Ah, Dear Gentle Reader(s), diplomacy is a fine art, indeed. Today, on NPR's Morning Edition, Renee Montagne spoke with David Welch, an assistant secretary of state "for Near Eastern affairs."
At the end of the conversation, Montagne took up the issue of the contradiction between President Carter and Secretary of State Rice where the Secretary said Mr. Carter had been advised not to go, and the President responded that he had received no such advice from Welch.
Montagne asked, "...can you just clear that up?" Welch sidestepped the issue with, "Well, we've been on the record on this...I'd really rather not get into it any more...I did counsel about our concerns about Hamas...That it is what it is..and I'd prefer to leave it right there."
Clever.
Note, DGR(s), that Welch did not gainsay Mr. Carter. State has, indeed, been on the record. Mr. Carter is also on the record. Mr. Welch is the only person who knows the truth of the matter, and Mr. Welch is not on the record. "...it is what it is..." That can mean anything as well as nothing. Was Mr. Carter advised not to go? Mr. Welch is not saying.
The question remains, who is being more truthful? Mr. Carter, a Nobel Peace Prize winner or Ms Rice, a spinmeister for the administration's march to a dubiously warranted war?
Trust, but verify.
Sphere: Related Content
Wait, you missed the best part:
ReplyDelete"It's often said that Hamas won an election, that's true, but they won it by a plurality of the vote"
So in that case, President Bush didn't win an election either? Or Bill Clinton?
Um...OK, but I'm not certain of the relevance to the basic point of who is telling the truth vis a vis Carter/Rice.
ReplyDelete