It is tragic that it takes bloody murder to raise the press out of its journalism ethics torpor, and force it to ask tough questions of the administration it helped put in power and has pampered, pimpeda nd covered for ever since. Still, progress is progress. CNN’s Jake Tapper, probably the closest thing to an objective journalist in captivity, has obviously had enough of the seven-year pattern of pretending that all Obama policies are working just marvelously thank-you, even as the stench of fakery, dishonesty and incompetence fills the air.
Over the weekend, Tapper was having none of the spin offered by Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), both sent out by the White House for damage control, after the President’s statement that “ISIS has been contained” was rendered ludicrous by the deaths in Paris.“If this is what ISIS looks like contained, I shudder to think what ISIS looks like uncontained,” Tapper told Rhodes.
Bazinga!
President Obama ended the war on terror, put tepid measures in place in Syria, dismissed ISIS as “the junior varsity, ” and in the aftermath of the Benghazi attack, coordinated a campaign of media disinformation to blame it on a YouTube video rather than admit that Al Qaeda was not “decimated” as he had puffed, all while taking unseemly personal credit for the killing of bin Laden and feeding the public what has been called a “narrative of success.”
Maybe the news media will finally insist that he accept accountability for his inept and feckless terrorism strategies. I doubt it, but at least Tapper gave us a reminder of what unbiased journalism looks like, lest we forget.
Ethics Alarms 
It only takes the first one to point out that the Emperor has no clothes.
And the second one to note that he has no balls.
But who knows – or watches – Jake Tapper? One voice in the wilderness? We know what that means. Americans want comfort, lies, and an assurance that they are not at risk. Americans buy into these lies — out of ignorance, insecurity, the need for a sense of safety. The Obama administration — touted so long ago as ‘transparent’ — is one of the most egregiously lying organizations in American history. We need Teddy Roosevelt, FDR (not necessarily the best example but one who understood leadership), and (sorry to all those who disagree) Ronald Reagan. We need GUTS in the Oval Office, not a pandering, cowardly, ideology-driven, purposefully ignorant leader. When Hillary takes charge, it will be only worse, and the Jake Tappers of the world will lose their (however small) influence. I have lived my whole life in or around “ground zero” in D.C. And for the first time, ever, I fear for my and my family’s personal safety. I blame Obama, and I don’t apologize for that.
This comment of the day from the Islamic State:
“We say to the states that take part in the crusader campaign that, by God, you will have a day, God willing, like France’s and by God, as we struck France in the center of its abode in Paris, then we swear that we will strike America at its center in Washington,” the man said.
Read more at Reuters http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/16/us-france-shooting-islamicstate-idUSKCN0T51AM20151116#EryTw2qWQpDhJfGf.99
Maybe such an attack will get someone’s attention in the current administration that purports to have no interest in shifting its policy toward the Islamic State in light of what’s happened in Paris. See http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/paris-terror-attacks-isil-215907
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/paris-terror-attacks-isil-215907
Nothing to see here. Move on. Dot org.
I think that Obama is justifiably cautious about heading into the quagmire that is Syria/Iraq right now. ISIS and al Queda are two separate organizations, and they hate each other. And normally “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”, that is definitely not the case here. They both hate the US as well. And to wipe them out is to create a power vacuum that almost inevitably leads to something even worse in that area. So the only solution is occupation, and we, quite frankly, don’t have the stomach for it. Not for what it would entail to try to keep control over there. And not for the enormous expense it would create for us. We don’t even want to provide services for veterans created from previous wars.
Obama has been bombing ISIS targets extensively and relentlessly, as well as doing targeted assassinations for both them and al Queda. There is an hysteria to “Do something!’, which I certainly understand, but I don’t think the American public is ready or willing to take on what the logical next step would be; that is, a huge amount of forces (maybe even the draft), and a few decades of occupation. Anything much less won’t get the job done, and would be merely a feel-good measure with little results.
Interesting, somewhat conservative article about ISIS: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/?utm_source=SFFB
Yes, it certainly got worse by showing the various factions that the United States will not be the strong horse. Most likely there will not be a strong horse among the Western nations. I suggest we all learn to either behave defensively like Israel or surrender. I also think I know what the choice will be. Makes me sad for my grandchildren.
Today I saw a conservative praise France for its “show of strength” in leading airstrikes on ISIS before complaining that Obama has done nothing. Apparently she didn’t know the U.S. has led way more airstrikes on ISIS than France. Not only is there a hysteria to “do something,” most of those who are part of the hysteria have no idea what IS being done.
Quantity of airstrikes isn’t necessarily a good indicator of accomplishing much. Quality of airstrikes, however, is important.
I didn’t understand that either.
The issue is not so much “do something” as 1)stop telling us what you are doing is working when there so little evidence that it is, and 2) since you claim to agree that doing something is optimal, why not do something that actually does something?
http://www.vox.com/world/2015/11/16/9744490/paris-attacks-isis-losing
The article basically argues that ISIS is “contained”, which is part of the problem. As they lose territory and prestige, they must find other ways to look strong and inevitable so their recruitment strategy continues.
Contained is a doctrinal military term defined during the pre-contemporary era describing a situation in conventional warfare. In the component of the battle against ISIS that involves front lines and territory, yes ISIS is mostly contained.
