Buried in a story in today’s New York Times is a fantastic notion – which is nevertheless entirely consistent with The Times’ worldview – that Obama’s win was a psychological defeat for terrorism.
The story is about a tape released by Ayman al-Zawahri, Osama bin Laden’s chief lieutenant, who referred to President-elect Obama as a “house Negro.”
The article suggests that Al Qaeda is lashing out. The Times claims, “American antiterrorism officials and other experts dismissed the video as a desperate tactic by a terrorist group that suffered a defeat in the global war of ideas with Mr. Obama’s election” (emphasis added).
The Times never identifies said “antiterrorism officials.” The “other experts” quoted are the author of a book on Al Qaeda, and Ronald Walters, a political scientist at the University of Maryland.
Walters believes Al Qaeda is threatened by the fact that Obama “looks like the rest of the world.” Among the tens of thousands of terrorism experts, Walters was chosen to put The New York Times’ spin on al-Zawahri’s message.
The Times thinks international terrorism suffered a staggering defeat because the voters elected a president who isn’t white, thus confirming that America cares about the downtrodden – like Harvard-educated lawyers with seven-figure incomes.
Never mind that Obama has multiple ties to radical Muslims, including his friend Rashid Khalidi. Forget that Obama said he would meet with the leaders of Iran and Syria without preconditions. Never mind that Obama intends to hand the terrorists a victory in Iraq.
The New York Times wants us to believe that Obama’s triumph is a setback for Al Qaeda. Sure, and the election of a disciple of Saul Alinsky is a victory for the free market.
@nytimes.com
