on the region, American journalists had asked the Pentagon to establish some sort of official accom- modation for reporters on U.S. military maneuvers and operations. This would enable the public to come to an informed decision on what the armed forces are really up to. Bowing into this demand, the Pentagon established the Pentagon Pool: a group of Washington based journalists who are se- cretly hustled out to accompany U.S. troops whenever a newsworthy event occurs. From this unique frontline perspective, they are allowed to write stories and take pictures. Before their work can be published, however, Pentagon officials must scrutinize it. What follows are excerpts of interviews conducted by Muzammil Ahmed with a Pentagon spokesperson and several reporters who participated in the Pentagon Pool. The Pentagon spokesperson will talk about how the pool is intended to work, the reporters will talk about how the Pool ends up work- ing. Ahmed: Can you tell me about the objec- tives of the Pentagon Pool and its back- ground? Spokesperson: The Pentagon Pool was based on the recommendation of the Sital Commission which was put together following Grenada to make it easier for military and media to 1) accomplish their objectives, 2) to maintain secrecy, and 3) report all that is reportable back to the American public...and so based on that it was decided that...you can establish a pool to cover the major news gathering services. A: How is it used specifically in the Persian Gulf? S: The Persian Gulf is the first actual de- ployment of the Pentagon press pool. If you're, let's say, the CBS crew, you know on this particular period you're on call. We call the Bureau chief...of CBS and we say we're activating the pool, we would like your representatives to be out...at Andrew's Air Force Base no later than 11:30...and that's about all we tell them. Once they ar- rive at the airport, we brief them on certain ground rules...once aboard the aircraft we then say, OK, here's what we're going to do, here's where we're going, here's how long it's going to take to get there, and here's what you'll be seeing. A: Some questions about the journalists themselves: What kind of guidelines and re- strictions were they under? S: We told them there were three locations they could not go to on the ship because of their classification of those spaces, but they had free access to anything else on the ship...They couldn't report anything that would be happening in the future, they could. report only on events as they saw them. A: Could they talk to personnel? S: They could talk to anybody they wanted to. Everybody was told what they said could be used to an on the record basis. A: After the writer writes a story, what happens to it? S: A print journalist would write his story, and we would send it via naval message from the ship with an immediate priority...which means it would get put very quickly (20 minutes)...We would then call the bureau chiefs [from the Pentagon]...and we would get it in the hands of Associated Press, and it'll be up to AP to release it to everyone else. The next excerpted interview is of Michael Duffy, a writer for Time magazine. A: Once you were aboard the navy ship, what guidelines or restrictions were you un- doi? Duffy: I could roam anywhere except the radio room...the outboard, which ...involved intelligence gathering...and the missile room...They also read our copy [of the news story] before we sent it in. A: How long were your stories held by the Pentagon? D: Well, it was hard for us to tell...basically, they got better as time went on. Our first dispatch we'd write and they'd read, and then they'd send it, but the guys on our ship weren't smart enough to know that they'd told us stuff the Pentagon would hold...It would have sent some pretty clear messages to our enemies. And so they at the Pentagon held it. Now, what should have happened is that the guys on the ship-our handlers, the Pentagon handlers-should have realized that that stuff would have pro- voked a hold in Washington and ask us to take it out, which we would have done sim- ply to get our stories out. We wouldn't have cared to edit the stuff according to their suggestions. Subsequent stories which they read more closely, and we were more careful in writing, were released in two or three hours. A: Did they tell you whether they were holding back your reports? D: Well, you have to understand that they were our lifeline for every piece of informa- tion...Everything we got, we got from them. They not only told us what happened, they also told us what happened to our stories. A: Were [military personnel] ever reluctant to talk to you? D: They were proud...and would sometimes tell us too much...Now, the day we hit the mines...our handlers disappeared and we got very ansy and we had to pull some-the way we finally got some answers from them was that I wrote up 20 questions with Mark Thompson of Knight-Riddder, and we just threatened to file it, you know, "Here's 20 things we don't know." We figured that would be pretty damaging for the Pentagon to release, and therefore forced them to an- swer the questions...The next day, they coughed up the admiral of the whole opera- tion for us...Since I've been back, it's been harder to find out what's been going on in the Gulf here than there. The next journalist, Bob Frankin, is a photographer for CNN. A: While you were aboard the ship, what kind of restrictions were you under? Frankin: Almost none, almost none. We were not allowed to got into the one room which was off limits to everybody, and that's the code room. Standard