Over the last few days, we've learned one thing for sure: "Whatever his name" is did try to blow up the plane landing in Detroit!
Just listen to the passengers!
Wonder how many passengers agree with Pres BO that this terrorist "allegedly" tried to kill 250 people over Michigan?
Nevertheless, Pres BO said yesterday that the terrorist 'allegedly" try to blow up the plane.
Shouldn't we hear something more definite from Pres BO?
Pres BO's leadership style is starting to come under severe scrutiny, specially now that he has to make decisions rather than just give "healing the planet" speeches in front of adoring crowds.
Handling problems the Obama way is the latest article that questions Pres BO's style:
"There is a sense of déjà vu in the Obama administration’s response to the attempted terrorist attack on Christmas Day.
A by-now familiar pattern has been established for dealing with unexpected problems.
First, White House aides downplay the notion that something may have gone wrong on their part.
While staying out of the spotlight, the president conveys his efforts to address the situation and his feelings about it through administration officials.
After a few days, the White House concedes on the issue, and perhaps Obama even steps out to address it.
That same scenario unfolded over the summer when Obama said Sgt. James Crowley, a white Cambridge, Mass., police officer, “acted stupidly” when he arrested Henry Louis Gates Jr., a black Harvard professor, in his own home.
It happened in March when the public was outraged over AIG dishing out hefty bonuses.
More recently the public witnessed the dynamic after a security breach at President Barack Obama’s first state dinner."
A little too much dithering?
We are not saying that Pres BO should have declared war on Nigeria or Holland.
At the same time, it would have been nice to have seen a more engaged presidency saying something like this:
First, this is unacceptable. How did this guy get on the plane?
Second, the terrorist is a terrorist who did try to blow up an aircraft and kill innocent people.
Instead, we got "legalisms" and "we need more reviews"!
Yes, we need a review but we also need a president who showed some passion about the fact that a terrorist tried to kill US citizens.
2 comments:
Ron Radosh has a great article on Pres BO's response:
"But as the world knows, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was indeed very guilty, and only because a Dutch filmmaker sitting near him interceded and subdued him, helping put out the fire at the same time, was the plot unsuccessful.
Rather than treat the culprit as a foreign national who became converted in London to the doctrines of radical Islam by mullahs at his local mosque, evidently the decision has been made to treat him as a defendant in a criminal case, with a subsequent trial in which his guilt is not to be prejudged.
Although he is a foreign national, evidently he will be treated as if he were an American citizen.
Perhaps that is why at present, the government has not been able to obtain necessary DNA samples from him, since Abdulmutallab clearly does not want to voluntarily acquiesce in giving a sample to the FBI.
Coercion and rough treatment, including serious interrogation about the involvement of others, could be used against the government in any ensuing trial."
(http://pajamasmedia.com/ronradosh/2009/12/28/president-obamas-failed-response-to-the-attempted-terrorist-attack/)
This is very interesting from The Detroit News:
"Flight 253 passengers believe others involved in plot"
(http://www.detnews.com/article/20091229/METRO01/912290365/Flight-253-passengers-believe-others-involved-in-plot)
Post a Comment