As the military-intelligence complex becomes more oppressive, the chances increase that dissenters within the ranks will leak information -- not to any real or imagined "enemy,' but to us
. Of course, the day may come when the American citizenry will be the only "enemy" left.
The government and their media toadies have concocted what we may call a "new cliche" to explain away these pesky whistleblowers. Anyone who warns the world about covert wrongdoing runs the risk of being labeled a narcissist
or a megalomaniac
That's the theme we've often heard in recent weeks.
It was sounded just now
, during the sentencing phase of Bradley Manning's trial. I'm not interested in the question of Manning's gender identification, which does not strike me as relevant to the case (even though most observers seem unduly fascinated
by the sexual issues, as people usually are). What bugs me is nonsense like this
Navy Captain Dr. David Moulton, an expert forensic psychologist detailed to the case to review Manning, took the stand as a defense witness.
Doctor Moulton found traits of “narcissistic personality,” “borderline personality,” and “abnormal personality” in Manning.
Moulton is the defense
witness, folks. The absurd logic of trials often requires shrinks to spout nonsense about a defendant during the sentencing phase. The prosecution favored us with a variant of the same tune:
The government’s cross-examination questions to Dr. Worsley focused on its view that Manning’s behavior indicated narcissism or an inability to show empathy with others. Dr. Worsley made a point that someone could seem narcissistic simply because they feel inadequate, not because they’re necessarily narcissistic.
The government prosecutor was persistent in asking about Bradley Manning denying his role in his problems in sessions with Dr. Worsley.
Government officials (and some media) think all leakers must be narcissists. (Note: never mind that the drive to inform the general citizenry of things it should know for its own general benefit is actually showing empathy with and connection to others, and not necessarily a manifestation of a purely “Me first and only!” mindset.) That may partly explain why this line of questioning was pursued here today by the prosecution.
Dig: We are supposed to believe that Manning
is the one who displayed an "inability to show empathy with others." In fact, that poor fellow is where he is precisely because
he dared to feel some empathy with the (non-white) victims of the atrocity documented in the "collateral damage" video.
Meanwhile, we are supposed to believe that our Generals, Colonels and other officers are never guilty of narcissism. (Even Patton would have guffawed after reading the preceding sentence.) Barack Obama has countenanced torture -- not to mention numerous broken promises to the working class -- yet no-one accuses him
of lacking empathy.
Of course, shrinks never use words like "narcissist" and "megalomaniac" to describe Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and all of those other media blowhards who hate Manning.
Conscience-free super-snitch Adrian Lamo -- a man who has never shown any contrition
even though he bears no small amount of responsibility for Manning's torment -- made sure than an entire movie told the tale of his glorious exploits. Lamo's Twitter feed
features this epigram: “you cannot harm one who has dreamed a dream like mine.” Nevertheless, our media does not repeatedly characterize Lamo as a narcissist or a megalomaniac.
And yet, just today, two psychiatric prostitutes were willing to testify under oath that young, idealistic Bradley Manning -- yes, Bradley Freakin' Manning
-- is the one who deserves to be called an empathy-challenged solipsistic egomaniac.
Future historians will need to invent a word stronger than "hypocrisy" to describe our times.