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, do you believe that this was a terrorism attack?
OBAMA: Well it’s too early to tell 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.
KROFT: It’s been described as a mob action, but there are reports that they were very heavily armed with grenades, that doesn’t sound like your normal demonstration.
OBAMA: As I said, we’re still investigating exactly what happened, I don’t want to jump the gun on this. But your right that this is not a situation that was exactly the same as what happened in Egypt. And my suspicion is there are folks involved in this. Who were looking to target Americans from the start. So we’re gonna make sure that our first priority is to get our folks out safe, make sure our embassies are secured around the world and then we are going to go after those folks who carried this ou
Isn't it amazing how the media clips and edits to give the best possible spin to their favored side (Obama and the Democrats)? In this case, Fox's Bret Baier discloses how CBS has just now released a previously unshown clip of their interview with President Obama on September 12, hours after that Rose Garden interview. It seems that after that debate dispute on whether Obama had called Benghazi an act of terrorism on September 12, CBS did some editing to avoid the appearance that their interviewer, Steve Kroft, had actually challenged Obama for not calling it terrorism.
http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2012/11/05/what-president-obama-really-said-60-minutes-interview-about-benghazi/
Clearly, on September 12, after the Rose Garden appearance by the President, Steve Kroft did not have the impression that the President had called it an act of terror, rather he had "gone out of his way" not to use the term.
So now, a couple of days before the election, CBS releases this latest clip (without fanfare) probably to cover their asses before Baier or someone else blew the top off their deceit.
5 comments:
And this stale new is significant, how?
Now that we know most of the lurid accusations about the U.S. response are simply lies, that in real time no responsible military leadership could tell what was happening on the ground such that a meaningful response could be launched without endangering the Americans involved, as well as large numbers of civilians, this word parsing from when we didn't know is relevant to what?
Oh, that's right, Gary and the pajama party are desperately looking for anything, anything, that might resurrect the failing candidacy of Mittens.
Siarlys,
I suggest you re-read the article. Since CBS has just now released the clip, it is hardly stale.
If I released a longer version of the Zapruder film, would it be anything but stale?
Only if it showed Alfred E Newman on the grassy knoll with a gun in his hand.
Now this discussion is getting down to the level it deserves. Its getting funnier too.
[Please prove you're not a robot:
whorina 44 ]
Post a Comment