Fox Ignores Facts To Bash Obama Over Shooting Of U.S. Soldiers In Germany
Fox News has repeatedly attacked Obama for not using the word "terrorism" to describe a recent attack on U.S. soldiers in Germany. In fact, U.S. officials have repeatedly said that the attack -- which is being investigated -- appeared to be motivated by Islamic extremism and could be an incident of terrorism.
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
Fox & Friends Attacks Obama For Not Describing Germany Attack As "Terrorism"
Doocy: "The Administration Refusing To Call The Shooting In Germany Terrorism. Why?" On the March 4 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy said, "He shouted 'Allah[u] Akbar' before allegedly gunning down two servicemen earlier this week, but the administration refusing to call the shooting in Germany terrorism. Why?" [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 03/04/11]
Carlson: "It's Amazing This Administration Will Not Call It What It Is." Later on Fox & Friends, co-host Gretchen Carlson claimed that "German authorities did call it an act of terrorism and yet, the Obama administration, as usual, did not call it an act of terrorism." After playing a clip of State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley, Doocy said, "It sounds like terror to me." Later in the segment, Carlson said:
CARLSON: It's amazing this administration will not call it what it is. I think it's insulting for P.J. Crowley to compare the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords and ask reporters there, is that an act of terrorism? That's apples and oranges. That guy was a loon who went on a shooting rampage. He had an obsession with Gabrielle Giffords for two or three years before it happened. Completely different situations. That guy right there, Jared Loughner. It's insulting to compare that to an act of terror. [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 03/04/11]
Kilmeade: "The Obama Administration Won't Call The Attack In Germany An Act Of Terrorism. What's Up With That?" Later on Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade said the attacker "shouted Ali [sic] Akbar right before allegedly gunning down two of our servicemen and wounding two others, but the Obama administration won't call the attack on Germany an act of terrorism. What's up with that?" [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 03/04/11]
O'Reilly: "Nobody Understands Why The Obama Administration Simply Will Not Call Incidents What They Are." Appearing on Fox & Friends, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly claimed, "Nobody understands why the Obama administration simply will not call incidents what they are and they just -- it's just inexplicable at this point. But I'll hearken back to my View appearance. I mean, you've got a strain of people -- I don't think many, I really don't -- who simply for whatever reason are not getting -- they don't want to put a label on, you know, Muslim killers. They don't want to do it." [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 03/04/11]
In Fact, U.S. Officials Repeatedly Described Incident As Tied To Islamic Extremism, Terrorism
WSJ: "U.S. Official Said Early Indications Suggested That The Shooting Was A Terrorist Assault And Not A Random Act Of Violence." In a March 3, 2011, article on the shooting, the Wall Street Journal reported:
A lone gunman killed two American servicemen and wounded at least two others on a U.S. military bus outside Frankfurt Airport in what officials described as a possible terrorist attack.
[...]
A U.S. official said early indications suggested that the shooting was a terrorist assault and not a random act of violence. German police said they had no evidence of a terrorist motive but couldn't rule one out. A senior military official in Washington said the suspect has "some kind of Islamic ties, but we do not know exactly what those are or how deep they are." The official said it was too early to tell if the suspect was aligned with Al Qaeda or localized Islamic organizations in Kosovo, a former Yugoslav territory that is majority Muslim. [The Wall Street Journal, 3/3/11]
NYT: American Military Official: "There Is Enough Information...To Indicate That He Identifies With Islamist Terrorist Ideology." A March 2, 2011, New York Times article reported:
An American military official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that the United States was not ruling out terrorism, although it was unclear if the suspect was acting alone or with partners. "I don't know if he's tied to a group," said the official. "But there is enough information at this point to indicate that he identifies with Islamist terrorist ideology." [The New York Times, 3/2/11]
Fox News: U.S. Officials Investigating 'Substantial Evidence That Uka Has Links To Islamic Fundamentalist Groups.'" A March 3 FoxNews.com article reported, "U.S. officials confirm that the suspect was extremely active on the Internet, specifically Facebook. They say they are looking for any potential contacts with the American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who is seen as the new generation of digital jihadist." From FoxNews.com:
U.S. officials tell Fox News that German authorities are investigating "substantial evidence that Uka has links to Islamic fundamentalist groups in Germany." Officials also say evidence supports the view so far that Uka did act alone -- which he stated -- but no final conclusions have been reached. [FoxNews.com, 3/3/11]
Fox News Repeatedly Attacks President Obama For Supposedly Not Recognizing "Terror" Threat
Sammon Slanted Fox News' Coverage Of Obama's Cairo Speech Claiming He Didn't Use "The Words 'Terror,' 'Terrorist' Or 'Terrorism.'" As Media Matters noted, on June 24, 2009, a couple of hours after President Obama delivered his much-anticipated speech in Cairo regarding America's relationship with the Muslim world, Fox News Washington managing editor Bill Sammon sent an email to Fox staff pointing out that Obama did not use "the words 'terror,' 'terrorist' or 'terrorism.' " In fact, Obama devoted a significant section of his remarks to denouncing and confronting Al Qaeda and other "violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security." Despite this, Sammon's "cursory check" quickly became the editorial focus for Fox News journalists covering Obama's speech, and was repeated (in some instances almost verbatim) by the network's hosts. Sammon himself appeared on Fox shortly after sending the email and claimed that Obama, in not using "terrorism" or any of its variants, showed that "he has taken us off a war footing as a nation." [Media Matters, 2/8/11]
Kilmeade, Rumsfeld Attack Obama For Not Using "War On Terror Language." During the February 15, 2011 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, Kilmeade conducted an interview with Donald Rumsfeld in which he said, "Let's talk about the war on terror. We can call it that. This administration didn't want to call it that." Rumsfeld responded by saying, "If you're not willing to identify the enemy, I think you're unlikely to prevail." [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 2/15/11]
Carlson: "Let's Face It," "When It Comes To Terror" The White House's "Tone" Is "Not Quite That Serious." On the January 8, 2010 edition of Fox & Friends, Carlson asked political analyst Doug Schoen about the "tone ... specifically in the White House right now when it comes to terror" and whether there is "a war waging behind the scenes between the CIA and the White House." After Schoen said that "there is no clear division of responsibilities or plan to deal with the inevitable conflicts," Carlson added, "Is that why everyone felt comfortable being on vacation, because the tone -- let's face it -- is not quite that serious?" [Fox News' Fox & Friends, 1/8/10]
Baier: "Words That You Did Not Hear In The Speech - Terror, Terrorist, Or Terrorism." Fox News anchor Bret Baier stated in a June 4, 2009, broadcast that a speech made by President Obama at Cairo University "lasted a little over 55 minutes" and "was 6,000 words." He added: "Words that you did not hear in the speech -- terror, terrorist, or terrorism -- although the president did talk about the 9-11 attacks and a lot of other topics." Baier did not discuss or report possible reasons for Obama's word choice. [Media Matters, 6/5/09]
Fox News Host Sean Hannity Criticizes Obama For Not Invoking "Terror." During the June 4, 2009, edition of his Fox News program, Hannity stated, "[I]n his remarks, Mr. Obama refused to use these words -- 'terror,' 'terrorism,' 'terrorist' -- or even that term, 'manmade disasters.' But he repeatedly quoted the Quran and even accused Americans of overreacting to the 9-11 terror attacks." Additionally, on his radio show the same day, Hannity said, "By the way, 'terror,' 'terrorism,' 'terrorist' -- how many times do you think those words were mentioned in the speech? It wasn't. Not even 'manmade disasters' -- that wasn't even mentioned. 'Me': six; 'my': seven; 'I': 50; 'Christians': six; 'Muslim': 39. He quoted the Quran far more often than he did the Bible." [Media Matters, 6/5/09]
Doocy Criticized Obama's Cairo University Remarks Because Obama "Avoided Using 'Terror' In [His] Speech." During the June 5 edition of Fox & Friends, Doocy stated that Obama "had a 6,000-word speech, and yet, of those 6,000 words, not once did he use the word 'terrorist,' 'terrorism,' or 'terror,' 'war on terror' or any of that stuff." During the program, on-screen text read: "President's Word Play: Obama Avoided Using 'Terror' In Speech"; "Terror Term Dropped: Doesn't Appear Once In 6,000 Word Speech"; and "What Obama Didn't Say: Pres Ditches Words 'Terror,' 'Terrorism.'" [Media Matters, 6/5/09]
BTW, if you read the article above, it completely obliterates the F&F crew's BS.