stuff...They provided us with one helicopter ride over the area. Now, I should point out that when you say 'aboard the ship' were there restrictions: we were not taken to certain areas. We did not stay with the convoy as they went through the Strait of Hormuz - which we wanted to do...Our prohibitions came up when we wanted to [accompany the convoy] to other areas...They were claiming they didn't have the facilities to do it. A: Your reports from the Pentagon: were they held back or censored? F: No, not at all. A: None of them were held back for any amount of time? F: No, on a couple of occasions they tried to make changes that I would not accept. Minor changes. A: Can you give an example? F: The use of a word. For instance, I used the word 'embarrassed' to describe the min- ing of the Bridgeton, and they didn't like that word, and I had to say to them that that is not anything that has to do with security, I will not accept your authority. And that was the end of it...I consider that perfectly nor- mal, trying to get your point of view across. A: Do you think any situation arose where the Pentagon showed you what they wanted you to see rather than what you'd like to see? F: I at no time was denied seeing what I wanted to see, except that we were not given access to certain parts of the convoy. That is to say, we were basically allowed to be in the area about 18 hours, and that was much less time than the whole convoy. After that we were taken back to Bahrain, so the Pen- tagon did not let us see the entire trip. Tim Ahern from AP also participated in the pool. Although he could not be reached for comment, he wrote about at least two personal instances of attempted censorship in the Persian Gulf by Pentagon officials. In the Washington Journalism Review (8/87); he wrote that Pentagon officials "eliminated...a reference to [navy personnel's] beer drinking...because [the official] said it wouldn't look good to readers back in the United States if they knew." He also wrote that the Pentagon held back some of his stories without letting him know, "because they breached operational security." The Persian Gulf is bound to spawn more crises which the media will report. From these excerpts of interviews and articles of reporters who have participated in the Pen- tagon pool, it is clear that some news stories from the Gulf have been looked over and okayed by a military censor. Readers should be warned about this by editors placing an advisory heading above such stories. While the Pentagon pool provides a new pe'rspec- tive on the Gulf, readers should know that this perspective has been made "acceptable" to a Pentagon censor. Muzammil Ahmed is a stifled Daily Opinion page staffer. . Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Vol. XCVIII, No. 66 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board. All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. Smokers vs. non-smokers Fat back-to-school tips A hearty howdy and welcome back to campus to all my tree town friends and foes. Happy New Year. I hope all of y'all's breaks went well and you're gearing up for the new term. I've got some fat suggestions for you. FAT A L First, boycott classes. It's colder than a well digger's ass out there and that means it's too damn cold to walk all the way to campus just to attend class. For sure do not go to any discussions unless there's already been a lecture. Maybe even two. How important can the first lecture be anyway. Probably just some white haired, hot aired ol' bag of wind puffing out warnings about how hard his class is agonna be, and you'd better be prepared, and yeah, yeah, yeah. Secondly, you're all gonna be greeted by friends, acquaintances, and assorted sordid others with a generic, "How was your break?" Just nod and retort that it was fine. Any more detail and you're bamboozled into a long discourse on the details of couch potatoing, food inhalation, and the virtues of sleeping late. Cut the crap and take a deep whiff. Face it, the break was too short, maybe the shortest in major college history. Everyone wishes it was longer. Of course, the prez who signed the papers didn't care because he's not here anymore. He signed the schedule, knowing full well that Princeton doesn't get going again until late January. Thanks a lot Hal. Another alternative is to blow them away by saying something like "It sucked. My dog died, my parents farm got repossessed, and I flunked all my courses. But I feel great." Then laugh real hard, spit on the ground, and take a pinch of Copenhagen. This way, you'll find out who your true friends are around here anyhow. And who's got time for the rest anyhow? Thirdly, I suggest with true corporeal wisdom that you don't buy your books- you won't read them anyway. Instead invest in a warm, dead-animal garment. Hey, we're the top of the food chain, aren't we? And, man it's some cold out there and nothing can keep your blood flowing like a pelt. Most of you can't trap your o w n vermin like me, so do the next best thing and dish out some beans. Last, it is important for all to remember that with all of the free time available because of the aforementioned suggestions, alternative activities must be found. There are several options here. First, for the wimps in the crowd- do not leave the house except to buy beer. You can have everything else you need delivered; Why doesn't anyone deliver beer anyhow? Sit around, tip a few cold ones, consume, other substances of your choice, watch TV, listen to some tunes, abitchin' and amoanin' about how cold it is, and blah blah blah. You know if this option is for