BHO Terrorist Apology Eight Days After 9/11

[LightningJoe]

It doesn't matter what motivates America's enemies as long as they're dead. Our task is not to change the minds of America's enemies; our task is to make them dead.

[JuanCarlos]

Whack-A-Mole is only fun at the arcade.

[jimpeel]

A bit of clarification:

Did Obama state this eight days after 9/11/2001 or eight days after the anniversary of 9/11 in some year other than 2001?

[publius42]

Originally Posted by Bruxley

The comments by Obama in the days after 9/11 reveal that he buys into the 'we deserved it' mentality that is taught in Madrases across the middle east. His comments are not as much apologist as that would show a a recognition that it was wrong as they are justifying what happened. "Yeah it was tragic but justified" sums up his comments.

I don't see how you get that from the quoted comments. "Tragic but expected" would be more accurate. Obama basically said that you can expect poor and uneducated people to be mean. That would imply that more anti-poverty and education programs are a solution to terrorism.

I guess when you are holding a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

The problem has been pointed out already: plenty of terrorists throughout history have been well educated, financially comfortable people, the 9/11 terrorists included. Can anyone point out acts of terror committed by toothless morons who were fooled by demagogues?

[jimpeel]

Originally Posted by publius42

Can anyone point out acts of terror committed by toothless morons who were fooled by demagogues?

Richard Reid

[publius42]

Richard Reid is not a good example of what Obama was talking about in the topic quotation. Obama was talking about poor and uneducated third worlders being potential recruits for terrorist. Reid was born in England and went to Thomas Tallis School, which looks like the Brit equivalent of an American prep school. He is yet another example of a case in which the motivations/sources of his actions, whatever they were, were most likely not poverty and ignorance.

[madmag]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080721/pl_nm/iraq_dc

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama met Iraq's prime minister in Baghdad on Monday but did not raise his plan to remove combat troops within 16 months if he wins the election, an Iraqi official said.

Is this now the official Obama time schedule for leaving Iraq? 16 months? That's more that a year...right? Maybe after 16 months he can add another 16 months. My how times change. I guess he just not want to bother the Iraqi's with that minor detail.

[SecDef]

If you had taken the time to read the New Yorker article you would know these are his cited written words and were not paraphrased by myself or anyone else.

When I spoke of misrepresentation, I was speaking of what I quoted in my last post. Specifically starting at the second sentence.

This thread is as good as any to put a link in that I think represents why I will be voting for Obama this election regardless of his faults.

Venial versus Mortal sins

[mountainclmbr]

The Obama piece about 9-11 was published on Sept. 19, 2001, in Chicago's Hyde Park Herald.

[xrocket]

SecDef ... If you've already decide to vote for BHO and no one else that is your right. I'll never fault a fellow for standing his ground and sticking to his convictions.

The thread I started, really wasn't intended to change your vote, but to help and inform others who still seek reasons to vote either for or against BHO. My personal opinion is JMc is a patriot and BHO isn't. Further more, BHO is a left voting socialist, terrorist apologist and political opportunist. While JMc is lacking in many areas, his endeavors are recognized to work both sides of Congress and he enjoys a much longer Senate voting record than BHO's less than four years.

Winston Churchill once said: "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is equal sharing of miseries."

Yes, both candidates leave allot to be desired based on their current histories and each exhibit major political deficiencies in who I would want running the United States of America. If BHO is elected President, then I hope I'm 100% wrong about his socialist tendencies and untested abilities to lead our country. If I'm right, then God save the United States of America.

[xrocket]

SecDef ... Funny how great minds work. The article you refer to is dated the same day I posted my third post of this thread dated July 16, 2008.

In my opinion, the only hope for our country is BHO, if elected, will use his education and intelligence to quickly evolve and morph into a realist with true centrist responses to the world's insane challenges which face these United States.

[Musketeer]

So then is Obama winning the presidency and using a Dem majority to push through judicial nominees who look at their position as one to foster societal change through the principal of a "living COTUS" while disregarding the written law or reinterpreting it based on the meaning they believe appropriate today a "Venial or Mortal Sin?"

How about nationalizing healthcare? Do you think that will EVER be turned around?

[Musketeer]

In my opinion, the only hope for our country is BHO, if elected, will use his education and intelligence to quickly evolve and morph into a realist with true centrist responses to the world's insane challenges which face these United States.

I have defended the statements about understanding the motivations of terrorists and the systems which gives rise to them. At the same time if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck it's a duck. Expecting the duck to suddenly turn into a cow is lunacy.

Obama is what he is and will not miraculously change into something else after being sworn in as President.

