Ladies and gentlemen, Jamie Kirchick has done it again. In another remarkable display of partisan hackery, Kirchick (rightly) harangues the Obama administration for not accepting that American policies might be at fault for the Benghazi attack:
When riots spread across the Muslim world last month, the administration desperately wanted to believe that the global outpouring of anti-American rage had absolutely nothing to do with the United States or its policies, and was really just a reaction to a crude movie posted on the internet. President Obama, by dint of his personal background and mere “face,” as pundit Andrew Sullivan once predicted, was supposed to fundamentally change the way Muslims see the U.S.
And so, on Sept. 14, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney asserted that the protests were not a response “to United States policy” or “the administration, or the American people,” but “in response to a video — a film — that we have judged to be reprehensible and disgusting.” Carney repeated this line all the way up to Sept. 18, insisting that there existed “no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack.”
This is a good critique…the problem is it’s a perspective Kirchick himself condemned just two years ago. Is Kirchick “suffer[ing] from a severe case of myopia” “by blaming anti-Americanism on failures in American foreign policy?”
It is typically one’s own words that are the most damning. Kirchick never fails to disappoint.Published in