Posts Tagged “cia”

OlKu / Flying Saucer with Alien, via Open Clip Art LibraryThe 1947 Roswell, NM UFO incident is the stuff of UFOphile legend. For “true believers” in extraterrestrial visitation, it’s pretty much all they need to know. That it was not actually an extraterrestrial vehicle crash, does not matter to them. That no one has offered the slightest bit of verifiable evidence it might have been, does not matter to them. That the government has explained what really happened — over and over and over and over and over again — does not matter to them. No, the more they’re told it wasn’t an extraterrestrial crash, and could not have been, the more convinced they become that’s precisely what it was.

For UFOphiles, facts are irrelevant … they know “the Truth” and that’s all there is to it.

But it’s not as though they haven’t had time to gather up and present some meaningful, compelling evidence. Say, pieces of the crashed vehicle which have been objectively tested and determined to have only extraterrestrial origin. Or body parts that have been examined and shown cannot be from any animal on earth. UFOphiles have had decades to produce that — but they have staunchly and vehemently refused to do so. Instead, they just bellyache and whine about “government cover-ups,” as though somehow that absolves them of the obligation to demonstrate the veracity of their outlandish claims.

It’s not a coincidence that, on the 65th anniversary of the supposed “flying saucer crash,” one more wingnut UFOphile has decided to come forward and claim he somehow knows an extraterrestrial vehicle crashed that day in 1947. As USA Today reports via the Detroit Free Press, he’s a former CIA agent who says he saw the evidence in a government vault (WebCite cached article):

A former CIA agent is going on the record to say the alleged UFO incident on July 8, 1947, in Roswell, N.M., really happened, the Daily Mail and other news organizations report.

Chase Brandon, who worked 35 years with the CIA, said documents regarding the alleged landing of beings from outer space are locked up at the CIA’s headquarters in Langley, Va.

He found evidence in a mysterious box in CIA headquarters … but strangely, refuses to say what was in the box:

“That’s all I will ever say to anybody about the contents of that box,” [the Huffington Post] quoted Brandon as saying. “But it absolutely for me was the single validating moment that everything I had believed and knew that so many others believed had happened truly was what occurred.”

So, Mr Brandon, you say you’ve seen evidence … but not only do you refuse to produce it, you refuse even to describe it? We’re just supposed to take your word for it? Because you’ve said so? Really!?

Sorry, but no. You want to say you can “prove” an extraterrestrial vehicle crashed at Roswell NM, Mr Brandon? Then produce your fucking evidence … or else shut the fuck up and go away. I’m not stupid enough just to swallow the line you’ve reeled out, and I’m insulted you would actually expect me to do so. Man up, Mr Brandon … and all the rest of you UFOphile lunatics. Your games and bullshit are juvenile, and insulting to our intelligence. Take responsibility for your claims. Either produce objective, verifiable evidence for them, or go away and stop bothering the rest of us. OK?

Photo credit: OlKu, via the Open Clip Art Project.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments Comments Off on Former CIA Agent Says E.T.s Crashed At Roswell NM

I’ve already blogged about one example of moral relativity from the Right … an ideology that condemns all moral relativity as repugnant, but which engages in it nonetheless. There is another example of this hypocritical phenomenon, however, which is playing out not in the world of beauty pageants, but in Washington DC.

The issue is “harsh interrogation” (aka “torture,” “waterboarding,” “enhanced interrogation,” whatever you choose to call it; I’ll refer to it hereafter as simply “torture”). Democrats (rank and file) and the Left generally have complained for years against the Bush 43 administration’s use of torture. The Right, however, staunchly refused to concede there could have been anything wrong with it … in spite of the fact that public distaste for it may well have played a role in Democratic electoral victories last year. Unable to admit the possibility of error, even out of office, Rightists like Dick Cheney and Karl Rove are trumpeting how successful their torture program was. Cheney, for example, declared that his administration’s use of torture had saved “perhaps hundreds of thousands of lives” (see this AFP story).

The Right has also begun claiming that the former administration’s use of torture was actually morally acceptable, because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — among other Democrats in Washington — had been briefed on it at the time, as long ago as 2002 or 2003. This story has been all over the Right-wing news outlets, such as Drudge Report, Fox News, etc. (Here’s a sample Wall Street Journal story on it by none other than Karl Rove.)

The Right’s position appears to be that Democrats in Congress were told about the torture, but said nothing, which makes it morally acceptable. In other words, the administration’s opposition consented, so it was OK to torture.

This is a specious argument, however, and exhibits shades of moral relativity. That one’s opponents do nothing to stop one from doing something immoral, does not somehow make it moral; it just means that something immoral was done without interference. The real moral issue here is not whether Congressional Democrats consented to the use of torture. It is, instead, whether or not it’s moral to torture people. That Democrats may or may not have known about it, does not make it moral. This matter is, in fact, quite irrelevant. This notion reduces morality to a matter of consent between opposing parties.

This is a gross violation of the Right’s underlying philosophical assumption that morals are always absolute and non-negotiable in all cases. Quite the contrary to this “absolute” philosophy, they have decided that the morality of torture is negotiable, in spite of this.

This, of course, makes them hypocrites — brazenly and obviously violating their own claimed principles in order to justify their own actions. Nice, huh?

One last consideration: The idea that Pelosi, or any other Democrat, could have raised Cain over the torture, had they been upset about it after having been briefed on it, is invalid by itself. CIA briefings are frequently confidential; those briefed cannot disclose the information gained. For her to have shared this information with others, then rallied others against it, would have violated that confidentiality. Congressional Democrats’ ability to do anything about the torture was extremely limited. In many ways, they could not “consent” to it, since their legal power to approve or disapprove of the administration’s actions, was almost non-existent.

The bottom line here is that the Right has engaged in a practice that may or may not have been morally acceptable … but rather than justify it morally, based on the principles of morality itself, they’re claiming it was acceptable because their opponents didn’t stop them. That position, all by itself, is morally repugnant. The Right, once again, is as hypocritical as it could be. (Not that this is unexpected.)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments Comments Off on Right-Wing Moral Relativity Continues