"…some of the legislation proposed thus far threatens the rights of the public and undermines the confidentiality that is crucial for the flow of information needed for the provision of library services and importantly, the vitality of our democracy."

     At page 14 we have our cover story, 8 pages out of 100. The first page focuses on what various libraries did to help after 9/11 in terms of fund raising, children’s programs, and dealing with the increase in demand of information on Islam and the Middle East. Then we get the subtitle “FBI targets library computers” which should have been titled “Terrorists rely on library computers” because we get a pretty interesting look at just how the terrorists did use libraries for communication. Interesting note near the end of this section:

The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported October 10 that the terrorists may have haunted Las Vegas as well. Employees of the West Charleston branch of the Las Vegas--Clark County Library District reported to the FBI that they may have recognized some of them. State law against the seizing of library records without probable cause prevented the immediate confiscation of computers there.

     As we know from the debates over the Patriot Act, being involved with terrorism or terrorists is not considered probable cause. Glad we got that straightened out.

     We get a brief mention of librarians who died on 9/11 along with some very interesting eyewitness accounts on that day. Then we end the first half of the cover story with a short section titled "Patriotism versus freedom" that focuses mainly on a head librarian in a Florida University who had ordered her staff not to wear flag pins on duty in order to avoid offending foreign students. She was severely reprimanded and received a month suspension without pay. An odd focus but the piece ends with a paragraph containing this: "...libraries in this time of feverish patriotism...will be challenged to protect open access and the public's right to know." [emphasis mine]

     The first half was written by Leonard Kniffel, then we have two shorter pieces written by Jennifer Pierce and Julie Novacek. The first titled "Recovery in Washington", the second "Coping in New York". Each provided a look at libraries in those areas closest to the tragedy. They offer a important view of what it is to work in a area suffering from devastation.

     Of course from there we're back into routine, talking about nimda worms, school funding, and of course they have to have the Censorship Watch section. Free Uncle Remus!

     It's ho hum until we get to the Thus Said section and we are treated to a cartoon showing a gentleman at a computer and being asked to click on one of two options, Freedom or Security. You can only choose one you know!

     Then we are back to Kniffel who has his monthly editorial and this month chose to bemoan the fact that people had dared to suggest maybe Banned Book Week should be postponed due to 9/11. He makes an interesting point and one I'm sure you probably won't hear again, that BBW would have been an excellent opportunity to read excerpts from Salman Rushdie works and think about how Iran chose to voice their displeasure with him by calling for his head. Of course, BBW didn't highlight his work, only American 'censorship' seems to count. [Make a note of this people, I think we have a plan for BBW 2005]

     On the next page [39] I must say I was flabbergasted. There is a piece there that is a work of art and without question the only truly patriotic piece in the magazine. I encourage everyone to read it, hell, frame it. Its called "When Books Weren't Enough" and its by a librarian named Stacy Smith. I call her a librarian but in 'official' circles she is a paralibrarian, maybe that's how the article slipped by. You read the article and see if you don't think she's the real deal.

     From there we are forced to slog through several irrelevant articles, the titles I mentioned being on the cover, until pg 68 where we have a piece by Karen Schneider called "With All Our Heart". Its not a bad piece, no sign of the FBI for which I'm grateful. Its a look at how librarians conducted themselves on that day, which is fair, librarians near the areas of the attacks did more then all right.

     Of course we get to end the issue with Will's World. Here's a paragraph:

Our fears have allowed us to make religious and racial prejudice socially acceptable again in our everyday lives. This is all the more frustrating because we have made so much progress in the past 20 years to instill a new respect for tolerance and fairness. In times like this we librarians have a major role to play. We are the ones who have the information that can defeat the racial and religious stereotyping that is based upon myth, prejudice, and misinformation.

     Yuh.

     Okay, that's the whole issue.

      On September 11, 2001 3000 people were murdered in cold blood. The Two Towers, symbols of America's strong economy known around, the world were destroyed. The Pentagon, the heart of America's defense was struck brutally. And in a field in Pennsylvania the spirit, the soul, of America was shown in the brave and heroic deaths of over 40 Americans.

     I remember the months after 9/11 when editorial writers were wondering why the government wasn't asking citizens to do more to help the war effort, to sacrifice in some way to help. This is why. When given the opportunity to address an event that changed us forever ALA and American Libraries chose to spend its time between being impressed with their own profession and creating a hysteria against the country, their own country, that was attacked. The only piece written to show love of country was written by someone who by most in our profession wouldn't even be considered a Librarian.