Language in the modern political state

There's so much spin, it's hard to appreciate. We're in a war, they tell us, so lines like Operation Iraqi Freedom are accepted at face value. Why is it there's spin even in operational names? It's obvious why. Because it spins well in an accepting media. But it's not just in names. Here's choice bit of code to disentangle. I heard this this afternoon on ABC (Australian) Radio National. "The Taliban being the political articulation of the views of Al Quaida" (Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Alexander Downer, in interview, broadcast on ABC Radio National ~5.42pm, AEST, 6 May 2003). I don't know the details, but I think that is a very big claim to make. But I do know that if accepted, it makes the invasion of a country, and replacement of its political structure and leadership a justified action for an increasingly frightened populace. Why is it that the right is presiding over this growth of fear, wars, security and militarism? Is it all so easy; is the answer simply "evil"? I doubt it, as do many others, but we have been effectively silenced.