Friday, November 16 , 2018, 4:27 am | Fair 47º

 
 
 
 

Mona Charen: Two Shots at History

Literary license again distorts history, this time in Fair Game, about Valerie Plame and Joseph Wilson

It was pleasant — and frankly a little shocking — to see The Washington Post editorialize over the weekend about the new film Fair Game, which purports to be the true story of Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame.

Mona Charen
Mona Charen

Noting that Plame has labeled the movie “accurate” and that Wilson had expressed the hope that the film would help people “who don’t read” or have “short memories” to understand the period, the Post blasted them both. “Fair Game ... is full of distortions — not to mention outright inventions ... Hollywood has a habit of making movies about historical events without regard for the truth; Fair Game is just one more example.”

Yes, yes, and again yes. The entire Plame episode, it bears recalling, was steeped in deceit from the start — a great deal from Mr. and Mrs. Wilson, a huge dollop from the media and Democrats, an assist from prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, and a generous contribution from Richard Armitage and Colin Powell (both of whom knew the identity of the leaker before Fitzgerald began his investigation). As I wrote at the time of Scooter Libby’s trial, “The man on trial did not do the leaking. The man who did the leaking is not on trial.”

For Libby, the witch hunt was a personal tragedy. Because his memory of conversations differed from some others’ recollections, he was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice. Though his sentence was commuted, he lost the ability to practice his profession (law), paid a huge fine and endured disgrace.

But for the country, it was a descent into dangerous demagogy. The entire case rested on a lie shopped around by the Wilsons and eagerly parroted by a media hoping to damage the Bush administration — namely that Plame was outed as a covert CIA officer by the White House as retaliation for her husband’s role in discrediting President Bush’s claim that Iraq had sought to buy uranium from Niger.

To quote Mary McCarthy on Lillian Hellman, “every word was a lie, including ‘and’ and ‘the.’” The White House did not leak Plame’s name or identity. It turns that the deputy secretary of state, Armitage (who opposed the Iraq war and thus had no motive to punish Wilson), was the leaker. And Wilson did not discredit the uranium story when he made his report to the State Department. In fact, his report tended more to support the claim than to refute it.

But Hollywood now enters the picture and catechizes the Wilsons’ false history. Joe Wilson is right: Some people who don’t read will be duly propagandized. Everyone knows that Hollywood is very liberal. But you’d have to be really cynical — or well-informed — to know that Hollywood will peddle outright falsehoods and pass them off as history.

Liberals always get two shots at history — one as events unfold, and another when playwrights, screenwriters, novelists and other cultural arbiters recount events later. It’s a crime against truth, but it happens every day.

In Washington, D.C., a new play opened recently. Titled Every Tongue Confess, the play was described by The Root, a magazine for blacks, as “a moving response to an almost forgotten racial inferno of the mid-1990s, when hundreds of black churches in the South were mysteriously burned.” The Washington Post review said the play “tries through lyrical speeches, magical spirituality and densely interlocked subplots to locate the redemptive potential in a horrific set of circumstances: the serial burning of black churches in the Alabama of the mid-1990s.”

It may be a great play, but the history is distorted. There was a ginned-up panic about black church burnings in the mid-1990s, but there actually was no epidemic, at least not until after President Bill Clinton delivered a speech on the subject (which was followed by a rash of copycat crimes).

The media, salivating over the possibility of reaping civil rights glory, fanned the flames with such headlines as “Flames of Hate: Racism Blamed in Shock Wave of Church Burnings” (New York Daily News) and “A Southern Plague Returns” (Associated Press). By the time a presidential task force issued its report showing that the overwhelming majority of the arsons (and more than half were of white churches) were the result of drunkenness, insurance fraud, burglary and personal revenge, everyone had moved on. Of 64 arsons studied, only four turned out to have any racial motivation. Four are too many. But they aren’t a “racial inferno.”

But the truth is now smothered by literary license — again.

Mona Charen writes for Creators Syndicate. Click here for more information or to contact her.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made using a credit card, Apple Pay or Google Pay, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Email
Select your monthly membership
Or choose an annual membership
×

Payment Information

Membership Subscription

You are enrolling in . Thank you for joining the Hawks Club.

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.
You may cancel your membership at any time by sending an email to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.