It’s a silly term however in the contemporary era without qualification. Without indicating what “contained” means for civilians to understand, then it looks, sounds AND is facile to claim ISIS is contained when attacks like Paris and the Russian airliner occur well *outside* the ISIS controlled territory.
Meanwhile, ISIS brags that it slipped over 4000 fighters in with the “refugees” into Europe. I never thought I’d see the day that our own government would import hordes of people who want to kill us.
And you believe ISIS…why, exactly?
You mean the numbers? Good point. Somebody got into the country somehow, though.
Not really.
All of the attackers from Friday’s massacre in Paris so far have been identified as European Union nationals, according to a top EU official. The announcement further casts doubt on the validity of a Syrian passport found near the bodies of a slain attacker.
“Let me underline, the profile of the terrorists so far identified tells us this is an internal threat,” Federica Mogherini, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission, said after a meeting with EU foreign ministers. “It is all EU citizens so far. This can change with the hours, but so far it is quite clear it is an issue of internal domestic security.”
Oh, the link: http://thinkprogress.org/world/2015/11/16/3722838/all-paris-attackers-identified-so-far-are-european-nationals-according-to-top-eu-official/
Yes really.
It’s my understanding these guys, though EU nationals, have left Europe, radicalized in Syria, and made their way back in amongst the refugees.
Never mind the ones that came in and became EU nationals to bide their time years ago.
I don’t think your assertion undermines the legitimate and rational concern one iota.
But still came from somewhere: non-culturally assimilated immigrants. You don’t grow up eating crepes and listening to Charles Trenet and do this stuff. Maintaining the integrity of culture is essential to survival.
“But still came from somewhere: non-culturally assimilated immigrants.”
True, but they could be the descendants of immigrants that have been there generations. They have had a huge Muslim immigration population dating back to the war with Algiers.
And someone I read yesterday made the point that this problem dates back to the time, mostly in the aftermath of WWII, the former colonial powers brought Muslims from former colonies to do menial labor in the mills and elsewhere. Just because it’s a longstanding problem that dates back two or three or more generations does not obviate the need to deal with it. Promptly and effectively.
And let’s not hear how these young guys with AK-47s are the result of lack of jobs and opportunities. For example, in Belgium, any job involving dealing with the public requires fluency in four, count ’em, four languages: French, Flemish (Dutch), English and Waloon. So if you want a job, you have to go to school. And in any event, when does being unqualified for a job entitle you to murder people?
“You don’t grow up eating crepes and listening to Charles Trenet and do this stuff.”
Are you arguing that Westerners never commit terrorism?
No, I’m pointing out that normal Westerners never commit terrorism, because the culture leads away from it. The Islamic culture does NOT lead away from it. The Koran does not lead away from it. Islam does not teach that terrorism is a crime, for example. We do not have terrorist heroes in Western culture. In the West, terrorists are estranged from the culture.
Well worded. “No Normal Scotsman” isn’t a fallacy.
I do however foresee in your near future many references to George Washington and some of the Founders and original revolutionaries as being “terrorists” or even General Sherman being a terrorist.
Sherman is at least worth arguing about. Ditto Hiroshima. Nobody refers to Sherman as a hero, however.
What Sherman did Pales in comparison to what Bradley, Patton and Lemay did in WWII.
“We do not have terrorist heroes in Western culture.”
Well we have had them in the past, just look at the IRA during the troubles. Although now that the troubles are over and the IRA has become a criminal organization people are seeing them for what they really are.
The Koran teaches many things, some good some bad, the problem is that its scripture about violence is so open ended and vague that that a zealot can use it justify anything. That and Mohammad was a murderous violent bastard has allowed the better part of it to be pushed aside by the worse part of it.
The Koranic scriptures commanding the murder of unbelievers ARE open ended, but they are NOT vague.
Vague was not a good choice of words, I should have said that there are other parts of the Koran and that contradict them. But as we all know ISIS and its ilk choose to ignore those.
All of the attackers from Friday’s massacre in Paris so far have been identified as European Union nationals, according to a top EU official.
Since then:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11996120/Paris-attack-what-we-know-about-the-suspects.html
“‘Ahmad Al Mohammad’
Died in suicide bomb at Stade de France
The real name of the suicide bomber apparently carrying a fake Syrian passport when he detonated at the Stade de France remains a mystery, but officials say he entered Europe as an asylum seeker less than two months earlier.
The counterfeit document bearing the name ‘Ahmad al Mohammad’ was found alongside the body, whose fingerprints match a man using the name to enter Greece in early October.
he discovery has raised fears other militants may have used the migrant crisis to pose as refugees and enter Europe among crowds making their way from Greece through the Balkans to Western Europe.
Greek authorities say the passport was used by an asylum seeker who registered on the island of Leros on October 3 after his makeshift boat from Turkey carrying around 70 migrants foundered off the coast and he was picked up by Greek coastguards.”
And you dismiss that out of turn…why, exactly? Because they’ve done such a stellar job of vetting all those “refugees” swarming into the EU? Wishful, magical thinking?
I’m not sure if this has been posted here before: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8ce_1447076932
Saw some professionally printed stickers on a light post in the park here in enlightened Amsterdam today: “Rich Tourists: Fuck Off!” “Refugees: Welcome!”
Go figure.
Yeah, the people who thought legalized heroin was a great idea. Some people are almost too stupid to breathe.