Re: September 11, 2012
posted at 9/12/2013 9:27 AM EDT
In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:
In response to StalkingButler's comment:
[QUOTE]With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make
So you agree with HRC that the motivations of the killers doesn't matter?
[QUOTE]“Make no mistake, we will bring justice to the killers who attacked our people.” -- Barack Hussein Obama [/QUOTE]
Perhaps today would be a good time for a progress report. How we doing on this? Has he hired the same investigators that OJ did to find the "real killer?"
Think for yourself, question authority.
Here's the neo-con response after 9/11 about getting those responsible:
President Bush told Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes “bin Laden doesn’t fit with the administration’s strategy for combating terrorism.” Barnes said Bush told him that capturing bin Laden is “not a top priority use of American resources.”
And just six months after 9/11, Bush suggested in a press conference that Bin Laden was not a top priority for his administration. Asked whether Bush thought capturing Bin Laden was important, Bush scolded those who cared about Bin Laden for not “understand[ing] the scope of the mission” because Bin Laden was just “one person,” whom Bush said, “I really just don’t spend that much time on“
"Who knows if he’s hiding in some cave or not. We haven’t heard from him in a long time. The idea of focusing on one person really indicates to me people don’t understand the scope of the mission. Terror is bigger than one person. He’s just a person who’s been marginalized. … I don’t know where he is. I really just don’t spend that much time on him, to be honest with you."
So, Bush had one strategy, Obama had another.
Bush's strategy is history, and Obama's strategy is current.
how is Obama's strategy going?