« What if President Obama told the truth about Islamist terrorists? |
| Could Perot endorsement of Romney swing Minnesota? »
Obama's parsed statement on Libya attack suggests a 'crime,' not terrorism
A review of Barack Obama's statements shows that Barack Obama Tuesday night lied to the American people, live on nationwide TV, about his response to the attack in Libya.
In perhaps the debate's most heated exchanged, Obama claimed that the day after U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed in Benghazi he called the attack on the U.S. consulate "an act of terror."
He did not.
Obama is an attorney who graduated from one of the country's most prestigious law schools. Like Bill "It depends on what the meaning of the word, is, is" Clinton, he knows how to parse words.
Obama began his September 12 remarks, rightfully, praising the service of American diplomats and especially the four Americans killed. He then noted-as if to make sure that, after the brutal murder of an American ambassador, he was afraid of offending Muslims-that, "Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths."
After further praise of Stevens, Obama then declared: "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for."
His was a carefully parsed, umbrella statement.
It does not declare that the Benghazi attack actually was an act of terror. Instead it merely espouses general platitudes about "acts of terror." Further, Obama insisted that acts of terror will not affect our respect for "all faiths," even after attacks by Muslim extremists. No need for Muslim states to try to prevent such attacks, we'll still try to get along with 'em.
Instead, Obama's specific references to the assault were as an "attack", an "Outrageous and shocking attack," and "this terrible act." Again, these references were specific to the Benghazi assault, not as generic references. The one, lone reference to terror in his September 12 statement was vague and non-specific to Benghazi. There was no use of the word, terrorism, or of terrorists, in his September 12 comments.
In case there is any doubt, below is the full paragraph to which Obama referred during Tuesday's town hall:
Note the double use of the word, justice, implying that the violence done was not an act of war, but a crime. In tenor and in detail, Obama on September 12 avoiding specifically calling the Libya assault what it was: terrorism.
He continued that characterization Tuesday night. The propaganda wing of the Democrat Party--i.e. the MSM--has completely ignored the second part of Obama's debate comment about Benghazi: "I also said that we're going to hunt down those who committed this crime."
Indeed he did. In his September 12 remarks Obama referred to "justice" on three occasions and said we would "bring to justice the killers who attacked our people."
"Killers," not terrorists. "An attack," not a terrorist attack.
Remember, this is a man who claims to know the importance of using the correct words, who famously declared four years ago that, "Words matter."
Oh yeah, I forgot, he stole that line.
-William Tate is an award-winning journalist and author
FOLLOW US ON