you. Now for the rest of you, those with a hope of salvaging yourselves, hear this. You must conquer the elements and not let them conquer you. All that other crapola I wrote was to test you. If you succumbed, slap, yourself in the face a few times, drink a coldA Pabst Blue Ribbon and get your head; together. I guarandamntee you it's not too cold to go to it, whatever "it" may be. Buy, yourself some cross country skis or, as I. prefer, snowshoes. Then troop through the Arb and act like a Neanderthal. It's the only way to be. Heh-heh-heh.... A belated happy holidays. Hope everyone had a cool yule and a mellow new year...if this column is a little choppy it's cause I'm suffering withdrawls and DT's from ma's:, home cooking. Just think, no road kill stew for months. My stomach's churning just athinkin' about it. Hope to hear from you soon. Where were all those Christmas cards? My fat feelings were hurt. THE RINGING IN OF THE New Year has introduced the start of what promises to be a very ugly war between smokers and non-smokers. California laws eliminating smoking on intrastate mass transit become effective January 1, 1988. In April of this year, a federal statute banning cigarette smoking during shorter flights will be implemented. These and other actions will inevitably heighten tensions between rights advocates on both sides of the issue. Tensions rose to the point of violence last week, when ten smokers on a United Airlines flight defied federal regulations by lighting up on a non-smoking flight, which occurs when there are more non-smoking passengers than non-smoking seats. When a flight attendant tried to grab a cigarette from one of the smokers, a scuffle ensued. The police met the plane upon landing and made three arrests. Though this conflict was aggravated by the belligerent smokers, the incident serves as an example of how many smokers feel threatened. The latest health trend is to coerce smokers into quitting. While the stated motives for this coercion are unimpeachable, the new policies of the airlines and the state and federal governments smack of hypocrisy. There is little doubt in anyone's mind that smoking is hazardous both to smokers and those who encounter power of big business and greed of the state and federal governments is evidenced in the fact that there is not one state in the Union that has a truly protective environmental policy. This does not dismiss the harm of tobacco products, or justify smoking, but it indicates that the airlines and governments are not serious in their concern for people's health. If the airlines really cared about the health of their passengers, they would not sell alcohol on board, or even serve the crap they call food to their patrons. What has brought about these changes in the laws is the shift in the balance of power between lobbying groups for and against smoking. Whereas tobacco concerns previously ruled the appropriate committees of Congress, now politicians are being forced to mouth anti-smoking jargon to appease their constituencies. Several airlines and the Amtrak railroad system have already announced their unwillingness to comply to California's ban, claiming they are not bound by state laws. There is also opposition to the upcoming ban on short flights. The Daily in no way endorses any form of smoking or use of other tobacco products. However, the runaway juggernaut of anti-smoking forces must not be allowed to interfere with the rights of those who do choose to use tobacco. Other cr-strn - 1o - .%" rs.t ~c n" n1 hil LETTERS A need to understand gay problems To the Daily: A friend of mine told me that an editorial such as this could take pages. I suppose i t could-it could take a life- time. All issues have their leading threads. I am gay and have been becoming this way all my life. If only I had known perhaps things might be different. To say I "prefer" or that homosexuality is a preference precludes a choice I never made, nor could I have made. I am not so masochistic. I have no prevailing need of distinction... not more than any other human. the closet. Today he is dying alone of AIDS. Reality has hit home. The hinges of the closet door have a squeaking hu- mility, and mortality is not the issue; we all will die. Life is a process to an end-or a new beginning. Rather, dignity is the issue. The right to be who you are. If my lover were allowed dignity ... if gays were allowed it, he might have a future... he might be healthy. I am lucky. I am alive. My health is confirmed by three negative HIV tests subsequent to this first, and really last. relationshin. So. I "natural" distinction than a virus? Some may argue that societal distinction correlates to that of the virus; 75 percent of the victims are gay. That does not mean that 75 percent of the gays have AIDS. What about the gays who live? What about sexuality? Gays have existed in every echelon of society since the dawn of humanity, and despite AIDS, gays will continue to exist as long as there con- tinues to be natural variance in populations. As long as the process of sexualization con- tinie. A elong a livingr not AIDS. AIDS is a means of rally, but by no means is it our main or only battle. AIDS gives us a sense of humility. It causes us to realize the con- nected and overall battle- DIGNITY. Two coaches I overheard discussing homosexual ac- tivities in a university hall asked, "Why? Why don't they have the decency to do it in their own room? That is disgusting..." That is the issue. Why is it that gay bars are unnamed, in the back of shop- ping centers? Or in the ghettos of Detroit? Why is it that wed