Obama is bowing down to ISIS in latest speech

[war is best form of peace]

http://nypost.com/2015/12/06/president-obamas-latest-pathetic-speech-on-terror/






OPINION EDITORIAL
President Obama’s latest pathetic speech on terror
By Post Editorial Board December 6, 2015 | 11:21pm
Modal Trigger
President Barack Obama addresses the country from the Oval Office. Photo: Getty Images
President Obama tried yet again Sunday night to convince the nation he’s serious about fighting terror, and, as usual, proved the opposite.

Days after the San Bernardino attack, he finally called it terrorism, but he’s not offering anything new to combat the menace. He still won’t call it Islamist terror, and still wants to fold these attacks in with nonterror mass shootings — and fight them all with trivial tweaks to the gun-control laws.

Ban gun sales to anyone on the terrorism watch list? Gee, the list didn’t include the Fort Hood shooter, the Tsarnaevs or the latest attackers. How about getting a watch list that’s worth a damn?

He gave the same old defense of his anti-ISIS strategy, with the added bit that now there’s a “timetable” for getting a cease-fire in the Syrian war. A timetable — that’ll show ’em!

And he’s sticking to his laughable claim that the only alternative to his approach is a decade-long US occupation à la Iraq. How about relaxing his Rules of Engagement, which have three-quarters of US planes returning to base without dropping their bombs?

He closed with another long warning against mindless Islamophobia — despite the fact that the country shows no sign of going there. America still has far more “hate crimes” against Jews.

This wasn’t a national-security speech, it was a political effort — and a weak one. The real message is that this president isn’t going to let facts shift his chosen course.

That’ll be up to the voters next November.

 

[tun_dr_m]

http://www.mediaite.com/online/ny-t...ticle-to-remove-embarrassing-obama-admission/



NY Times Stealth-Edits Article to Remove Embarrassing Obama Admission
by Alex Griswold | 9:01 am, December 18th, 2015 4600

If you read*The New York Times‘ story on President Barack Obama‘s private meeting with news columnists Friday morning, you may have caught one quote that made the President look particularly bad:

In his meeting with the columnists, Mr. Obama indicated that he did not see enough cable television to fully appreciate the anxiety after the attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, and made clear that he plans to step up his public arguments.

The President of the United States failed to understand*that Americans were anxious after two major terrorist attacks in Western cities because he doesn’t watch TV? It’s an admission that opponents are sure to use to*make the president seem out-of-touch at best, and unconcerned about a serious threat at worst.

Many politicos and journalists*immediately saw the newsworthiness of the statement, especially after CNN’s Brian Stelter drew attention to it.



But just as the quote was beginning to make the rounds, it disappeared entirely from the the Times piece, without a correction or any indication that the piece had been updated.


Instead, the paragraph in question has been replaced with the following, which doesn’t appear to have any connection to the original paraphrase:

“Mr. Obama argued that while there were potentially threats that would merit the kind of investment of lives and money equivalent to that made in the Iraq war, the Islamic State does not pose an existential threat to the United States and therefore the response should be measured. The United States needs to take on the group, in part to defend allies in the region, he said, but it should not be an all-out war.

Moreover, he added, part of the group’s strategy is to draw the United States into a broader military entanglement in the region. A sustained but limited campaign may be slow and politically unsatisfying, but ultimately will be more successful, he contended.”

UPDATE (12:34 AM ET): In a statement, The New York Times has offered an explanation for the edit, saying that the paragraph was cut for space reasons.

[Image via screengrab]