…from the quill of Antisthenes the Younger
Ms Susan Rice is a US Ambassador to the United Nations and until she attracted my attention in July this year I looked on her as just another Obama’s appointment based on a skin colour and the socialist, anti-American ideology. Then I got curious.
The following is based on Wikipedia information, which no one in his or her right mind ever accused of right-wing bias. Rice was born in November 1964 (Scorpio for people who believe those things) in Washington, D.C. Her father, Emmett J. Rice was a Cornell University economics professor and the second black governor of the Federal Reserve System. Her mother is education policy scholar Lois Dickson Fitt. Her parents divorced later on during her youth. Her brother, John Rice, received an M.B.A. and is the founder of Management Leadership for Tomorrow (an organization committed to developing top minority talent for leadership roles in the business and non-profit sector). She is not related to Condoleezza Rice and her great fear allegedly is that her accomplishments would be diminished by people who attributed them to affirmative action. [Dukakis, Clinton connections]
In July (Jul 2, 2012) she gave an interview to the TIME magazine, the notorious left-wing propaganda outlet since the seventies. Ms Rice was asked: Do Americans have an accurate impression of the way they are viewed in the word? Her unblushing answer in full: “I think most Americans understand that we went through a period in which American leadership was judged quite critically internationally. And I think most American are aware that by any objective measure, the US is viewed more favorably today that it was three, four years ago.”
The Arab followers of Mohammed’s teaching, for example, view United States so favorably that they sodomise her ambassadors before killing them. All Obama’s work in short “three, four years”? Perhaps. He already inaugurated his campaign flag to commemorate the occasion.Indubitably inspired by the recent peaceful protest post factum image from the Benghazi consulate-
In the “bad” old times Air America was flying all over South-East Asia delivering humanitarian aid to villagers made destitute by the activities of the Communist China and Vietnam terrorists; and at the same time supporting the native anti-communist fighters organised, so to speak, by the CIA. The legitimate cargo was called “soft rice”, firearms and ammunition was called “hard rice”. Ms Rice may be hard in dealing with her subordinates and opponents [see Wikipedia, if you do not believe me], but as far as the enemies of free and democratic USA are concerned, she is very, very soft, Carter, Clinton, Obama-like.
Or, perhaps, one could say Kissinger-like. Central Intelligence Agency via Air America was materially supporting the Tibet freedom (in the real meaning of that word) fighters since about 1962. Then, in 1972 the Secretary of State Henry Kissinger during his secret meeting with Chou En-lai consented to the Communist peremptory demand that US ceases its support. Nixon was allowed to go to China and the brave Tibetans, without soft or hard rice, were slaughtered by the communist troops. (Kissinger has so many human lives on his conscience that he should have been awarded at least two Nobel Peace Prizes.)
P.S. For nine days, the Obama administration made a case that virtually everyone understood was untrue: that the killing of our ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi, Libya, was a random, spontaneous act of individuals upset about an online video—an unpredictable attack on a well-protected compound that had nothing do to with the eleventh anniversary of 9/11.
These claims were wrong. Every one of them. But the White House pushed them hard.
Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, appeared on five Sunday talk shows on September 16. A “hateful video” triggered a “spontaneous protest . . . outside of our consulate in Benghazi” that “spun from there into something much, much more violent,” she said on Face the Nation. “We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned.”