10-06-2016, 02:08 PM
Ventus: sure thing. Here's my latest - a reply to "Sajid UK" re: his Sept 29, 9:27AM comment to me, stating that he preferred "secrets and obfuscation" to a potentially destabilizing truth:
"@Sajid: thanks for the kind words. I enjoy your contributions as well. But on the narrow point you emphasize: I disagree strenuously. I do NOT prefer a soothing lie over a disturbing truth. Lies do more damage when left to fester under the skin than they do if lanced. And the precedent your philosophy sets is, to me, a very dangerous one: if we stop sniffing around whenever our leaders say "state secrets!", what will stop them from using that excuse whenever they want? To what degree of incompetence, corruption, and outright evil are we prepared to turn a blind eye, in order to ensure our leaders have plenty of space to park all their "noble" lies?
Believe me: I'm absolutely sure you just want what's best for all involved. But believe me: so do I."
"@Sajid: thanks for the kind words. I enjoy your contributions as well. But on the narrow point you emphasize: I disagree strenuously. I do NOT prefer a soothing lie over a disturbing truth. Lies do more damage when left to fester under the skin than they do if lanced. And the precedent your philosophy sets is, to me, a very dangerous one: if we stop sniffing around whenever our leaders say "state secrets!", what will stop them from using that excuse whenever they want? To what degree of incompetence, corruption, and outright evil are we prepared to turn a blind eye, in order to ensure our leaders have plenty of space to park all their "noble" lies?
Believe me: I'm absolutely sure you just want what's best for all involved. But believe me: so do I."