The second issue is that NOW he wants to make it appear that he actually did say ‘shoot to kill’ when you get the opportunity. That shows a pretty low level of character on his part and an iimplicit dishonesty.

Any word from the KING about what we intend to do about future piracy and killoings there or will he wait until the UN acts and he gets multilateral concensus about the world.

I keep wondering how we will read these pirates their miranda rights.

“The president played it cool — in fact, pitch-perfect — as it turns out. We now know that while he was saying little in public, he was completely engaged. He sent his secretary of state to warn the pirates publicly — while the president privately held more than 17 briefings on the matter and made sure the bureaucrats at all agencies were working together (no small task).”

Sounds a little different than Gibbs’ reporting of the matter, huh?

And then, this all time gem:

“And finally, he gave an unambiguous order — to shoot if the captain’s life was in peril.”

Dear LORD. Apparently she is not clear on the definition of “unambiguous”. Let me provide a little example, Gloria:

“Shoot if you get a clear shot.”

See the difference? And see how Obama, with his “unambiguous” order, gave himself all the wiggle room a coward needs?

Then Gloria could have written something like this:

“It appears that the Navy ignored the orders by Barack Obama, and shot when the pirate’s finger was on the trigger and the AK-47 was pointed at the captain’s head. They did not determine, unfortunately,whether the safety could have been in the ‘safe’ position, and did not consult the President, who probably would not have known what in the hell they were talking about anyway. The President said he regrets the loss of the brave captain and has ordered a full investigation into the matter.”

And the weathervane rotates…

Anyway, such censorship is pathetic.