Thursday, 5 September 2013

"I didn't set a red line" - Really Mr President, really?

Barack Hussein Obama 4 September 2013

"I didn't set a red line"

That's odd because here's Barack Hussein Obama from August 2012

"We have made it very clear... that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilised... We have communicated in no uncertain terms with every player in the region that that's a red line for us and that there would be enormous consequences if we start seeing the movement on the chemical weapons front or the use of chemical weapons..."

Maybe President Obama misspoke?  It would seem not as this White House Background Conference Call by White House Official on Syria from 25 April 2013 makes clear:
'We go on to reaffirm that the President has set a clear red line as it relates to the United States that the use of chemical weapons or the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist groups is a red line that is not acceptable to us, nor should it be to the international community.  It's precisely because we take this red line so seriously that we believe there is an obligation to fully investigate any and all evidence of chemical weapons use within Syria.
On your red line question, it is absolutely the case that the President's red line is the use of chemical weapons or the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist groups.
But I think nobody should have any mistake about what our red line is.  It is when we firmly establish that there has been chemical weapons use within Syria, that is not acceptable to the United States, nor is the transfer of chemical weapons to terrorist organizations.  And the people in Syria and the Assad regime should know that the President means what he says when he set that red line.  And keep in mind, he is the one who laid down that marker.  He's the one who directed that we provide this information to the public.  And he's the one who directed that we do everything we can to further investigate this information so that we can establish in credible, corroborated, factual basis what exactly took place.'

So when President Obama says  "I didn't set a red line", is he telling the truth?

If this was a Republican President the BBC would be all over this story but as it's the Obamamessiah the BBC restrict themselves to this:
'US President Barack Obama has said the world had set a red line over the "abhorrent use of chemical weapons", and that the credibility of the US and international community was at stake over its response to Syria.'
So for the Obama worshipping BBC there's no questioning of Barack Obama's change of mind/lie, but just faithful reporting of his words. The lack of critical analysis would be staggering if we weren't so used to such partisan reporting.

No comments: