Wed, 31 Mar 1999

Similarity between Dyer and Goebels

There are certain things and phenomena in this world that you can rely on. For instance, if you're down on your knees, defenseless, your hands tied on your back and a gang of criminals is attacking you, you can rest assured that Mr. Dyer will join them with a punch. It is to be expected for a certain character group to act like that.

Back to the title: the obvious similarity between the two gentlemen in my title is that they both, in their time, strongly believed in and practiced lies. They both, in their time, knew that "a thousand times repeated lie becomes the truth". They both knew that it is not important to prove anything, but only to stay one lie ahead of your victim's answers and clarifications.

Mr. Dyer complains and he is angry with the "international community" for its lack of legal action against certain Serb public figures. But the answer to this inaction is simple: it is one thing to use lies, half-truths and simplistic formulas in daily propaganda, and a completely different thing to actually prove all that in a court of law. Why should anybody in Mr. Dyer's or Mr. Goebels' position sweat themselves with finding actual legally acceptable proof for their words, actual evidence that a certain person is responsible for a certain crime, when it is so easy and safe to hide under belly and move on. They "prove" one lie by introducing another lie as an argument and so on and on... Let the victim prove his/her innocence.

There are too many Gwynne Dyer types of journalists in the world. This makes it virtually impossible for the victim to protect himself/herself. And all these Gwynne Dyers know it.