The story had some wings for a few days. But, like the tale of Icarus, Mark Perry's fabrication in Foreign Policy about David Petraeus collapsed into the tempestuous sea of truth.
As we know, there are many in the media who would have wanted the general to have accused Israel of endangering American soldiers and U.S. interests. And, frankly, I suspect that Barack Obama would have also been happy if the Commander of the U.S. Central Command had enunciated such anxieties. These would have given the president some rationale for his desperate and accelerated distancing from the Jewish state. But he really needs no rationale except for the basic one, and that he is simply and directly for the Palestinians and against the Israelis. Too simple, you may think. Well, why does he have so many demands of Jerusalem and literally none from the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah? Literally none. This cannot be gainsaid.
I will not speculate about why Petraeus corrected the record, except that he is an honest man.
But he did correct the record. Philip Klein asked him about the controversy yesterday at St. Anselm College, and he has posted about the general's response on the website of the American Spectator on which there is also a clip of his remarks. Klein transcribes these accurately: "Petraeus Says Reports About His Remarks on Israel Were 'Flat Wrong'."
Max Boot was the first one to tackle the meretricious siege.
Ha'aretz and the Jerusalem Post both have articles about Petraeus' conversation with the Israeli chief of staff, Gabi Ashkenazi, that cleans up the matter, except for the mischief makers in the administration and out who will try to extend its life.