Obama Called It An Act Of Terror

Contrary to right wing media spin, the President did refer to the Libya attack as an "act of terror". Here he is in the White House Rose Garden the morning after the attack.

No votes yet

What the President says - at 5:04 he begins talking about Sept. 11th and talks in general terms about service. He says "no acts of terror will ever shake"........That is very different than saying. "We consider this attack in Benghazi an act of terror"......and normally I wouldn't split hairs but with Dems you have to because they don't know what is is. If the President during this speech believed it was an act of terror why did he later, and his people later, refer to is as a response to an internet video?

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

I think you left a few things out. For example, you left out the fact that Obama finished up on the subject of 911 around - 5:20, and went to the subject of the new attack in Benghazi by saying: "And then last night we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi". Then, still on the subject of Benghazi, he equates it with 911 by saying "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation". Then, again still on the subject of Benghazi, and still equating it with 911, he says "Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States Of America". He puts those who died in Benghazi in the same light as those who died on 911, the largest act of terror ever. Now why would he do that if he didn't think of them as victims of terror?

But it wasn't. It was all because of a video. Remember?

MikeyA

repeat after me.

It was an act of terrorism....it WAS an act of terrorism.

And soon, you too will instantaneously become permanently STUPID !!!!

Voodoo -Black Magic ( mulatto ? ) Obozo Style....

I agree with you Fred. I think he was making a generalized statement. My question is who gives a fuck? Why does it matter. Maybe he was waiting to have all the facts before running his mouth unlike Willard Romney. What is the Repubics insinuating, that he is weak on terror? Really?

Because it was about a video. Remember. He told that to the UN.

MikeyA

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.