A tale of two Rices
by Kevin Foley
Columnist
November 30, 2012 12:48 AM | 1172 views | 12 12 comments | 6 6 recommendations | email to a friend | print
In late 2002 and early 2003, Condoleezza Rice, then the National Security Advisor, joined other administration officials in “selling” the invasion of Iraq to the American public.

Rice insisted Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and suggested he also likely had a nuclear weapon he was prepared to give al-Qaida terrorists.

“We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud,“ Rice famously declared.

We now know Vice President Dick Cheney was pushing the CIA to give him the Iraq analysis he wanted, not the analysis that reflected the available intelligence.

Nevertheless, Condi Rice was out there delivering the administration talking points she’d been handed on Sunday morning news programs, never questioning their veracity.

In 2004, when Rice was nominated to be Secretary of State, Sens. John McCain and Lindsay Graham supported her.

Now, however, McCain, Graham and other GOP senators who voted for Rice’s confirmation are “deeply disturbed” that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice went on Sunday morning news programs Oct. 16 to deliver the Obama administration’s talking points about the Benghazi attack.

It’s so typical of the double standard Republicans like to apply to the Obama administration. But this one features a major disconnect.

While Condi Rice flogged false information ginned up by Cheney and CIA Director George Tenet, Susan Rice presented unclassified facts as the administration understood them.

Former CIA Director David Petraeus recently said the CIA withheld reports that extremists with links to al-Qaida were involved in the attack to avoid tipping off the terrorist organization. Thus, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA removed the terms “attack,” “Al-Qaida” and “terrorism” from the talking points it gave the White House.

Rice’s tormenters have focused on her statement that the attack was, “a direct result of a heinous and offensive video” that a Coptic Christian produced and posted on the Internet. They claim she hid al-Qaida’s involvement for political reasons.

As reported in the November 27 New York Times, however, “(Libyan) witnesses to the assault said it was carried out by members of the Ansar al-Shariah militant group, without any warning or protest, in retaliation for an American-made video mocking the Prophet Muhammad.”

In accusing President Obama of a cover-up, McCain and Graham are relying on a phony Fox News report.

In late October, Fox reported that, when the attack on the Benghazi consulate began, security officers were ordered to “stand down” and stay at their annex nearby. The CIA quickly responded to Fox’s false report with this statement:

“We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues. … Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”

The same Fox News report also claimed the CIA “chain of command” — clearly implying the White House — refused to pass along requests for help from a Special Forces base in Italy. In fact, those forces arrived in Benghazi after the five-hour attack had ended.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who met with Obama immediately after the attack began on Sept. 11, said the president ordered him to take whatever steps were necessary to help the besieged Americans.

The secretary “ordered all appropriate forces to respond to the unfolding events in Benghazi, but the attack was over before those forces could be employed,“ Pentagon spokesman George Little told the media.

McCain, Graham and the rest know all of this. But that hasn’t stopped them from smearing Obama or the good name of Ambassador Rice.

Kevin Foley is a public relations executive, author and writer who lives in Kennesaw.
Comments
(12)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Gordo Meis
|
December 04, 2012
Foley has been doing FAKE NEWS for so long, he has started to believe himself...whatever he says. Typical liberal. Want to know more about Kevin E Foley and his fake news? Just Google it!

This afternoon I listened in on a conference call among some of the top PR execs in the business of producing news releases (VNRs), more honestly called fake news. I can report they are proud and confident that the recent "flap" on the page of Sunday's New York Times about the Bush administration's use of fake news will amount to nothing at all. These PR executives are elated that the New York Times piece was about government propaganda, and not about their much more widespread and lucrative production of corporate VNRs, the biggest and richest part of the fake news business.

