If you don't support Obama, you're 'serving the goals al-Qaeda'? :: Political News and commentaries

« Be happy about a nuclear Iran? | Main | Obama administration 'out of touch' »

February 9, 2010

If you don't support Obama, you're 'serving the goals al-Qaeda'?

Interestingly, although John Brennan, Barack Obama's Deputy National Security Adviser, says in his USA op-ed that critics of the White House "only serve the goals of al-Qaeda," the editors of USA Today, in what was apparently written before the editors saw the contents of Brennan's piece, categorically reject Brennan's arguments in his op-ed and on the Sunday talk shows that people should stop criticizing the performance of the government and start praising it unequivocally instead. Contrary to Brennen's argument, the USA editors rightly conclude that there isn't much reason to have confidence in Barack Obama's national-security team:

Ever since the botched Christmas Day plot to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner, the Obama administration's national security officials have struggled to assure the public that they know exactly what they're doing.

So far, they're achieving the opposite, and they're needlessly adding some jitters in the process:

- CIA Director Leon Panetta and other top officials agreed last week that an attack by al-Qaeda is likely in the next three to six months. The warning is bound to frighten the public, with no obvious benefit beyond the ability to say "I told you so."
- Top administration officials revealed last week that bombing suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was again cooperating with authorities. Great. But the news pretty much negates earlier claims that no intelligence was lost when Abdulmutallab was prematurely read his rights.

- In Senate testimony, National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair had a "Duh!" moment as he hit his forehead and acknowledged that authorities fumbled the initial questioning of Abdulmutallab by failing to call in the high-value interrogation group, which was created to question terrorism suspects. Refreshingly candid, yes, but not a statement that inspires confidence. Especially when the same day, at another Senate hearing, FBI Director Robert Mueller testified that the high-value unit was still in its "formation stages" and that "there was no time" to get it to Detroit.

All of this follows the string of blunders that allowed Abdulmutallab to carry explosives onto a U.S.- bound plane in the first place. The chaos that followed his arrest now looks just as bad.

As Ed Morrissey aptly notes, before reading Brennen's op-ed one should keep Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's point in mind:

My oh my, how time changes things. Indeed, we're reminded that Brennan's comments sound remarkably similar to the type of thing the Left accused the Bush administration of saying.

And as Jim Geraghty points out (H/t - Ed Morrissey):

Looking again at that John Brennan op-ed in USA Today, I see he refers to Abdulmutallab as a "suspect" but asserts that administration critics, ipso facto, "serve the goals of al-Qaeda."

In other words, in the eyes of one the administration's top men on counterterrorism, Abdulmutallab gets a presumption of innocence that you and I don't.

Such logic makes sense only to an administration that sees itself as dictator and we the people as "the enemy."

Posted by Abdul at February 9, 2010 12:33 PM

Articles Related to Political News and commentaries: