It's not often one gets the pleasure of seeing two detestable and duplicitous entities square off against each other. Thus it was more than enjoyable watching that nest of vipers known as the U.S. State Department square off their fellow vipers at CNN. It seems the network obtained the personal journal of slain Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens, and used it to broadcast news reports based on it contents, despite requests by Stevens' family that they not do so. CNN's rationale? "CNN did not initially report on the existence of a journal out of respect for the family, but we felt there were issues raised in the journal which required full reporting, which we did," the network said in a statement.
Got that? We didn't tell you we have a journal, or that we a broke a promise to Stevens' family not to use it, but there was too much juicy stuff in it to resist, so we decided to use it anyway--and all of these machinations constitute "full reporting."
So the State Department is incensed as a result. Of course, that would be the very same State Department--will the full knowledge and blessing of their boss, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and her boss, Barack Obama--peddling one of the most outrageous loads of b.s. ever to come down the pike regarding the attack in Benghazi. And off course, CNN is an integral part of the see-no-Obama-administration-evil brigade of media suck-ups, that dutifully supported that narrative, right up to the time when it became completely unsupportable to do so.
What got four Americans killed in Benghazi? A deadly combination of progressive-inspired hubris in general, and the contemptible narcissism of Barack Obama in particular. Progressive hubris is nothing new. The same group of self-righteous know-nothings, who have accused their opponents of waging "war" on women, poor people, gays, and the elderly, literally eliminated the one genuine war from their vocabulary: in 2009, Clinton announced that the phrase "war on terror" will no longer be used by the administration to describe what it is going on in the Middle East. This Orwellian construct was confirmed as recently as April by White House spokesman Tommy Vieto, who further clarified that the "war on terror" is over--even as we remain in some sort of "altercation" with al-Qaeda.
That would be the same al-Qaeda that blew away Stevens and three other Americans, even as our Narcissist-in-Chief gave his marching orders to administration fluffers like U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, and White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, to sell the idea that it wasn't al-Qaeda at all, but the result of a "spontaneous" demonstration that got out of control. Of course Obama and Hillary, who also flacked the company line, knew every bit of it was a lie, but when you're as heavily invested in hubris and narcissism as this bunch is, admitting that your "enlightened" policy of Muslim "outreach" just came back to bite you on the butt, cannot be tolerated.
That dynamic duo knew something else as well. They knew organizations like CNN, et al, would dutifully follow suit as long as they could. And right off the bat America's media # allowed themselves to be played for the suckers they truly are. For the better part of a week, the story wasn't about the colossal failure of the administration's "leading from behind" approach to Libya, its failure to anticipate uprisings on 9/11, or its host of other Middle East initiatives, most of which fall under the heading of sucking up to our enemies, while alienating our friends. No, no, no, it was all about Mitt Romney's temerity for daring to notice. It was about staying with the administration's meme that a 14-minute movie trailer denigrating the Prophet Mohammed---that had been on the Internet for weeks before the rioting ensued--was the proverbial match that lit the Islamist fuse.
Even now, in one of the more pathetic apologies made by an administration that constantly apologizes for our nation, the State Department announced it is spending $70,000 of taxpayer money to air an ad on Pakistani television. It features President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton denouncing the video. Not defending the First Amendment. Not warning these thugs that the billions of dollars we give them in foreign aid funding is at stake if they don't clean up their act. Simply berating the same video that inspired these staunch defenders of freedom to "suggest" to YouTube that it "review" it policy for posting such videos.
And they're offended that CNN would exploit a dead ambassador's diary?
I'm guessing more Americans are offended by an administration and a mainstream media that would lie unabashedly about the real reasons Stevens, and the Americans who attempted to defend him, were killed. I'm guessing they'll be even more offended when the wheels finally come off the administration's other fairy tale as well, which is the idea that the crowd in Benghazi dragging Stevens' body through the streets, shouting Alluhua Akbar, were concerned citizens "taking him to the hospital," as Mrs. Clinton put it. The flacks at the New York Times swallowed that bit whole, noting that in the video, "none say anything that shows ill will." Other less administration-friendly translations of the Arabic spoken in that video suggest exactly the opposite, that these men were reveling in the death of an American.
Given that the media/administration version regarding rest of the story has blown up, I'm betting Islamist thugs behaving like Islamist thugs is the likelier scenario.
The administration's kerfuffle with CNN? Just another distraction from the stench of failure that surrounds not just foreign policy, but every other administration policy as well. Thus, Americans will be orchestrated to direct their wrath at Anderson Cooper, instead of administration that can't even get to a crime scene to seal it, quicker than a news organization can get there to exploit it. We're supposed to have our attention diverted from the reality of administration that courts Islamist Egyptian president Mohammed Morsi, even as it snubs Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.
We're supposed to take at face value--from an administration that lies unabashedly and without restraint--that there is no truth to the idea that Barack Obama would consider transferring blind sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman to the custody of Egyptian officials as a "goodwill gesture," despite the reality that he is serving a life sentence for attempting to blow up the World Trade Center in 1993. Remember this is the same president who was caught on camera promising Russian president Dmitry Medvedev he's have more "flexibility" following his re-election. Is there any doubt Obama would pursue a similar "reset" policy with the Muslim Brotherhood?
As for CNN, not to worry. The Obama administration and the news network will kiss and make up in short order. There's an election to win, and getting Barack Obama back in the White House is a high priority. This is nothing more than a spat between allies, nothing more than the latest distraction in a long line of distractions designed to take the American public's attention away from one of the most corrupt and incompetent administrations in the history of the nation.
Distracting Americans' attention from that reality is a dirty job, but somebody has to do it. CNN will be back with the media pack doing just that before you know it.