Then why try to equate the two?
I said the same thing as Dawuss.
You are equating killing with terrorism simply because the perpetrator is Muslim. That's not true. That's what Dawuss was saying.
I think Dawuss' analogy was weak at best. We aren't talking about some minor infraction, we are talking about murder. I am not invested in bashing Obama for what he isn't calling it because that seems to me to be ridiculous and nothing but politics. But we aren't talking about "any crime".
:)
Nothing general about it.
Why are you so scared of Muslims?
I am happy that the administration does not push the TERROR button every time a act of violence involving a Muslim occurs.
What church, synagogue, earth-mother tree festival or mosque would routinely encourage it's members to attack the IRS in such a manner? Maybe if we find such an organized institution we could call his actions as part of their dogma and acting terroristically because of those tenets and thereby call him a terrorist.
Now if he acted alone, without that religious background, was upset at an IRS ruling and flew the plane into the building, then I'd agree that he would be a criminal.
Islam the religion of hate and death.
No, it isn't.
Now if you are a muslim, that's another story.
Only to an ill-informed, proudly ignorant person. Most Muslims believe in killing in the name of terrorism? You actually seem to be trying to prove Dawuss's point above. Which is that you have a separate set of rules for Muslims than Christians.
He wasn't screaming what you say he was screaming..
They, radical muslims, are at war with our culture and we continue to try and deny it. But at least the Germans see this as an act of war and we will see how that country deals with this terrorist.
I don't deny it all. But this silly criticism of Obama and his word choice is nothing but politics. There are plenty of things to criticize any president over, but stuff like this is petty and political.
What, is Germany going to invade Iran in response?
As soon as the schizophrenic was identified as the shooter, it was immediately attributed to 'right wing politics', without a shred of evidence. Yet you have a muslim nutjob, doing what muslims to best, scream ally achbar and kill soldiers we have to wait until a full investigation is done.
Maybe he acted alone or part of a group, it doesn't matter. When a muslim shouts ally babha and kills people he's following through with terrorist sentitments of trying to destroy anything to do with America or the western civilizations that have shown them up over the last few millennium.
You should really stop commenting on any threads that involve Muslims.
They don't hate us for our freedom and our culture.
They, radical muslims, are at war with our culture and we continue to try and deny it.
Insert "christians" for "muslims" and you might have a point.
Why did obama hate American's? He claimed that the infidels were in Saudi Arabia tainting the dear mecca? Or was it the ottoman empire that got under his skin, at least that within the last 100 years, close enough for a good cause. Maybe the crusades, my goodness, who doesn't get their shorts in a knot over that recent event? Maybe the marines kicking the muslim barbary pirates behinds when they took to attacking other ships when would no longer engage in the African slave trading they commerce they had created? Or is it Israel? Is it all or none of the above?
Maybe, just maybe, it has to do with a religion that makes spiritual dominance over any other religions that gives them the right to strap on a few sticks of dynamite, scream happy thoughts to allie and hope for a few hookers in the afterlife!
Yeah -- kinda like some people in this country who want to kill someone for burning an American flag . . .
Yet they want to kill the infadel.
the religon of death!
I tell people "God Bless You" when they sneeze, but that doesn't make me a Christian freak.
Isn't it better to get the facts straight before making such claims?
Then you can avoid that nasty Christian freak label.
I just found it amusing that you were scolding liberals in the context of an exchange in which no liberals were involved.
My point stands. I have rarely, very rarely, ever seen a liberal challenged for making an anti-Christian slap, have you?
What would you call a a mudering radical Muslim screaming ali akbahr? The tooth fairy?
You remain in your twisted reality.
I went to college with many Muslims, and they seemed to be concerned with the same things I was: passing that test, playing some sports, finishing that beer, getting into that cute guy's / girl's room for the night. No mention of Israel or infidels.
Your ethnic bigotry is duly noted.
Now I recognize that oberman was a useless tool, and that the lameoes from kos and h.r. puffin stuff aren't mainstream, but a number of politicians on the left are more than happy to attribute this to the conservative right.
So, you have one blogger and no significant media figures. It remains a myth that there was an outpouring of blame against conservatives in the media for the Tucson shootings.
