Twisted Logic

I have wondered why news reports keep referring to a video Muslims didn’t like rather than the date of 9/11. I think I have it figured out.

Today’s Washington Free Beacon provided the answer. A statement by Presidential Press Secretary Jay Carney gave me the clue:

CARNEY: We also need to understand that this is a fairly volatile situation and it is in response not to United States policy, and not to, obviously, the administration, or the American people, but it is in response to a video, a film that we have judged to be be reprehensible and disgusting. That in no way justifies any violent reaction to it, but this is not a case of protests directed at the United States writ large or at U.S. policy, this is in response to a video that is offensive to Muslims.

This is very simple–if the protests are about the movie and not about American policy, there is no criticism of President Obama’s foreign policy.

The article also reports:

According to a page on the State Department’s website describing what an embassy is, an attack on an embassy is considered an attack on that country.

“Because an embassy represents a sovereign state, any attack on an embassy is considered an attack on the country it represents,” the page reads.

The logical twists and turns that are taken by the mainstream media to avoid the truth in this situation is amazing.

If you want the full story of what actually happened in Libya (caution: graphic pictures), I would recommend yesterday’s U.K. Daily Mail. Don’t look for the American media to tell the whole story.

Enhanced by Zemanta