Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Compare Reporters Perspectives On Obama

The over sensitive Politico came running to defend President Obama.

"Quarrel over the facts"? Here is a portion of Toby Harnden from the Telegraph UK.

4. In his studied desire to be the unBush by responding coolly to events like this, Obama is dangerously close to failing as a leader. Yes, it is good not to shoot from the hip and make broad assertions without the facts. But Obama took three days before speaking to the American people, emerging on Monday in between golf and tennis games in Hawaii to deliver a rather tepid address that significantly underplayed what happened. He described Abdulmutallab as an “isolated extremist” who “allegedly tried to ignite an explosive device on his body” – phrases that indicate a legalistic, downplaying approach that alarms rather than reassures. Today’s words showed a lot more fire and desire to get on top of things – we’ll see whether Obama follows through with action. In the meantime, he went snorkelling.

5. There has been a pattern developing with the Obama administration trying to minimise terrorist attacks. We saw it with Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad, a Muslim convert who murdered a US Army recruit in Little Rock, Arkansas in June. We saw it with Major Nidal Malik Hassan, a Muslim with Palestinian roots who slaughtered 13 at Fort Hood, Texas last month. In both cases, there were Yemen connections. Obama began to take the same approach with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. We’ll see whether this incident shakes him out of that complacency. Whether it’s called the war on terror or not, it’s clear that the US is at war against al-Qaeda and radical Islamists.

It may be clear to this reporter, but it is not clear to me that the President knows we are at war. So in a true comparison, Bush would have treated this Christmas plot as a terrorist action and an act of war. Obama treats this as a typical legal issue. If you have any doubts, New York trial of 9/11 terrorists should be more than sufficient evidence to see where the Political Left desires to take this.

Dr. White also offers some insight into the Muslim mindset in his article

Dar Al-Harb: Why You Need to Know This Arabic Phrase.


Anonymous said...

Howard Fisher said...

Thanks for the link anonymous. It is always interesting how both sides see the same thing differently.

"Let's review a few pesky details.

OK Let's do.

1) "First, it was Cheney's administration that released some of the alleged terrorists who plotted the attack into an "art therapy rehabilitation program" in Saudi Arabia, only to see them become terrorist leaders in Yemen."

It is interesting for me to see that there have been several men that have been released only to have been caught again and sent to Gitmo during Bush's administration. So nothing unexpected here. Is this arguing that Obama would have done differently?

This statement also gives the sense that this conspiracy took place because of Bush and during Bush's reign.

Also, the terrorist was not someone Bush released. He was an unknown prior to Obama.

2) "It was also Cheney's administration that gave Abdulmutallab a visa to enter the United States in the first place." states in their article,

"he blamed the Bush administration for releasing the terrorists who now lead the al-Qaida offshoot that allegedly provided Abdulmutallab with "a visa to enter the United States in the first place.""

So who gave this guy a visa?

3) "Second, let's compare some "low-key responses.""

This is just silly tit for tat nonsense played by both sides.

4) "Democrats, at the time, didn't launch an assault against the Bush administration, and we didn't see Al Gore condemning the White House. It simply didn't occur to Democrats in 2001 to use the attempted mass murder of hundreds of Americans to undermine the presidency."

This statement is interesting to me because from my perspective, all I had seen during Bush's War against terror was Democrats, especially Gore, attack Bush at almost every turn and seek to undermine the Bush during a time of War. I don't even know where to begin.

5) "Eight years later, Dick Cheney believes his principal responsibility is to destroy President Obama -- the man Americans chose to clean up the messes Cheney left as a parting gift after eight years of abject failure."

First, the fact they call it a mess after 8 years of not being attacked is telling.

Second, Cheney and Bush have been blamed ever since Obama took office. This has been nothing short of making sure Obama has cover if something happens. Just start blaming Bush the day you get in office.

6) "I am not aware of a case of a former President or Vice President behaving as despicably as Cheney"

We definitely live in 2 very different worlds.

Howard Fisher said...

This article is more informative about the visa issue.

"During this meeting the senior Mutallab informed embassy officials that he was worried that his son had become involved with Islamic extremists; he specifically expressed concern that his son had either visited, or otherwise been in contact with, militants based in Yemen."

But then...

"But, according to officials, it’s also often very raw information which lacks the kind of legal substance that U.S. officials believe is required before such intelligence is used to restrict an individual’s travel, for example by putting them on a “no-fly list” or special screening list maintained by the Terrorist Screening Center, a separate interagency unit run by the FBI."

This is the problem. The kind of legal substance? This kind of jargon is just silly. We should not be fighting terrorists legally. This is Cheney's and other's criticism.