‘Is This an Act of War?’ Obama Turns His Back on Question about Libyan Attack

CNS ^ | September 12, 2012 | Melanie Hunter

[Hunton Peck]

Jimmy Carter II -- a Yellower Shade of Fail

[Travis McGee]

Great link to the movie behind the killing...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmodVun16Q4&feature=youtu.be

[Regulator]

And make no mistake – we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people

What, by providing them with mirrors?

[FrankR]

[Lucky9teen]

His inner Muslim is showing.....

[Pietro]

words.............

[aposiopetic]

This is worse. Carter had hostages to be concerned about and, whether or not we agreed, chose not to put them at risk. Here there was a murder.

[aposiopetic]

What, by providing them with mirrors?

Well said.

[Hiryusan]

Perhaps, some might conclude, if it is too much for him to be both President Obama and Candidate Obama, he should resign one of the two positions. I seem to remember Bob Dole doing something similar in 1996.

[mkjessup]

It's only an "act of war" when someone dares to question the Kenyan usurper.

[stocksthatgoup]

Bringing the killers to justice? What a joke! The Libyan government will just line up a group of Christians in Muslim garb and execute them.

[RummyChick]

“It’s especially tragic that Stevens died in Benghazi, because it is a city that he helped to save. At the height of the Libyan revolution, Chris led our diplomatic post in Benghazi. With characteristic skill, courage, and resolve, he built partnerships with Libyan revolutionaries and helped them as they planned to build a new Libya,” Obama said. “

Then,
He was either CIA or worked closely with CIA.

It seems odd that Libya is so quickly admitting that Libyan security force led the protestors to Stevens.

[kevslisababy]

The picture I saw didn’t look like they were trying to get the Ambassador to the hospital!

The lies just never stop....I need more duct tape for my exploding head.

[mkjessup]

...Carter had hostages to be concerned about and, whether or not we agreed, chose not to put them at risk. Here there was a murder.

Carter put those hostages at risk when he stabbed the Shah of Iran in the back and called the Assahollah Khomeini 'a godly man', precipitating the seizure of Iran by Islamic terrorists.

Re-read that history FRiend, and you'll discover that's the truth.

[onyx]

I sure don't want the Marxist and his evil, Moslem Cartering administration to win off of this unconscionable outrage, so Dear God, give Romney strength and continued backbone to pound away and ramp up his rhetoric, pointing out the failings of the Marxist and his mistreatment of Israel.

Rush is speaking the truth: The media are slamming Romney, more and even before they slammed the attacks!

VOTE THE MARXIST OUT!

[onyx]

BUMP!

[tomkat]

             

[lacrew]

Gee,

An American embassy is attacked with rockets and gunfire, resulting in the murder of four people.

Hey Barry, its not a tough question to answer.

[aposiopetic]

I lived through it. Of course he put them at risk. But I am comparing the situation as it exists today to that which existed once the hostages were taken. You are comparing situations upstream. I still think this one is worse, since Obama is directly responsible for the regime change in Libya, whereas Carter just stood by while things happened in Tehran. So we disagree.