Once in a while Andrew C. McCarthy writes something that
says more about him than the subject he is trying to write about. A case in
point is his latest creation: “'Blaming It On the Video' Was a Fraud for the
Cairo Rioting, Too.” It was published on May 13, 2013 in National Review
Online.
There is no doubt he believes he is credible in saying that
the Obama administration has lied about the Benghazi
episode, and the Cairo
episode too. But by the time you go through what he has written, you get the
sense that the administration only did what all administrations do which is to
recognize that when they speak, they do so to multiple audiences at home and
abroad. Thus, different representatives of the same administration may deliver
one message somewhat differently at different venues, each tailored for a
specific audience.
Thankfully, McCarthy demonstrates that he has a level of
intelligence which allows him to see for himself that something can be true but
not all that true. Here is how he put it: “This conventional wisdom is wrong
[but] there is a kernel of truth to it...” Saying it this way, he recognizes
that there are shades of truth. Unfortunately, however, this is only how far
his intelligence will go. What he does not grasp is that everyone does not see
the same shades with the same level of intensity. Thus, what is a kernel of
truth to him may be no truth at all to someone else, while being the absolute
truth to yet another one.
In the meantime, given that riots have erupted in Pakistan
because of a video that slandered the prophet Mohammed, the best version of an
American message to the United Nation would have to be that a bad video cannot
be justification to start a riot. And this is exactly what president Obama said
when he stood at the podium of the United Nation.
There is another matter escaping McCarthy and those like
him. It is the fact that the kids who were pitted against America have a mentality that is no different
from the mentality of the big brass and the high honchos of Israel . It is
that the back-alley kids of Afghanistan
and Yemen seek to do to America what the Israeli apparatus seeks to do
to places like Iran , Lebanon and Gaza . They want the people there to live in
fear of them; they want the people to be in a permanent state of terror.
Thus, it serves the Israelis well when writers like those
frequently published in National Review Online serve as mouthpieces for them
and write article after article on how Israel is about to bomb Iran, for
example. The intent here is to accomplish something at no cost and no effort to
Israel .
Likewise, the kids in the back-alleys of Afghanistan and Yemen relish the
thought that people like McCarthy, McCain and Graham voluntarily serve as
mouthpieces for them, and raise their “terrorist” profile in the eyes of the
American people, thus accomplish something at no cost and no effort to them.
Sugar daddies to the terrorists – all three of them. Life cannot get any better
when your allies are so devoted to your cause.
We know why the writers who volunteer to serve as
mouthpieces for Israel
do it. What is puzzling is why McCarthy, McCain and Graham volunteer to serve
the back-alley kids of Afghanistan
and Yemen .
In the absence of a definitive answer to that question, we have the right to
guess that in the case of at least Andrew McCarthy, the phenomenon has
something to do with him suffering from a complex of inferiority.
The proof is that he mentions “Islamic supremacists” four
times in his article. He formed that impression while prosecuting a blind Sheik
and the handful of kids who used to follow him. If this is what made McCarthy
generalize that the kids were supremacists, we must conclude that what is at
work here is the principle of relativity. The truth cannot be that these kids
are superior; it must be that he is inferior by comparison to them.
A sugar daddy that is such a wretch. What a pity!