Leftist publication regurgitates intellectually bankrupt White House talking point
Paul Joseph Watson
May 13, 2014
In an article for leftist publication Salon.com, writer Arthur Goldwag characterizes the Benghazi cover-up as a “conspiracy theory” backed by nothing more than “faith,” a ludicrous assertion given the recent release of emails which proved a deliberate effort to mislead on behalf of the Obama administration.
In a sophomoric piece entitled, Benghazi nuts, anti-vaxxers, birthers: Do they really buy their own nonsense?, Goldwag asks, “Why do people believe ridiculous things, in despite of all reason and proofs to the contrary?”
One of those “ridiculous things” is the notion that there was a cover-up surrounding the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, which Goldwag labels a “conspiracy theory” backed by no evidence, comparing belief that the Obama administration lied about the incident to belief in the King James Bible.
Goldwag goes on to equate believers in a Benghazi cover-up to those who supported Stalin’s mass starvation of millions of Russians in the 1930’s.
In characterizing the notion that there was a cover-up surrounding the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission as a “conspiracy theory,” Salon is regurgitating White House talking points. Last week, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said that a new investigation into the attack was unwarranted because the “conspiracy theories” had “fallen apart.”
In typical fashion, Goldwag’s smearing of those who assert there was a Benghazi cover-up with the pejorative “conspiracy theory” term is a poor substitute for him failing to even acknowledge never mind attempt to debunk actual hard evidence which clearly indicates there was a cover-up surrounding the attack in Benghazi.
Goldwag makes no mention whatsoever of emails released under the Freedom of Information Act earlier this month which reveal how Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, coached then U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice “to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.”
The fact that the assault on the consulate was a terror attack and not a protest gone awry as a result of a YouTube video was known by U.S. intelligence officials within 24 hours of the incident, yet the Obama administration continued to blame the YouTube video for a full week.
This is not a “conspiracy theory” or an article of “faith,” it’s an acknowledged fact, as are discrepancies between the emails released as a result of the FOIA request and those released to the House oversight committee, indicating an attempt to hide information (in other words, a cover-up).
No matter what the scale of the Benghazi cover-up, to deny that there was any cover-up or attempt to mislead at all by ludicrously dismissing the entire issue as a “conspiracy theory” on a par with UFO’s, Area 51 and faked moon landings, as Congresswoman Jane Harman (D-CA) did recently, is a pathetic and desperate act of intellectual cowardice which also underscores how the “conspiracy theory” pejorative has been abused so many times that it is now practically meaningless.