Being labelled an Al-Qaeda deep-cover agent is, of course, ambiguous. Does this wording mean the agent is working for Al-Qaeda, or for the Americans against Al-Qaeda, perhaps? The answer is, of course, who knows? And the person who made the statement in the first place is not only making a wild unsubstantiated allegation, but is speaking a load of humbug. Or, most likely, he was just making a silly, joke about something and will never do it again.
Ha, ha, ha, ha!
But if the author said, for example, that Lee Rhiannon of the Greens, was an ex-Stalinist cheerleader, it is far less ambiguous and should be examined more closely to see if any there is any truth in it.
So what about the term “cheerleader”? Does that imply that Lee used to dress up like an all-American cheerleader and cheer on Stalin as he murdered tens of millions of his countrymen and the citizens of the Warsaw Pact countries he brutally ruled?
How could she? She was barely 2 when Stalin died in 1953. What’s more, even if her parents supported Stalin, she could hardly be held accountable for it.
No, the author probably meant that he imagined Lee Rhiannon dressed up in a sexy old soviet-style uniform, with added pom-poms, dancing, rah-rah’ing and cheering Stalin on as his tanks destroyed much of the German Army in WW2. This entirely happy scenario can be seen then as a man’s innocent erotic fantasizing. Sexy Lee putting a smile on Uncle Joe’s face as he crushed the nasty Nazis. Something completely at odds with the charge of, for example, Lee giving enthusiastic proxy support to the murderous Hamas Islamist maniacs bent on destroying Israel and the West through her BDS activism. Not the same thing, is it, really?
So he would probably say it again if challenged.
Ha, ha, ha, ha!