The conference call was arranged by PR trade press maven O'Dwyer. It featured top PR executives in the fake news business, including Doug Simon of S Simon Productions, Stan Zeitlin of Glen Communications, Larry Moskowitz of Medialink Worldwide and Media's KEVIN FOLEY. These are the companies that are producing and distributing the thousands of VNRs sent to TV networks and stations each year. The VNRs are fake news stories, paid for by clients ranging from the Pentagon to Monsanto, that are aired by TV news producers as if they were independent reporting and the work of real journalists, rather than PR operatives who used to be real journalists...

Kevin Foley
|
December 05, 2012
Gordo Meis - No dirt. Nice try. What you quote here was written by a far left watch dog group 6 or 7 years ago. They got all their facts wrong, but as a low information voter who consumes conservative propaganda, you'd be used to that.

Anybody interested in what I do can go to my web site at www.kefmedia.com. I proudly employ nearly 30 Cobb County based folks and, I assure you, both my net worth and tax bills are bigger then yours, Gordo.
Kevin Foley
|
December 04, 2012
CobbCoGuy - I just there was as much far right "outrage" over 4,500 pointless deaths in Iraq as there is over 4 tragic deaths in Libya.
Kevin Foley
|
December 04, 2012
CobbCoGuy- You do know that the WSJ is owned by Rupe Murdoch, the guy who also owns Fox News, the GOP's communications arm, right?

As Pulitizer Prize winner Thomas Rick said on Fox before his interview was cut short, Fox has been the primary cheerleader in trying to gin up a non-existant Benghazi scandal.

CobbCoGuy
|
December 04, 2012
KF - yes, I'm aware of the relationship. Does that change the State Department's designation?

Also, I'm assuming by "scandal" you're only referring to the back and forth regarding Susan Rice, right? I hope, you're not putting the deaths of four Americans under the umbrella of "scandal."
CobbCoGuy
|
December 04, 2012
Mr. Foley references a November 27 NY Times article placing blame for the attacks on the Ansar al-Shariah militant group. According to an October 4, 2012, Wall Street Journal blog, the U.S. State Department (Hillary is Secretary of State, right?) has "changed its designation of al Qaeda as a foreign terror organization to include Yemen-based Ansar al-Sharia as an alias..."

Take note of the dates in the preceeding paragraph.

Back to square one. Susan Rice's agenda was not to inform the public, but to provide cover for Obama's reelection.
SG68
|
December 03, 2012
Another myopic, brainwashed comment by Mr. Foley.

Using one screw up to justify another is just plain stupid.
Kevin Foley
|
December 03, 2012
SG68 (whoever you are) - Read the column again and learn. I'm not justifying a "screw-up." I'm explaining to low information voters like you that there was no screw-up in Susan Rice's case.

The entire Benghazi "scandal" was cooked up by Fox and the rest of the far right screaming hamsters.

In Condi Rice's case, you were lied to. You know that, right?
CobbCoGuy
|
December 04, 2012
Mr. Foley is correct; it was no screw-up. Susan Rice knew exactly what she was doing.

There was an interesting article in the September 2001 edition of The Atlantic regarding the 1994 Rwandan genocide. In her article "Bystanders to Genocide", Samantha Powell wrote,

"At an interagency teleconference in late April, Susan Rice, a rising star on the NSC who worked under Richard Clarke, stunned a few of the officials present when she asked, "If we use the word 'genocide' and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the November [congressional] election?"

To be fair to Ms. Rice, she later walked back those statements, sorta. Again, according to the article, "If I [Susan Rice] said it, it was completely inappropriate, as well as irrelevant."

Note the disclaimer, "If I said it...".

Right.

Susan Rice is not a professional diplomat, stateswomen or ambassador. She is a political operative.
Bob Johnson
|
December 02, 2012
Everyone is getting the message, no comments and Kevin will be gone.
Buster Jones
|
November 30, 2012
National security advisor, U N Ambassador; which one probably had better intelligence? I have no doubts Saddaam had WMDs but also had plans to get them out ASAP when needed. And yes, Obama is God, you have not heard?
MartyWhereas
|
November 30, 2012
The part where Foley writes that Obama is really God returned must have been edited out.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides