That's in the past.
This is what the White House, through the medium of its * Goebbels-esque Liar-in-Chief of a Press Secretary Jay Carney, wants us to think about an event that happened less than eight months ago. In his words:
" 'Let’s be clear,” Carney said in response to a question from Ed Henry. “Benghazi happened a long time ago. We are unaware of any agency blocking an employee who would like to appear before Congress to provide information related to Benghazi.' "
By saying that the White House is unaware of any "blocking" of people from providing information to Congress about the lack of response to the pleas for help from the besieged, Carney must be trying to avoid admitting that individuals, not agencies, do the thug work. The State Department is obviously not going to go on record as making threats; that is the job of selected members who have been assigned the task. By using the specific word blocking, Carney must mean that no one has been physically restrained from driving or walking to the earlier hearings, the press, or any Congressman's office. To him, threatening them with the losses of their jobs or promotions or possible prosecution for divulging information that has conveniently been classified Secret would not count as "blocking".
To paraphrase what regular guys in New York City would say in answer to Carney's assertion, "I got news for you Jay, everything that has ever happened in the history of the world is in the past. If it wasn't then it didn't happen yet."
I guess that we are supposed to apply a Monty Python and the Holy Grail line of thinking to Benghazi - "Well then, I suppose it was a long time ago. Let's forget about the whole thing - it was silly after all".
I guess that we are supposed to apply a Monty Python and the Holy Grail line of thinking to Benghazi - "Well then, I suppose it was a long time ago. Let's forget about the whole thing - it was silly after all".
Unless period specified by a Statute of Limitations for a particular crime has passed, then I believe that dismissing an event as having occurred "a long time ago" (Which also factually false as the attack was less than two-thirds of a year ago) does not get one off the hook. As an aside, I once had an officer who was assigned to my section try the 'That's in the past" defense when he was being counselled for a years-long pattern for abuse of sick time (He has been bounced from supervisor to supervisor over a period of time and I saw that his performance failures had not been addressed. My answer was that, if his attendance issues were not in the past, then I would not be counseling him about it because it would not have occurred.
The bulk of our media will do all in their power to ignore the picture that is unfolding, will run interference** for the administration, and will not jump on board unless we do start getting some real information. We can also say with certainty that they will refrain from doing their jobs until the very last minute - and then only if the administration has already been proven guilty as sin.
When the earlier hearings ended on a pathetically weak note, I think that the White House staff really thought that they had dodged this bullet and consequently breathed a collective sigh of relief. This time, it appears that they are concerned that Rep. Gowdy and others mean business.
One last note - at some point those who know what happened will have no choice but to come forward with the truth even if they are ultimately denied authorization to do so. The blood of the victims cries out for justice, and sometimes people have to risk being punished for doing what is right.
Christians and Jews would say that God demands that we put the lives of, and need for justice for, others ahead of concerns about our own prosperity and safety. Even the pre-Christian Northmen and other early Germanic peoples would say that the Norns who spin and weave the fates of man will put one in situations not one's choosing but will require noble actions.
*http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/goebbelslie.html
"Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels was the master of the “big lie” tactic in which a lie, no matter how outrageous, is repeated often enough that it will eventually be accepted as truth. Goebbels explained:
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.' "
**"Run interference" is a term from American football.
0 comments:
Post a Comment