Credibility is a term of which
the principle application is the “believability” of a person or claim. Is it
supposed to help Hillary Clinton’s “credibility” that three of her former
staffers at the State Department, who had detailed knowledge of the inner
workings and security failures of her personal server, refused to answer
questions before a Congressional committee, the answers to which would clearly
be yet more damaging to Clinton’s credibility? That it was admitted that there
had been “several” unsuccessful forced log-ins on her server, which illegally
contained classified information? How many times were they successful? Of
course, that was one of the questions that was not answered. What foreign
governments knew that Clinton was dumb enough to keep classified information on
an unsecure, personal server, merely because she was too lazy for a few rules
to annoy her? After all, she spent so much of her time being a paid tourist. But it’s all par for the course with Clinton;
how are we to judge the “credibility” of a pathological liar? How do we judge
it in relation to Donald Trump’s loutishness?
But since to Clinton’s legion of
lemmings, the word “credibility” doesn’t
even exist in their lexicon. We must look elsewhere for a “proper” definition
of “credibility.” Today, it might refer to the character of someone who “proves”
to friends and enemies that he is “man” enough to beat-up on people who are
smaller than he or she is.
Or it could refer to following:
You are walking to work in the wee hours of the morning. You notice some huge guy
who looks like the former “professional” wrestler and current action movie
actor Dwayne Johnson wandering in the middle of the street a short distance ahead.
He looks like he may be excessively inebriated, but this the middle of an
industrial park area and there is no place in sight that he might have gotten
“lost” from. But as you get closer, he suddenly becomes “sober” and waits for
you on the sidewalk. You are somewhat concerned for your physical safety at
this point. You try to walk around him but he blocks your path. You are wearing
earphones, and he innocuously wants to know what music I am listening to.
Thinking that if you at least give him an answer he’ll let you alone, you begin
to answer him; he shows his approval of your taste by socking you hard in the
face. You go down, and he tells you to “stay down.” You comply as he rips off
the cord around your neck, takes your earphones and runs off. You observe that
there is a car partially hidden by trees in an unlighted section of next
crossing street, which the man runs to and into, and the car disappears down
the deserted road, without headlights on so as to foil any effort to identify
it.
What happened here? This person
was no doubt a gang member-in-training. His “rite of passage” in gaining
“credibility” as a full-fledged gang-banger was to find some isolated little
person with no witnesses in sight, and for no rational reason knock him out and
rob him. He might feel a little guilty about the whole thing, because he didn’t
really want to hit a complete stranger (the reason why he told you to “stay
down”), and he could have taken your wallet. Unfortunately, the object he made
off with was not an over-priced iPod like he probably thought, but something
even more valuable to you: Your airport identification badge; without your ID
badge, you might as well walk around stark naked.
You call the police, who say they
can’t really do anything (this kind of thing happens all the time, and they
don’t have time for any reported
thefts anyways, unless it is for felony-level robberies), so they tell you to
file a report, which you do.
You get a copy of the report from the police
station, and go down to the Airport Access Office to report the theft. If you
lost your identification, you have to pay a $250 fine for a replacement, the
second time $500, and the third time your employment at the airport is
terminated. But if the badge was stolen or was found and returned, then you
don’t have to pay the fine. Two black women are working in the office when you
show up. You tell them what happened, and show them the police report. But the
police report isn’t enough to “prove” it was stolen, and neither is the bruise
on your cheek bone. Your story lacks “credibility,” because they might suspect
that you are trying to accuse some “innocent brother/child” of the mugging—and they never do that.
Anyways, they don’t make clear
what else is required, and they imply that you are “lying” and must pay the
fine. But you are not a liar, and you will not pay the $250. Your “credibility”
is being questioned, and you have your principles to consider. You call the
police station, but you are told that the officer who is “handling” the theft
is taking a short “vacation,” and won’t be back until the following week. Oh
great.
You are not able to work for six
days and thus lost $600 in pay. The police officer finally returns from her vacation;
she told you that she didn’t understand what else is required, and tells you
to have the airport people call her. You
come back the ID office and tell them that the officer wishes to speak to them,
and you give them her phone number. They seem much reluctant to do this, and
you tell them that you will call the officer so that she can speak to them. All
this did was cause confusion and consternation, since now they have to justify
their own “credibility” to a law officer. They make you sit around for an hour,
and then one of the managers from the vendor you work for shows and he has you
mysteriously accompany him to a private room, where he questions you on your
“story.” When you are finished, he confesses that your story sounds “credible”
and it didn’t appear to him to be “made-up” as the access office accused it of
being.
The manager then drops the
“bombshell”: That the access office had the badge since two days after it was
reported stolen. Someone had mailed it in without a return address. Of course it was without one, you say; the
person who had taken it probably noticed the Department of Homeland Security
decal on it and became “worried,” perhaps suspecting that he had made a mistake
in mugging a “government official,” and his offence could mean a felony
conviction and deportation back to Hawaii or wherever. The manager agrees that
this is a likely scenario, and hands you back your “lost” badge.
Your credibility restored to its proper place, the “credibility” of the
personnel in the ID Access Office must be put under a microscope. Were they
expressing their stereotypes concerning “ethnic” people? I mean, who are they
to judge anyone? Clean-up your own “house” before you do that. At least the
mugger had enough personal “credibility” to return the badge; the real
“thieves” in this episode were the people in the access office. It was they who
“stole” the $600 in pay you lost because they doubted your “credibility.”
No comments:
Post a Comment