Deep Throat- The Jury Is Still Out
Michele posted an interesting question this morning: Would Deep Throat be a hero in 2005?
Some her readers left interesting remarks and that will no doubt be the case throught the day. We thought we'd mention it, because the question is essentially a moral one- and as such, it really is a continuation of of conversation on the same subject.
SC&A have the following to say: We don't know if Deep Throat really is a hero or not. In the end, history will have the final word on that.
We will contribute to the discussion by asking a few question. Mr Felt was second-in-command at the FBI. Should he not have brought his evidence to a Grand Jury, rather than to a reporter? Surely the Democrats would have aided and assisted Mr Felt in pursuing the legal route. Why did he not approach them or the Special Prosecutor? Why did not do what he swore he would? Did he violate his oath to uphold the law?
Some have said that Woodward and Bernstein brougt forth the truth, and therefore ought to be commended. How do we know they brought all the truth to the fore? No one questioned Mr Felt- and it remains unlikely he will be questioned- and as Woodward said this morning, there were other sources as well. Who are those sources? Do we know what agendas were being promoted at the time? Why are the others so afraid to come forward now, so many years after the fact?
Were any other laws broken, and if so, by whom?
Like we said, the jury is still out on this one.
Some her readers left interesting remarks and that will no doubt be the case throught the day. We thought we'd mention it, because the question is essentially a moral one- and as such, it really is a continuation of of conversation on the same subject.
SC&A have the following to say: We don't know if Deep Throat really is a hero or not. In the end, history will have the final word on that.
We will contribute to the discussion by asking a few question. Mr Felt was second-in-command at the FBI. Should he not have brought his evidence to a Grand Jury, rather than to a reporter? Surely the Democrats would have aided and assisted Mr Felt in pursuing the legal route. Why did he not approach them or the Special Prosecutor? Why did not do what he swore he would? Did he violate his oath to uphold the law?
Some have said that Woodward and Bernstein brougt forth the truth, and therefore ought to be commended. How do we know they brought all the truth to the fore? No one questioned Mr Felt- and it remains unlikely he will be questioned- and as Woodward said this morning, there were other sources as well. Who are those sources? Do we know what agendas were being promoted at the time? Why are the others so afraid to come forward now, so many years after the fact?
Were any other laws broken, and if so, by whom?
Like we said, the jury is still out on this one.
<< Home