Sections

Weather Forecast

Close
Advertisement

GOP hyperbole about blame

Email

Here is how Wiktionary defines the word “Terrorist” as “a person, group or organization that uses violent action or the threat of violent action to further political goals.”

Fact checkers like those at the Washington Post have described Obama’s reference to “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation,” as being too ambiguous to be taken as a direct reference to attacks on the Benghazi embassy being made by terrorists. Apparently, even his reference to the attacks on the World Trade Center did not indicate sufficiently that Benghazi may have been a similar act done on a smaller scale. Yet we know that nearly 3,000 innocent people died in New York that day — representing the largest terrorist attack ever carried out on American soil. And, doesn’t the fact that a U.S. embassy was attacked imply political motivations?

Apparently, it doesn’t matter that, by definition — one person or a group of people — who commit acts of terror, (as the president said in the rose garden the day after the Benghazi attack) are correctly referred to as “terrorists.” And, it doesn’t matter that the New York Times has published an article indicating that those who attacked Benghazi were affiliated with al-Qaida, but were not actually members of that organization, and the moronic video designed to smear the Muslim faith, may indeed have played a primary role in touching off the attack. As anyone knows, smaller incidents are used often as rallying cries to justify larger and bolder acts of aggression.

But think what you may about Obama’s words, splice and dice them as you will — I have just one question. If the president had wanted to conceal an act of terrorism (as Republicans claim), then why would he even want to use the phrase “no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation”? Why not just decisively chalk it up to religious rage concerning feelings of dishonor and lies about the Islamic faith? It’s as if the president of a bank wanted to conceal that it was robbed by stating that no act of “theft” will ever deter us? Why should the president even invite such easy criticisms by using similar logic?

Perhaps the GOP doesn’t care about who started the attacks in Benghazi — only about how thoroughly they can place the blame on Obama.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
randomness