Obama said:
Quote:
|
"We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair."
|
Sorry, while I generally disapprove of Obama and absolutely do not support him for President I see nothing wrong with his analysis in the above quote.
Understanding the factors that lead to such acts of violence is certainly important. Standing around and shouting "they hate our freedom" if feeble pandering to the animal which demands retribution and demonization of the enemy in all of us. I have no problem with hunting down and killing the perpetrators of those attacks along with those who gave them aid and shelter. Understanding the real motivations of such people and what factors lead to such acts though is critical in planning out future US policy.
The gist of the New Yorker article and cover was making fun of the knee jerk right for their painting of Obama as a anti-American Muslim extremist. The rage against his perfectly acceptable statement quoted above in this post is evidence that such a Pavlovian response exists. Dislike Obama for the very real reasons which exist. Hammering him for non-issues only belittles any valid criticism you may make.