Again, the obermans and other leftists are by your words, irrelevant to any discussions.
King Arthur: You'll what?
Black Knight: Come here!
King Arthur: What are you gonna do, bleed on me?
Black Knight: I'm invincible!
King Arthur: ...You're a loony.
or senator turbin-durbin's blaming Palin's use of the word reload or use of targets as cause for this act?
Again, your only defense is to say that these democrat leaders are insignificant.
That make it a common trait, These Muslims, (not all) are terrorists.
and you are in some alternative reality!!!
As soon as the schizophrenic was identified as the shooter, it was immediately attributed to 'right wing politics', without a shred of evidence. - mmfvl
By the administration? You are making a fool of yourself. If you are looking for someone making claims without a shred of evidence, look within.
mmfa attempts to refute the contention that Pres. Obama has not used the word "terrorism" to describe a recent attack on U.S. soldiers in Germany....and then fails to cite any example of him doing so.
They glibly slide right into the "U.S. officials" have repeatedly stated this looks like the work of terrorism. Anonymous "U.S. officials" are not spokesmen for the president or his administration.
It's a fact that administration has issued statements using the word terrorism in its various forms. It's also a fact that Obama has discussed the topic frequently and at length using somewhat different phrasing. Therefore, when Faux et. al. pretend that the topic isn't being taken seriously because it isn't being addressed verbally, they are lying.
If the president or his spokesman had done so...I'm confident mmfa would have shown it. He didn't...so they couldn't.
To your larger point...that the administration has issued statements using the word terrorism...I agree. But this story is not about the "larger point". This is about a specific incident...and mmfa gets a fail in their puny rebuttal.
First, that's not exactly what I said the larger point was, but let's leave that for now. However, the story really IS about the larger point. It was NOT about whether or not a specific word had been mentioned. The larger point is accusations that there is a reticence on the part of the administration to identify acts of terrorism or call Muslim terrorists what they are. Those accusations have been shown to be completely false in both this current event and in past events.
I'm afraid it's just your carping that's weak.
Your defense of this administration's avoidance of calling a jihadist spade a jihadist spade is as tepid and uninspiring as this administration has become.
A leftwinger shoots a federal court judge and kills him then shoots a congressman (person) ....almost fatally and within minutes (literally) you guys are trying to shovel the responsibility for this attack on conservatives and Sarah Palin (I understand why you were mad back then ...she had just hung the most dramatic ass-kicking in the last 75 years of midterm election history around your necks) Krugman, Olberman (ad nauseum), KOS and too may others to name
THEN
A muslim extremist gets on a bus and courageously assassinates two of our soldiers shouting "allah akbar" (which we all know the meaning of from the last 3-4 cowardly mass murders and attacks during the last year or so alone) Fox News can't help but notice (just like the other 300 million or so of us) that the Obama Team refuses to use the word terrorist except in the most general terms ...even when pressed and/or asked directly...Why? and the funnniest part is that neither one of you mouthbreathers can even see the hypocrisy of your race - based, incoherent, wrong thinking? What we get instead is a bizarre conversation that I just know will end with one of you stating "it depends what the meaning of is ...is". Pull your heads out and engage your brains please. And try to remember that:
"Foolery, gentlemen, does walk about the orb like the sun; it shines everywhere"
If you guys can't at least try to come up something that credible you really should wait until you can before you comment again
No -- this administration from the President on down is just loath to launch attacks on any other middle eastern, predominately Muslim countries in RESPONSE to any attack, whether others deem it "terrorist" or not.
This is the difference between having in the Oval Office an illiterate cowboy [Bush] and an intelligent man who THINKS before he responds, and, as now, allows the rule of law in another nation to take its course . . .
Obama is a corupt, incompetent, fool.
That would be Bush, not Obama. You've gotta try harder to keep your presidents straight.
What I wonder is this: How would the situation be made better by Obama shouting "TERRORIST" ??
Afghan President Hamid Karzai tells Gen. David Petraeus that a U.S. apology for the accidental killing of nine Afghan boys in a NATO air attack is insufficient, saying civilian casualties are no longer acceptable.
Could it be any more clear? It is NOW time for President Obama to pull our ALL of our troops out of Afghanistan. Sink or swim Karzai.