Wednesday, September 12, 2012

What More Evidence Do People Need?

Every single year on the 9/11 anniversary the Islamists have tried to hit us with terrorist strikes.  This year they succeeded. President Obama and his State Department were asleep, and Americans were killed or nearly killed by Islamists in Egypt and Libya.

There must have been credible intelligence warning the president in advance that these attacks might be in the works.  But according to news reports, the president's not really interested in attending intelligence briefings.  We should have had beefed-up security, especially in the Middle East. 

Worse yet, after the attacks finally ended, the president seemingly had no idea how to respond.  So others responded.  Now the White House is scrambling to repair all the mixed messages sent out by the State Department and the Administration.  Either America is sorry for our misguided citizens making films critical of the Prophet, or America condemns the attacks and wants those responsible for killing Ambassador Stevens and his staff brought to justice.

Or maybe a little of both.  Obama seems to have in the same statement offered regrets that American free speech rights gave offense, but at the same time condemns the violence.  Hillary Clinton's remarks sounded as if she is treating the terrorist incident like a political disagreement, praising the Libyan government for trying to help diffuse the situation while other reporting suggests that same government gave the ambassador's location to the terrorists and encouraged them to go get him.

This is what they call the Arab Spring?

What more evidence do voters need to figure out that the child prince Obama must be demoted to "Former President"?

No comments: