Ray McGovern’s performance during Clinton’s speech on freedom on the Internet: childishness or more smearing?

I hesitated a lot before covering this story, and then suddenly I decided to go ahead with it. I wasn’t sure exactly what to think, I had certain doubts and questions but now I see more clearly. In fact, what I actually thought on first impression has imposed itself as the valid explanation. I also have to mention that the story was covered as well by people I respect in the progressive sector and because they covered it in a way that I feel is not correct, I feel obligated to retort and set the record strait. I became aware of this story through the Boiling Frogs show and the Peter B. Collins show. As you may know, the websites for these two shows are listed on your right in the category Politics and Policy, and I also took the time to write a description of them in the section Resistance that you can read here. So I was more than perplex about the incident and the coverage they made of it.

First of all, let me set the scene to help you understand the context. Hillary Clinton is giving a speech about freedom of speech on the internet and let me precise as well that he video available on Youtube for this incident could be better. The framing, at the beginning of the scene, doesn’t allow us to see the whole room, with McGovern it it. We only see Clinton and we have to make do with it. This room, as the camera frames back, reveals itself to be of a relatively small dimension, and filled with people who are relax and seemingly willing to listen to a speech. And then we witness McGovern being seized by security guards, and after a few seconds we can hear him shout « So this is America? », and the video ends. I wish we could have a better document on which to base our analysis but all we can do is rely on this one.

Now, to the meat of the matter. According to these pictures, I would be tempted to say that McGovern behaved like an idiot. It is clear that what he did there was manufactured and intended as a provocation to Clinton. McGovern didn’t care about democracy or freedom of speech. All he wanted to do was to embarrass Clinton, to provoke her into doing something with the purpose of blaming her for it afterwards. The fact that he chose a speech about freedom on the internet is speaking volumes. He didn’t choose a speech on whatever else topic, no. He chose the topic to make sure that she would look terrible and could be blamed for whatever happens. Frankly, and after all it is just between you and me here, I don’t trust this guy. For an ex-CIA agent, I think that either it was foolish of him or it was an operation to discredit Clinton. The way he behave was immature, childish, not dignified of a grown man. Doesn’t he have anything else to do? Personally, I don’t have time to present my back to politicians I don’t like. With my day job and this blog, I am more that busy. I don’t have time for child’s play. But it seems that McGovern does…unless it was an operation.

You know what it makes me think of? I just reminded that in the 1995, the administration commissioned a study about the internet and its content. The report came out under the title Communication Stream of Conspiracy Commerce. According to Conservapedia website, the reports stated that:

« The Communication Stream of Conspiracy Commerce’ refers to the mode of communication employed by the right wing to convey their fringe stories into legitimate subjects of coverage by the mainstream media. This is how the stream works. First, well-funded right-wing think tanks and individuals underwrite conservative newsletters and newspapers such as the Western Journalism Center, the American Spectator and the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Next the stories are reprinted on the Internet where they are bounced all over the world. From the Internet, the stories are bounced into the mainstream media through one of two ways: 1) The story will be picked up by the British tabloids and covered as a major story, from which the American right-of-center mainstream media (i.e. the Wall Street Journal, Washington Times and New York Post) will then pick the story up; or 2) The story will be bounced directly from the Internet to the right-of-center mainstream American media. After the mainstream right-of-center American media covers the story, congressional committees will look into the story. After Congress looks into the story, the story now has the legitimacy to be covered by the remainder of the American mainstream press as a ‘real’ story.

« The Internet has become one of the major and most dynamic modes of communication. The Internet can link people, groups and organizations together instantly. Moreover, it allows an extraordinary amount of unregulated (emphasis added) data and information to be located in one area and available to all. The right wing has seized upon the Internet as a means of communicating its ideas to people. Moreover, evidence exists that Republican staffers surf the Internet, interacting with extremists in order to exchange ideas and information. »

In those years, the Clintons had the impression that the Right was doing a smear campaign against them and that the Monica Lewinsky scandal was just another chapter among many. I might be wrong but I have the impression that it is going on all over again with « incidents » like these. On one side, you have a series of folks who try to smear Barack Obama by saying that he is a secret Muslim, that he is a communist, etc, and on the other side, you have attempts to smear Hillary Clinton saying whatever non-sense about her. Note that McGovern, besides being a former CIA officer, Army Intelligence officer and a U.S. war veteran, was also somebody who apparently briefed George H. W. Bush on a daily basis when he was President…which is certainly not a reference. Remember that George H. W. Bush is the only person in America who can’t remember where he was on November 22nd 1963, the day John F. Kennedy was killed… According to a memo in possession of the FBI, George H. W. Bush was in Tyler, Texas, the day just before the assassination. He made a phone call to the FBI from there. Then he drove to Dallas officially after the assassination. By the way, you can find all the details about that in Russ Baker’s book, Family of Secrets. There is a book review available on this site, here.

To sums things up, there is something wrong with all this. A 60-year old man doesn’t act as stupidly as McGovern did unless there is a reason. Whether it is plain immaturity, vengence or a job he was doing for somebody else, I don’t know. But don’t forget folks that the Right in the U.S. is pretty ruthless. They are ready to go to any length to smear and destroy people who are genuinely trying to do something good. That’s what is going on here, I think. In the second video that I present to you here, you will see McGovern speaking about the incident. I find it funny because he looks just like a little boy in short pants who was able to pull out an apple from the school director’s office. Anyway, I will let you decide what to think. Review the info and the videos and make your own opinion.

Laisser un commentaire

Votre adresse de messagerie ne sera pas publiée. Les champs obligatoires sont indiqués avec *

Ce site utilise Akismet pour réduire les indésirables. En savoir plus sur comment les données de vos commentaires sont utilisées.