What is wrong with this picture?Neil Munro of The Daily Caller reports that Obama is planning to use his influence as president to run interference in the media on behalf of Jihadists. Naturally, he’s doing it for the troops:
White House: Obama Will Fight Media To Stop Anti-Jihad ArticlesPresident Barack Obama has a moral responsibility to push back on the nation’s journalism community when it is planning to publish anti-jihadi articles that might cause a jihadi attack against the nation’s defenses forces, the White House’s press secretary said Jan. 12.“The president … will not now be shy about expressing a view or taking the steps that are necessary to try to advocate for the safety and security of our men and women in uniform” whenever journalists’ work may provoke jihadist attacks, spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at the White House’s daily briefing.The unprecedented reversal of Americans’ civil-military relations, and of the president’s duty to protect the First Amendment, was pushed by Earnest as he tried to excuse the administration’s opposition in 2012 to the publication of anti-jihadi cartoons by the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.
Here’s a video report:
This should come as a surprise to no one.
Back in 2012, White House spokesman Jay Carney chastised Charlie Hebdo for ridiculing Islam.
Keith Koffler of the White House Dossier blog reports that nothing has changed:
White House Stands By Earlier Criticism of Charlie HebdoThe White House Monday refused to back away from its pre-Paris-attack criticism of the magazine Charlie Hebdo’s exercise of free speech, claiming it was meant as some kind of defense of our troops.The criticism came from former White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, who on September 19, 2014, accused Charlie Hebdo of lacking “judgment.”That puts the White House among the many in the Je suis Charlie Hebdo crowd who failed to stand up for free speech until the magazine’s cartoonists died for it.White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest Monday piously explained that Carney – who spoke in September 2012 after the attacks on U.S. embassies that were being blamed on an anti-Muslim video – was objecting to speech that could cause harm to American servicemen and women:
It would not be the first time that there has been a discussion in this country about the kinds of responsibilities that go along with exercising the right to freedom of speech. And in the scenario — or in the circumstances in which my predecessor was talking about this issue, there was a genuine concern that the publication of some of those materials could put Americans abroad at risk, including American soldiers at risk.
Hope and change.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY