Streetwise Professor

October 16, 2012

Cliches are Cliches Because They Are True

Filed under: Military,Politics — The Professor @ 1:28 pm

Susan Rice has doubled down on her claims that she relied on intelligence reports when claiming, 5 days after the Benghazi attacks, that the assault was a spontaneous response to the Mohammed video.  She now says that she received daily reports, and that she did not “cherry pick” from them.

This has to be false.  There are numerous timelines showing that various intelligence entities had said that the attacks were premeditated terrorist acts between the time they occurred and the time Rice appeared on all the Sunday talk shows.  Indeed, the State Department has said it never  bought into the Video Days of Rage explanation.  Since Rice only gave one explanation, she had to have cherry picked.  And she picked wrong.  And she picked the story that had credence for about a day, before being revised even by the intelligence agency that originally promulgated it.

Hillary attributes the confusion to “the fog of war.”  Yes, that cliche is common, because it is accurate.  There is a fog of war.  But that fog is thickest at the initiation of an action.  It would have been defensible for Hillary and Rice and Obama to have cited the “fog of war” in the early days as a justification for not advancing a definitive narrative.  But that’s not what they did.  Instead of being circumspect and cautious in their conclusions,  they adamantly and definitively blamed the attacks on the video, and denied they were pre-planned terrorist acts.  It is outrageous to hide behind the fog of war now when they acted as if it didn’t exist in the days following 11 September.

There is another cliche about war that is true: “In war, truth is the first casualty.”  We are seeing that cliche acted out before our very eyes.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

2 Comments »

  1. This is actually a variation of Bismarck’s comment that the most lies are told after a hunt, before an election and during a war. Rice may or may not be stupid, but is acting like an idiot. Even if what she says is true, she should still have kept her yap shut because it sounds so ridiculous. Lacking the sense to perceive this, what can one expect of her? All in all she seems an example of someone raised in a cocoon of concurrence – someone who never had to really argue in a logical or rhetorical sense with a serious opponent, or is at least wildly out of practice.

    Remind you of anyone else in this administration? Hint: without a teleprompter he is disarmed.

    Comment by Sotos — October 16, 2012 @ 3:15 pm

  2. Absolutely, sotos. And here is what is really frightening: she is being groomed to be Sec State. And you know who is grooming her, don’t you (though it’s not her name out front)? 0’s Svengalina. His Rasputina. Valerie Jarrett.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — October 16, 2012 @ 4:46 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress