What makes it so difficult is that to support the President is to support a lie.
The minute I (or anyone else) supports a lie, we’re implicated. First we support one lie and that leads us to need to support another. Pretty soon we’ve lost the clarity of insight that comes with standing for the truth.
I support the President and I don’t support the lie that this operation is and was. It’s more important for me to maintain my connection to the truth than it is for me to support this operation or anything that arises out of it.
For that reason, I choose to turn my face from the subject while not giving up my support for the President. But he authorized this operation and I leave him to handle the consequences that arise from it. I don’t choose to go further down the road of subterfuge that having authorized this strike creates for him.
The sooner the lie is acknowledged, the better, as far as I’m concerned. Until it is acknowledged, I plan to concentrate on what else is happening in the world related to disclosure and Ascension. There’s too much at stake that really matters to weave a tangled web of deceit.
There is also the not-inconsequential matter that several people may have died in the Abbottabad mansion in the pursuit of this policy and that those deaths were caused while knowing that Osama bin Laden was not in the mansion and had been dead for perhaps a decade.
That a court of law (perhaps the ICC) will have to adjudicate. I don’t even know how to think about the matter. And supporting the action would necessitate me supporting the killings, which I won’t do. Altogether not a happy situation.