The Associated Press is as much as blaming the victim for the attack again with theirs headlined "Obama says he wants to 'reboot' America's battered image among Muslims." In this report we get the AP saying that the reason the Muslim world is mad at us is because of George W. Bush. But not a word is mentioned about why Bush might have been in a position of interacting so heavily with the Muslim world in the first place. How soon the AP forgets a little thing we like to call 9/11.
Using Obama's claim that he'll use his full given name, Barack Hussein Obama, as he's sworn into office, the AP trumpets how Obama will "repair America's reputation worldwide" after that dastardly Bush leaves the Oval Office. AP's thoughts on why Obama must undertake this grave effort, though, are interesting.
The U.S. image globally has taken a deep hit during President George W. Bush's two terms in office, primarily because of opposition to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, harsh interrogation of prisoners, the indefinite detention of terrorist suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and mistreatment of inmates at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
Here we go again. To the AP the Muslim world is all mad at us because of George W. Bush. But not a word is written by the AP about The many thousands of atrocities, provocations, declarations of war, and terrorist actions by Muslims across the globe against Americans and westerners or anyone else for that matter. No, according to the AP the whole focus on why there is a conflict between the US and the Muslim world is all because of George W. Bush.
But, the sun will come up tomorrow because The Lightworker is coming to town...
Obama promised during his campaign that one of his top priorities would be to work to repair America's reputation worldwide, and that one element of that effort would be a speech delivered in a Muslim capital.
Gosh. Who could doubt that all animosities will be dispelled in a flash of Obama's pearly whites?
Still, one is struck at the complete lack of attention by the AP as to just why there was any conflict between the US and Muslims. Did this George W. Bush fellow just decide out of sheer pugnacity to pick a fight with the whole Muslim world? Is this Bush fellow just a bigot? We don't know because the AP gives us no balanced information of what caused the supposed rift between the Muslims and the US that they claim Obama will heal.
Worse is this claim that just showing up at some "Muslim capital" will prove the salve that the AP is reporting it may be. To what capital does he go? Just about any choice is due to anger any number of people. Does he chose the capital of an autocratic or despotic state and give legitimacy to tyranny? Does he go to Indonesia, the veritable backwater of Islam and anger all those states that feel they represent the more traditional home of Islam? Does he go to a failed state or one that no longer holds a prominent place in the Islamic world? Would he go to an enemy state like Iran? Should he?
It's all rather vague and ridiculous, really. But the AP and many other news outlets seem to be presenting this campaign promise as something of great merit.
Another odd feature of the APs report is that it links Obama's past stated desire to "re-boot" America's relationship with Muslims to his using his full name as he's sworn in. As if using his full name is somehow a direct statement of Obama's support for Islam even though no one in the administration has ever said such a thing. In fact, this assumption is being made by many news outlets.
But of using his middle name, Obama told the L.A. Times, "I think the tradition is that they use all three names and I will follow the tradition, not trying to make a statement one way or the other. I'll do what everybody else does." Obama is saying directly that this is no big deal and means nothing.
As Newsbuster Michael Bates reminds us, not every president used his full given name while being sworn in, but what is fascinating is that every news outlet is repeating that using his middle name is an "olive branch" to the Muslim world. In other words, the Old Media are creating a positive message for Obama without his saying that it is so. The media are looking for ways to assist Obama to "heal" the supposed rift created by that evil George W. Bush.
So, now Obama doesn't even have to announce an idea or policy and the Media will read into his actions the exact positive program they want to see that may or may not even really exist. I am wondering if anyone can find an example where some statement of George W. Bush was taken as some obvious "olive branch" to any adversary without the administration having directly stated that it was the case?
And, again, with all this happy talk of the healer, lightworker, Obama fixing all the world's ills and making it a happy place again, not a word is said of why this crisis arose in the first place. Nothing is said of Muslim aggression and atrocities.
How soon the Associated Press has forgotten 9/11.
And now for a comedy break...