[xrocket]

Well, I suppose if pigs could fly....
I think it's perfectly clear where I stand on BHO as President.
Actually I parsed "if elected" with "I hope"

Expecting the duck to suddenly turn into a cow is lunacy

So... I really don't expect, but I remain hopeful.

[SecDef]

SecDef ... If you've already decide to vote for BHO and no one else that is your right. I'll never fault a fellow for standing his ground and sticking to his convictions.

The thread I started, really wasn't intended to change your vote, but to help and inform others who still seek reasons to vote either for or against BHO. My personal opinion is JMc is a patriot and BHO isn't. Further more, BHO is a left voting socialist, terrorist apologist and political opportunist. While JMc is lacking in many areas, his endeavors are recognized to work both sides of Congress and he enjoys a much longer Senate voting record than BHO's less than four years

I'm just here to make a stink when your personal opinion isn't in line with reality.

In both recent "crossing the aisle" legislation (immigration and election reform) McCain has gone against his own work. Woohoo, what a champion!

He blatantly lied about conditions on the ground in Baghdad to support his position on the surge.

If the republican primaries had put someone worthwhile on the ballot, I would give them consideration. John McCain is lacking in far too many areas which you will NOT explicitly list, of course.

Personally, I am EXTREMELY happy with Obama's move towards the center (towards my own political stance).

You have not shown Obama is a terrorist apologist. You have shown his statements, then you have launched off on your own version of what you think they mean. Incorrectly. Making a statement that we should attempt to understand the motivations of terrorists in NO WAY attempts to justify their actions. It is merely an adult response to a threat. To think otherwise is simply ignoring personal bias.

[xrocket]

BHO, Nine days after 9/11... "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.

BHO, felt strong enough to compose those apologetic words when our country suffered a great tragedy at the hands of Muslim terrorist and in mourning. Ignore the words, quibble with the timing, question the publication and for that matter disparage the messenger, but it is not possible for any normal intelligent American citizen not to understand BHO wrote it.

[SecDef]

BHO, felt strong enough to compose those apologetic words when our country suffered a great tragedy at the hands of Muslim terrorist and in mourning. Ignore the words, quibble with the timing, question the publication and for that matter disparage the messenger, but it is not possible for any normal intelligent American citizen not to understand BHO wrote it.

You highlighted/bolded the pertinent portion just fine. In addition to the tragedy, it appears that the culprits did not have any empathy for the American people.

"lack of empathy on the part of the attackers" is not he same as how you seem to be reading it as "lack of empathy for the attackers"

Understanding the motivation for the attacks is paramount to mounting a measured response to the attacks, which we tried to do to some extent. Why didn't we nuke all the the middle east in response? Because we had a measured response.

Better than going in guns ablazing would be sniping the head of the beast, no? We better figure out the nature of the beast before we can do that, though.

Oh shoot, he was right, too. We went into Afghanistan (full support by the american public, but then we are squandering our efforts there based on recent events in the area) and then we went into Iraq (wasn't even the right beast)


Regardless, if you want to say he is being apologetic, please point to where he excuses the actions of the attackers. That being the definition of apologetic.

[Bruxley]

He wasn't stating that in reference to how to attack them, he opposed attacking them, he is trying to get people to empathize for the motives of the terrorists. Not necessarily in the specific sentence you are referencing but clearly in the rest of his statements.

In observing the place people come from in their statements you can see what their real perspective are whether or not they realize they are communicating them.

For example, if someone were to say 'when people aren't smart enough to earn their own living there should be a place for them to turn for support in a compassionate government." It reveals that they believe stupidity is a widespread enough problem that it deserves government attention and it reveals that they think government is an answer for people's problems.

Obama's statements reveal he feels that on some level the lives these people led could lead someone to terrorism and that the US is responsible on some level for the condition of that life. It acquits the terrorists of what they really were, radical Islamic Fascists and what they did is completely unacceptable regardless of what life experience you have had.

There is absolutely no rationalizing such behavior.

It's NOT what happens to you but rather WHAT YOU DO ABOUT IT that determines if you get justice or not. Mullahs, not Americans, influenced these men to do what they did.

Obama has revealed an empathy for terrorism.

EDIT TO ADD: Making excuses for the terrible performance of Democrats by saying that the Republicans did X or Y reveals that the person using that argument recognizes Republicans as the standard by which performance is to be measured. Works swapping Democrat and Republican or men and women and so on.......

[SecDef]

Obama's statements reveal he feels that on some level the lives these people led could lead someone to terrorism. . .

Wow, what a horrible monster

. . .and that the US is responsible on some level for the condition of that life.

No. He doesn't say that.

Here's the ENTIRE quote from the article. The first and third paragraphs are being ignored, thus making the analysis on the second incorrect.

Even as I hope for some measure of peace and comfort to the bereaved families, I must also hope that we as a nation draw some measure of wisdom from this tragedy. Certain immediate lessons are clear, and we must act upon those lessons decisively. We need to step up security at our airports. We must reexamine the effectiveness of our intelligence networks. And we must be resolute in identifying the perpetrators of these heinous acts and dismantling their organizations of destruction.

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.

We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad. We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle Eastern descent. Finally, we will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globe—children not just in the Middle East, but also in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and within our own shores.

NOT allowing our rage to spill onto innocents isn't a terrorist apology. You guys need to learn to read.

[Bruxley]

Perhaps his concern for the rage spilling out on OUR innocents might have been more at the front of his mind.

You don't seem to be reading either..

Incredible how oftem liberals accuse others of the very flaws they are demonstrating.

His coming from the perspective of feeling compelled to advocate for these folks on some level is what is found to be so offensive. It reveals an empathy for those that spilled thier rage on innocents rather then a condemnation of this tactic.

Quote:

Wow, what a horrible monster

Not a 'monster' as your sarcasm tries to dismiss but more like wrong headedness. Responsible adult people are accountable for the conditions of their own lives. If someone had forced them to commit mas murder while chanting 'ali acbar' that's one thing but they CHOSE to becomme terrorists, the lives they led didn't force it on them. He has revealed that he comes from the perspective that tese people were victums themselves. BS. They were homicidal by choice not compulsion.

Do you ever feel ashamed? Step back for a minute and look at the event we are talking about. Stop campaigning and contemplate the scope what took place.........

How in the world do you empathize with people committing an act like that and attack people that work to prevent it being repeated.........

How in the world did you get to a state where the events that took place that day became passe'. How did anyone get to that state? It takes a reprobate mind to get there.

[Playboypenguin]

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.

There is nothing wrong with his statement. Especially when taken in context. It is called being humane and considerate. It is called being a thinking person who acts but also thinks about what caused the problem and how it can be prevented instead of just seeking revenge.

I am sorry he can't be a tough talking, yet completely ineffective, cowboy who reacts instead of resolves.

This is just another smear job worthy of any right wing talking head mouthpiece.

It doesn't matter what motivates America's enemies as long as they're dead. Our task is not to change the minds of America's enemies; our task is to make them dead.

Wow. That is one of the most disgusting things I have ever heard. I would not want that type of bloodthirsty thinking associated with being an American.

[Bruxley]

Odd....you see humane in one direction and hate on the other. Enlightened shades of gray huh.......

More disturbing is you see those people as deserving of humanity and the President as deserving your evil......

[Playboypenguin]

Odd....you see humane in one direction and hate on the other. Enlighted shades of gray huh.......

Huh? Want to try that again?

[SecDef]

Not a 'monster' as your sarcasm tries to dismiss but more like wrong headedness. Responsible adult people are accountable for the conditions of their own lives. If someone had forced them to commit mas murder while chanting 'ali acbar' that's one thing but they CHOSE to becomme terrorists, the lives they led didn't force it on them. He has revealed that he comes from the perspective that tese people were victums themselves. BS. They were homicidal by choice not compulsion.

Do you ever feel ashamed? Step back for a minute and look at the event we are talking about. Stop campaigning and contemplate the scope what took place.........

How in the world do you empathize with people committing an act like that and attack people that work to prevent it being repeated.........

How in the world did you get to a state where the events that took place that day became passe'. How did anyone get to that state? It takes a reprobate mind to get there.

There's quite a stark difference between those that have the power to have empathy even under the most dire of circumstances and those that let blind rage dictate their short term response regardless of long term consequences.

The POINT wasn't to excuse the attackers. It was to indicate that they WERE NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE LARGER GROUP they were being identified with.

There is nothing "passe'" about this. It is the ability not to lose one's had in an emergency.

Do you ever even think about the number of innocent Iraqis killed? Talk about shameless.

Liberal? Ha. Pretty unperceptive. Par for the course.

[xrocket]

The BHO apologist are starting to respond not with facts or direct examples, but with dehumanizing opposition statements ... ever so typical.

This is just another smear job worthy of any right wing talking head mouthpiece

I am sorry he can't be a tough talking, yet completely ineffective, cowboy who reacts instead of resolves

Pray tell, one example of anything legislative BHO has resolved in the more than three years he has held a Senator's seat? Is there a single piece of significant legislation BHO personally sponsored, much less got passed?