"We have to recognize that 15 of the sites, nuclear sites, are available or are potentially penetrable by jihadists. Six attempts have already been made on nuclear sites. This is more than an existential threat."
This article shows that Bachmann's threats were checked by the National Journal, and none of the information was found to be true. As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, Bachmann upholds a position of high responsibility where she has the power to choose which information dictates American policymakers' actions and monitor the flow of information to the House. This comment can only be considered one of two things: A fabrication of serious evidence, or a leak of secret information which has not yet been released. Either way, while her motives of protecting the U.S. from WMD's is noble, her execution is all wrong. A likely possibility is that the information she gave was fabricated, and was used only to further her argument. The necessity to take correct information and warp it in order to fit one's argument is completely illogical, any way you look at it. It's possible that the mindset necessary to accept the Bible at its every word, for it's face value in addition to its moral value, may be similar to the mindset it takes for Bachmann to be convinced that funding Pakistan will indirectly lead to funding jihadists. While this might be true on an entirely different level, fabricating evidence and moving through the electoral with an unreasonable and closed mind will not lead to logical or cooperative solutions. Theoretically, for her to win even just the primary election, she would have to make huge changes to her strategy and maybe even her personality, but among those things would be to stop telling lies.
No comments:
Post a Comment