Before the sun set on Monday, America and the world witnessed an ocean of coverage regarding
     the six-month anniversary of the September 11th attacks. The networks showed graphic coverage of
     the Towers falling, the dust and debris in the New York streets, the pain and woe, and the heroism
     of firefighters and police. The dead were remembered. The soldiers in Afghanistan were lionized.
          This is all just and proper. September 11th was a national trauma on the level of the
     assassination of John F. Kennedy. In many ways, it was worse. Only one man died that day in
     Dallas. On September 11th, we lost thousands. Along the way, we saw bravery on a scale
     unmatched perhaps since a June day in 1944, when average Americans ran through a hail of steel
     and fire on a beach in France. What the police and firefighters ran through on September 11th was
     no less deadly. What our soldiers currently face in Afghanistan is likewise proving to be deadly, as
     well.
          Yet we must be cautious as we appraise the time that has passed since that wretched day. For
     all the good that has come from a nation united, there has been a larger surge of dangerous
     misdirection, folly and polished ugliness passing itself off as patriotism. For all the facts of note that
     will be remarked upon as we pass this anniversary, let us observe in equal measure those items
     which have helped point this country in a disturbing direction.
          We must remember that no explanation for the events of September 11th have been forthcoming
     in these six passed months. 9/11 was many things, but above all it was an intelligence failure of
     spectacular dimensions. The CIA, FBI and NSA were all caught flat-footed, and not one official has
     come forward with an explanation. We have been told the attack came because certain individuals in
     the world hate our freedom, and that is all we know.
          Yet we also know that Bush and Cheney have pressured Senate Majority Leader Daschle to
     avoid too many piercing questions into why 9/11 happened. These are the two men whose chief
     responsibility it is to ensure that such an attack never comes again. Ostensibly, the War on Terror
     serves that purpose. The war, however, cannot correct institutional flaws within our security
     apparatus. Such an investigation necessarily must fall to Congress, and it would seem sensible for
     the White House to warmly accept their help. That has not been the case.
          If we do not dig deep and hard into the reasons behind why 9/11 was allowed to happen, we
     leave ourselves open and vulnerable to another attack. This is unacceptable. On this six-month
     anniversary, we should put pressure on the White House to avoid blocking any Congressional
     investigations that seek answers to this most vital of questions. If they do not, we must demand
     from them an explanation of their motives.
          On this anniversary, we must also look hard at the War on Terror itself. It remains an undeclared
     war, and yet more and more resources are being poured into it. On Monday, Bush announced some
     new steps to be taken in this fight. Chief among them is his intention to push the battle into
     countries that do not request our presence. This is unilateralism on an unprecedented scale, and
     pushes his "With us or against us" rhetoric onto truly hazardous ground.

     Bush also intends to use his speech on Monday to further whip up support for an invasion of Iraq.
     The Guardian of London reports that Bush has asked British Prime Minister Tony Blair to draw up
     plans that would commit 25,000 British troops to that battle.

     Over the weekend, the Los Angeles Times broke a story about a secret Pentagon report detailing
     their intention to broaden the definition of circumstances in which nuclear weapons might be used.
     The report also outlined the need for a whole new galaxy of weapons that could be brought into
     Bush's terror war.

     All of this takes place within the context of a fight in Afghanistan that is far from finished. The Al
     Qaida stronghold outside Gardez has not fallen, despite days of pounding from the air and a
     sustained assault from U.S. and Afghan forces. Nine Americans have died in the battle, according to
     reports, and scores more have been wounded. Wintry weather has choked the offensive, proving
     once again that any army fighting a war in Afghanistan must combat the climate as much as any
     enemy troops.

     More disturbing is the report that a rupture has taken place within the ranks of Afghan forces fighting
     with the Americans. The split falls along tribal lines, as everything seems to in Afghanistan. Pashtun
     commander Mohammad Ismail has demanded that all fighters of Tajik blood remove themselves
     from the fight; Ismail fears the Tajiks will claim Gardez as theirs if they succeed in dislodging the Al
     Qaida fighters. In response, American commanders have "repositioned" some 400 troops to get
     clear of the new conflict within allied ranks. Through all of this, the Al Qaida forces continue to fire
     back.

     This does not bode well for our efforts in that country. Many have claimed that our experience with
     war in Afghanistan will be different from what the Soviets endured during their time there. This most
     recent event, combined with the fighting that recently broke out between other factions within the
     Northern Alliance, give lie to such statements. There are no clear sides in Afghanistan, and loyalty
     blows in the wind of tribal factionalism.

     In the Soviet war, the Afghans enjoyed arms, funding and training from America. Now, the common
     belief is that the Afghans enjoy no rich sugar daddy to help them. This is raised as another
     difference between then and now. Yet the commander of one Northern Alliance force currently
     fighting another Northern Alliance force, Dotsum, is receiving arms and training from Iran as well as
     from Russian Special Forces. Groups loyal to the Taliban in Pakistan are also supplying support, as
     is China. Where one American sugar daddy once stood, there is now an international amalgam of
     aid. Add to this the fact that America is in fact arming any group that proclaims their loyalty to our
     cause. Nothing stops them from taking those weapons and acting against our interests. The rift on
     the slopes of Gardez is evidence enough of that fact.

     It is not called the Great Game for nothing, and the "we'll get 'em" ethic of explaining the facts on
     the ground there paper over all the dangers we currently face.

     Americans demanded action after 9/11, and they have gotten it. Yet on this anniversary we must
     examine the dangers inherent in an open-ended and ill-defined global engagement. As we polish our
     nuclear weapons, ask for 25,000 British troops, and claim the right to invade whatever nation we
     wish with or without their permission or request, all the while sinking deeper into a murky quagmire
     in Afghanistan, it appears we have gotten far more than we bargained for. An explanation of what
     shall define victory in this fight, and a setting of clear parameters, is required.

     Finally, as we pass this anniversary, we must look to define patriotism. Senators Daschle and Kerry
     chose recently to question, in the mildest of terms, the direction of this war. They were pilloried on
     all sides for this, and their commitment to America called into question. It seems the White House
     would like nothing more than to marginalize Congressional oversight, in defiance of the Constitution,
     and will stoop to whatever hyperbole is available to do so.

     Senator John Kerry won the Silver Star, the Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts during his time in
     the Vietnam War. Upon his return home, he became active in the Vietnam Veterans Against the
     War. Of all those active in politics today, it is Kerry's wise voice we must turn to. He knows the
     needs of war personally, and also knows when a war has crossed the boundaries of common sense
     and control.

     Many of his detractors - Dick Armey, Tom Delay, Trent Lott, Dick Cheney, and George W. Bush
     among them - used family influence to avoid combat in Vietnam. Rather than attack the messenger,
     these people should take note of Kerry's concerns, as he is far more versed in the truths of war than
     they. If we are to be truly united, these men should avoid attacking the patriotism of a man who gave
     so much to his country while they stayed home when the call to serve came.

     The world will pause as we pass this anniversary. Americans must take that moment of quiet to look
     around and determine whether this nation is forging the proper course. The world is a dangerous
     place, as the crater in Manhattan clearly shows. If we are to make it less so, then a hard appraisal
     of our actions to date is required. The greatest defeat of all would be if our course, begun with such
     fanfare and support, brings us into a world where 9/11 seems mild by comparison. We are a fair
     piece down that road already.

     Remember the dead. Pray for the living. Accept no substitutes for the truth. Do these things
     unswervingly, and this anniversary will not pass in vain.