Just a reminder...

Tuesday, October 25, 2005
It is not criminal to lie to the press.

Whether it's Cheney, 'sources close to the investigation', or Wilson.

Just saying...

More: There's something else to keep in mind.

Not only is there fibbing, lying, spin, and misrepresentation, there is also disinformation for a purpose.
Everything we know about Valery is from the press, and a little about her involvement in Joe's being sent to Niger from the SSCI report.

That's it.

Even the 'fact' that she's not worked outside the country in over 5 years could be disinformation. Nobody official has confirmed it.

It's stuff like that which is keeping everyone on edge. Because very little we think we know about this whole affair do we actually know.

And I'm not implying that we should be super cynical about everything we read. We have to build our own narratives from the only sources available to us, and the majority of facts we come across can be independently verified.

So that's not really so much of a problem.

It is the situations where there's no real method of independently verifying something where we can be misled.

14 comments:

Rick Ballard said...

As I mentioned over at Just One Minute not only is it not a crime but I consider it a fundamental duty to lie to the press. Given the number of lies printed each day in the media, it only seems fair. Besides, it sharpens their dull senses and stretches their very limited wits. A worthy endeavor to help them improve. If they ever stop lieing to us we might consider not lieing to them. Some day.

heather said...

Hey. You fellas from Belmont and especially, Riger Simon's have bunched up!

Blogdom is, indeed, like the 17th century coffee houses!!

Congratulations!

Syl said...

::waving to heather::

Nice to see you here!!

Syl said...

There's something else to keep in mind. Not only is there fibbing, lying, spin, and misrepresentation, there is also disinformation for a purpose.

Everything we know about Valery is from the press, and a little about her involvement in Joe's being sent to Niger from the SSCI report.

That's it.

Even the 'fact' that she's not worked outside the country in over 5 years could be disinformation.

Nobody official has confirmed that.

It's stuff like that which is keeping everyone on edge. Because nothing we think we know about this whole affair do we actually know.

Syl said...

And I'm not implying that we should be super cynical about everything we read. We have to build our own narratives from the only sources available to us, and the majority of facts we come across can be independently verified.

So that's not really so much of a problem.

It is the situations where there's no real method of independently verifying something where we can be misled.

MeaninglessHotAir said...

Syl,

It is the situations where there's no real method of independently verifying something where we can be misled.

Yes, that's it exactly. Milan Kundera speaks to this quite elegantly.

But "what's a poor boy to do"? I despair of ever getting to the bottom of this elaborate Kabuki dance between the CIA, the White House, and the NYT. At this point it all comes down to faith and I'm just about out.

Heather, Welcome. Thanks. Good to see you here.

Syl said...

MHA

Do you think I really care about the 'facts' at the NYTimes? ;)

Even Whitehouse stuff may come out eventually.

Which leaves, well, we know what it leaves.

terrye said...

syl:

No doubt you are right.

You know when I began to think the whole thing was a big freaking farce?

When I see the picture of Valerie in her sunglasses sitting next to secret agent man in the jag all smiley.

Now there is a low profile for you.

real subtle.

We will see what we see but the media is so good at making moutains out of mole hills I don't have much faith in any reports I hear.

Syl said...

Terrye

Something's going on. This is serious enough to have Fitzgerald on it.

I would like to think that the ditzy blond with the blown cover was her cover. :)

But I hope if it's anything it's something like she's loved by the French and that's why our intelligence agencies are getting along so well when our governments aren't.:)

I doubt if we'll ever know. And I'm disappointed Roger isn't the slightest bit interested in it.

Papa Ray said...

What I want to see is charges brought on the "leakers" and idiots in the CIA.

But of course, that will never happen.

Just like treason charges will not be leveled on some in the media.

Papa Ray
West Texas
USA

Rick Ballard said...

papa ray,

Nice to see you here. I've enjoyed your comments over at BC.

I think there is an even chance that Fitzgerald will nail a few GS-15 or highers at the CIA. Not for conspiring against the administration but for lying to investigators.

Knucklehead said...

Syl,

You raise an excellent point. The "leaking" of info is a time-honored sport - almost an art form.

How do we plebes manage to try and figure things out in the face of this? There's no solid answer to that.

But we need to always keep in mind what we see from the MSM regarding matters for which we do possess some knowledge or even expertise. This helps build the mental habit of stopping to give some thought to MSM techniques and motives. For example their research techniques are often to turn to a very short list of subject matter experts for info and analysis. And since they are commercial operations concerned with their bottom lines they are not motivated to be any harsher than absolutely necessary with those who typically provide them either information/analysis or ad revenue.

This helps one to understand why the MSM is so prone to shallow reporting and analysis and why they seem to so often tip-toe past certain graveyards. It also helps one develop some minor ability to recognize some of the questions which have been neither asked nor answered in pursuit of the "story".

One gets to sometimes recognize where the "information" provided is so shallow as to be useless and frames out the areas where one might be interested in performing further research.

This doesn't help much, at least for me, in areas such as the Plame Blame Game stuff. Trying to follow this one makes my eyes cross - I just can't get at a reasonable level of understanding of the normal machinations to even guess at the motivations.

When I look at this particular case I see a range of possibilites that I don't know how to sift:

- A venal, career "civil servant" suffering from BDS went completely stupid in a very public manner or, perhaps, simply recognized and siezed an opportunity to make some money on the rubber-chicken BDS tour

- An understandably ticked off POTUS administration decided they needed to respond to the stupid and/or opportunistic VCCS-BDS and either did so in standard and defacto legally or cut some corners they shouldn't have thought twice about cutting

- Nothing the least bit unusual or remarkable happened at all and it is blown completely out of proportion for a number of reasons (fill print space/air time, try to draw some blood from here or there)

- some portion, if not the bulk, of the CIA has gone rogue and needs to be slammed on real hard

I don't see, given the info at hand, any particularly nefarious or criminal actions by the administration although it certainly is possible that someone within it crossed some "carreer ending" line in the sand.

RogerA said...

Syl--I suspect you are referring to RLS when you talk about disinterest. In my case, I think the case is illustrative because it really gets to the nature of how business is done in Washington DC and the nature of the MSM as "journalists."

Glad to see Heather here! and welcome Papa Ray.

Syl said...

Knuck

Yes, I agree we have methods of figuring out what is what in general with media reporting.

What I was getting at is that there are certain realities out there that we can't figure out for ourselves...neither can the media even if it wanted to.

And that is direct confirmation of what is or is not relevant in the Plame case concerning status, covertness, damage assessment.

We have NO means of independent verification. That's all controlled by the CIA.

Nothing much we can do about it. And, in fact, we probably shouldn't want to change it. Except, because of the very nature of the job they do, rogues have more power than other citizens. And that should be handled/punished.

RogerA

Yes, I meant the other one. :)

Papa Ray

::waving: Really nice to see you here!!