Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Furthermore, look at Crowley's statement:

"He did call it an act of terror," Crowley said of the president's remarks, but then told Romney, "you are correct" that it took the White House two weeks to fully admit that the attack was the result of planned terrorist operation and not part of protest against an anti-Islam video.

So she's saying that Obama called it an act of terror in the Rose Garden and that he lied about it. Note the use of "fully admit"

This is exactly what I said in my previous post. Obama called it an "act of terror" but took two weeks to call it an "act of terrorism". If you think the difference of those two phrases is a "lie", you are pretty ridiculous.

To him, it seems distinctly different.

But, given that you are not him, you acknowledge that they are the same?

BTW, where is the evidence that Crowley had a transcript of the Rose Garden statement? Two different wingers were making that claim and no evidence has been presented.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even OBAMA himself said that he did not call it terrorism. The way ya'll love to split hairs between act of terror and terrorism is a riot!

Agreed. They are the same thing.

Might I suggest you read Obama's words on the 12th in the interview?

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Furthermore, look at Crowley's statement:

"He did call it an act of terror," Crowley said of the president's remarks, but then told Romney, "you are correct" that it took the White House two weeks to fully admit that the attack was the result of planned terrorist operation and not part of protest against an anti-Islam video.

So she's saying that Obama called it an act of terror in the Rose Garden and that he lied about it. Note the use of "fully admit"

This is exactly what I said in my previous post. Obama called it an "act of terror" but took two weeks to call it an "act of terrorism". If you think the difference of those two phrases is a "lie", you are pretty ridiculous.

To him, it seems distinctly different.

Obama wants it both ways. It's called CYA!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even OBAMA himself said that he did not call it terrorism. The way ya'll love to split hairs between act of terror and terrorism is a riot!

Agreed. They are the same thing.

...and of course he said "act of terror" on the 12th. So this is all nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:Even OBAMA himself said that he did not call it terrorism. The way ya'll love to split hairs between act of terror and terrorism is a riot!

Agreed. They are the same thing.

Anonymous wrote:
Again, in repeated interviews, Obama did not call it terror.


He called it an "act of terror" on Sept 12, again on Sept. 13, and again on Sept. 14. How many times would he have had to say it to satisfy you?

If he said it two times it is like a double negative and he never said it.
-the hive

1) He openly blamed a youtube video
2) Went on the talk show circuit after stating acts of terror still talking about the video AND stating himself that he did not call it terrorism.
3) And just a couple days ago, he said this:

“The day after it happened, I acknowledged that this was an act of terrorism.”

As to number 2, this is Obama's exchange with Kroft on the 12th:

KROFT: “Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word ‘terrorism’ in connection with the Libya attack.”

OBAMA: “Right.”

KROFT: “Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?”

OBAMA: “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans. And we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice, one way or the other.”

On The View 13 days later:

Thirteen days later, Obama still didn’t use the T-word when asked directly, on ABC’s The View:

QUESTION: “It was reported that people just went crazy and wild because of this anti-Muslim movie — or anti-Muhammad, I guess, movie. But then I heard Hillary Clinton say that it was an act of terrorism. Is it? What do you say?”

OBAMA: “We are still doing an investigation. There is no doubt that the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn’t just a mob action. Now, we don’t have all the information yet so we are still gathering.”

Anonymous wrote:Again, in repeated interviews, Obama did not call it terror.

He called it an "act of terror" on Sept 12, again on Sept. 13, and again on Sept. 14. How many times would he have had to say it to satisfy you?

Again, in repeated interviews, Obama did not call it terror.

I was wrong. 9/11 was mentioned 2 paragraphs above. My bad.

Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.

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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

Anonymous wrote:Furthermore, look at Crowley's statement:

"He did call it an act of terror," Crowley said of the president's remarks, but then told Romney, "you are correct" that it took the White House two weeks to fully admit that the attack was the result of planned terrorist operation and not part of protest against an anti-Islam video.

So she's saying that Obama called it an act of terror in the Rose Garden and that he lied about it. Note the use of "fully admit"

This is exactly what I said in my previous post. Obama called it an "act of terror" but took two weeks to call it an "act of terrorism". If you think the difference of those two phrases is a "lie", you are pretty ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:

Talking about lawyers. Obama clearly said the phrase "act of terror". He was clearly talking about Benghazi

"clearly" was not so clear. In the paragraph before this statement, he referred to the anniversary of 9/11

Here is the quote in question and the paragraph before it which does not refer to the anniversary of 9/11:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya

As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.

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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

Bolding is mine. Note that in the very next sentence after mentioning "acts of terror", Obama mentioned the four killed in Benghazi. Yet, your claim is that he was talking about some general acts of terror. Only the willfully ignorant can come to the conclusion.

Even OBAMA himself said that he did not call it terrorism. The way ya'll love to split hairs between act of terror and terrorism is a riot!

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Crowley on Romney"

“He was right in the main, I just think he picked the wrong word,” Crowley concluded. She went on to say that her instinct forced her to correct Romney even though his “thrust” was correct.

The bolded holds the crux of the issue, one Jeff won't address. Crowley, as a moderator, blatantly sided with one candidate by correcting another. That was her 'instinct'

No surprise

Assuming that you are proficient in English, you obviously understand that being "right in the main" is different from being "right". Similarly, while the "thrust" of Romney's remarks were correct, in their entirety, they were wrong.

Here is what Romney said:

ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

In fact, as Crowley points out, Obama had called it "an act of terror" on Sept. 12. However, as Crowley later pointed out, Obama hadn't called it an act of "terrorism" so Romney's remarks were correct in the main -- there had been a two-week delay before Obama called it "terrorism", but wrong because, as you quote Crowley saying, Romney "picked the wrong word". Had he said "terrorism" instead of "terror", he would have been entirely correct.

Except for in the paragraph preceding the phrase 'act of terror', there was no mention of Benghazi, which Romney was specifically referring to.