Posted by Curt on 17 February, 2015 at 1:13 pm. Be the first to comment!



Didn’t his boss just send a very open-ended war authorization request to Congress last week? Did I dream that?

I can’t tell anymore if the White House’s weird pronouncements on ISIS and radical Islam are examples of fine lawyerly parsing or crude blunt-force denial.

The attorney general was making a broader point about the need for reporters to consider whether publishing sensitive information might undercut American national security.

“I’ll use an extreme example, perhaps unfair. In World War II, if a reporter had found out about the existence of the Manhattan Project, is that something that should have been disclosed? Now we’re not at a time of war, I understand, and I said, it’s an extreme example. But I think there is a question that members of the press should ask, about whether or not the disclosure of the information has a negative impact on the national security of the nation,” Holder said.

Tim Mak of the Daily Beast thinks that might be yet another case of Obama’s inner circle getting nervous about calling whatever the hell it is we’re doing with ISIS right now a “war.” The favored term, you may remember from last year, is “counterterrorism operation.” But … the point of calling it a counterterrorism operation rather than a war, I thought, was so that the White House could claim that it didn’t need formal authorization from Congress. Now that Obama has sought authorization, what’s the point of keeping up this Orwellian charade? Another possibility is that “war” is a term Americans associate with the deployment of infantry, the risk of which Obama is keen to downplay. Look at the latest poll numbers, though, and you’ll find the public now basically evenly split on whether ground troops should be used against ISIS.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x