Something about the way these quotes are used in this AP article is weird. What do you think? Is there an attempt to mislead? Is the writing merely sloppy?
Which do you prefer:
Quote #1
If Al Qaeda acquired nuclear weapons it "would have no compunction at using them," President Barack Obama said Sunday on the eve of a summit aimed at finding ways to secure the world's nuclear stockpile.
or
Quote #2
"We know that organizations like Al Qaeda are in the process of trying to secure nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction, and would have no compunction at using them," Obama said.
Quote #1 is presented at the start of the article, in the first paragraph. Quote #2, almost idential, is in the fourth paragraph.
Note also the title of the article more closely matches Quote #1:
Obama: Al Qaeda Would Use Nuclear Weapons.
Is there a difference between "organizations 'like' Al Qaeda", and "Al Qaeda"? How many "organizations 'like" Al Qaeda' are there, and how much compunction have they, relative to "Al Qaeda"?
Does it matter?
Obama: Al Qaeda Would Use Nuclear Weapon
For added reference, here is the definition of compunction as provided by dictionary.com:
Compunction