Rhodes’ musical chairs on Iraq and ISIS

White House: Foley’s killing was ‘absolutely’ a terrorist attack. That from Ben Rhodes in his press briefing from Martha’s Vineyard with Obama on vacation.

White House: Foley’s killing was ‘absolutely’ a terrorist attack

By Justin Sink – 08/22/14 | The Hill

The killing of American journalist James Foley was “absolutely” a terrorist attack, the White House said Friday.

Deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes, briefing reporters from Martha’s Vineyard, said Foley’s beheading by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) — and the release of an online video showing the aftermath — was a direct assault on the United States.

“When you see somebody killed in such a horrific way, that represents a terrorist attack against our country and against an American citizen,” Rhodes said.

“Clearly, the brutal execution of Jim Foley represented an affront — an attack not just him, but he’s an American, and we see that as an attack on our country when one of our own is killed like that,” he added.

Rhodes addressed the media the day after Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey floated expanding the scope of military action against ISIS into Syria.

“This is an organization that has an apocalyptic end-of-days strategic vision that will eventually have to be defeated,” Dempsey said. “Can they be defeated without addressing that part of the organization that resides in Syria? The answer is no.”

Rhodes said President Obama would consider airstrikes against Islamist militants operating in Syria if it were necessary to help protect Americans.

“We’re actively considering what’s going to be necessary to deal with that threat, and we’re not going to be restricted by borders,” Rhodes told reporters Friday. “We’ve shown time and again that if there’s a counterterrorism threat, we’ll take direct action against that threat if necessary.”

The White House said that the president has not yet been presented with specific military options “outside of those that are carrying out the current missions in Iraq.”

“But we would certainly look at what is necessary in the long term to make sure we’re protecting Americans,” Rhodes said.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/215778-white-house-foleys-killing-was-absolutely-a-terrorist-attack

Ben Rhodes could not find those words “absolutely” a “terrorist attack” on the US. Rhodes, who was behind the memos and Susan Rice’s talking points on Beghazi, now declares an attack on one American is a legitimate terrorist attack. A terrorist group claimed credit for the Benghazi attack, yet he could not voice those words. Now he can clearly call it terrorism. Will the real Ben Rohodes stand up… or sit down and shut up.

In an email to Susan Rice in prep for her infamous news tour on Benghazi, Rhodes said: “To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.”

It’s a shame old fiction writer Rhodes could not find the words “Terrorist Attack” on Benghazi, after slaughtering 3 Americans and a US ambassador the way they did. That’s checkmate, Rhodes! None of that “absolutely” shit about Benghazi, was there?

RightRing | Bullright

13 comments on “Rhodes’ musical chairs on Iraq and ISIS

  1. peppermintfarm says:

    Bull,

    All good points about the schizophrenic Rhodes, but we all know why there was “no terrorist attack” in Benghazi. It would have ruined the King’s narrative that “he had AQ on the run”. It’s almost funny if it were not so tragic. All for his political gain.

    Like

  2. I noticed two things near the bottom of the portion of Justin Sink’s piece you quoted.

    First, I don’t understand why Rhodes said “We’ve shown time and again that if there’s a counterterrorism threat, we’ll take direct action against that threat if necessary.” ISIS is a terrorism threat, not a counterterrorism threat. Duh. The U.S. would be the counterterrorism threat, if Obama would give the order to bomb the hell out of them.

    On that point, Sink said “The White House said that the president has not yet been presented with specific military options”. Well of course not. You can’t conduct classified military operations briefings at Martha’s Vinyard, on a golf course.

    Our leaders in the White House are fools, and the world knows it.

    – Jeff

    Like

    • Bullright says:

      Very good catch, Jeff. I took issue with that for other reasons. Good point. and that comes from his top adviser. I don’t know if others are using that term. I don’t know if that is a Petraeus term? We hear of counterinsurgency.

      Yea that’s a biggie. We were told he was having — or ordering — plans over a month ago. He’s been jerking our chain since the beginning of June about possible plans. And you can’t see anything from the 18th hole. (or the 19th LOL)

      Like

    • Bullright says:

      Jeff, I was brainstorming why he would have even thought to use it but …goose egg.

      Like

      • Before commenting, I also researched a little so as not to appear ignorant if there was an obvious explanation. One source I spotted had a definition of counterterrorism that includes the type that is a terrorist act that is in retaliation to a preceding terrorist act. But to me, that didn’t fit this case.

        Despite the fact I didn’t say it before, my conclusion was that Rhodes is just another doublespeaking government drone that just goes with whatever bureaucratobabble pops into his head and sounds plausible for the non-adversarial mass media. Amazing how vapid and fearless government officials become when the the “5th Estate” (the press) goes AWOL, isn’t it?

        – Jeff

        Like

        • Bullright says:

          I think you are exactly right, it just displays his ignorance. Again, he is a top foreign policy adviser. Oh yea, that’s for sure. Talk about grand openings for the press, and they didn’t even punt, they forfeited.

          Like

        • Bullright says:

          JEFF, the more I think of it it sounds like a Freudian slip. Maybe the threat they are worried about cutting off is a counterterrorism one?

          Like

          • I think I follow you. So you’re saying that a more honest version of Rhodes’ statement would have been:

            “We’ve shown time and again that if there’s a counterterrorism threat [such as Israel trying to defend itself], we’ll take direct action against that threat [Israel] if necessary.”

            I must agree with you. Mystery solved.

            – Jeff

            Like

  3. […] Source: Rhodes’ musical chairs on Iraq and ISIS […]

    Like

Comments...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s