Conservative Media Use Benghazi Hoax To Attack Obama Over Canadian Parliament Shooting

Conservative media are invoking one of their favorite Benghazi hoaxes to accuse President Obama of reluctance to characterize the fatal shootings near Canadian Parliament as terrorism, despite the fact that Obama framed it in terms of  “terrorism” the day of the shooting, just as he called the Benghazi attacks “acts of terror” the day after the 2012 assault.

Canadian PM Vows To Fight Terrorism After Gunman Opened Fire, Killing Soldier, Near Parliament Building

NPR"Soldier Killed, Suspect Dead In Shooting Near Canadian Parliament." On October 22, a gunman opened fire at Canada's National War Memorial and then proceeded to enter the Canadian Parliament building. As NPR reported:

In a televised address to his country, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said over the next few days “we will learn more about the terrorist and any accomplices he may have had.”  

But this attack, as well as the one earlier this week, shows that “Canada is not immune to the type of terrorist attacks we see elsewhere.”  

Harper, however, said that this will not intimidate his country. Instead, Canada will redouble its efforts against terrorism, he said, and make sure terrorists find “no safe haven.”  [NPR,10/22/14]

Right-Wing Media Pretend Obama Won't Acknowledge That Canadian Shooting Was Terrorism, Just Like After Benghazi

Fox Correspondent Ed Henry: To Understand White House's Reluctance To Call Shooting Terrorism, “Look Back To Benghazi [Where] The Administration For Days Was Suggesting It Was Not A Terrorist Attack.”  On the October 22 edition of Hannity, Fox's White House correspondent Ed Henry said that Obama wouldn't definitively call the Canadian shooting a terrorist attack because of their similar response to Benghazi:

HANNITY: If you look at the Canadian media as the story was developing today, and then of course the Prime Minister saying this was a terrorist act. It's hard to understand why there's this mysterious reluctance and resistance. It's sort of like Fort Hood, and it's kind of like what happened in Oklahoma, with the White House not being willing to identify this.

HENRY: Look back to Benghazi, obviously, a couple years ago. And the administration for days was suggesting it was not a terrorist attack, and then obviously got burned by that when the facts came out. That may be one reason, obviously, why they're a bit jittery or cautious about going in any direction until all the facts come in. [Fox News, Hannity10/22/14]

Fox Host Andrea Tantaros: "Why Would We Expect President Obama To Call This An Act Of Terror" When He Wouldn't Use That Term To Describe Benghazi? During an October 22 discussion roundly criticizing Obama for supposedly not calling the Canadian shooting incident an “act of terror,”  Outnumbered co-host Andrea Tantaros claimed there “is an apprehension and hesitancy by this White House to identify your enemy,”  citing the 2012 Benghazi attacks in Libya (emphasis added):

TANTAROS:  I would trust the words of the Canadian prime minister, right? You would assume, Sandra, because this happened in Canada, and they've been watching this guy for a long time, they had suspended his visa so that he couldn't leave, they have more facts than we do. So if the Canadian prime minister says that this is terrorism, I'm going to trust that they have the facts. Just like when the Libyan president called Benghazi terrorism and jihadism, our president didn't listen to him. OK? And so why, Sandra, would we expect President Obama to call this an act of terror when a hole that was large enough for twenty men to walk through was blown into our consulate and he couldn't use those terms then. There is an apprehension and hesitancy by this White House to identify our enemy. They won't even say we're at war. And to build on Eric's point, you have to identify the enemy or you'll never be able to defeat it. [Fox News, Outnumbered10/23/14]

Fox & Friends: Obama's “Failure To Recognize Terror As Terror” In The Canadian Shooting Is Like His Benghazi Response. On the October 23 edition of Fox & Friends, host Steve Doocy asked whether Obama's reaction to the Canadian shooting was putting the U.S. at risk because he failed to recognize terror. Fox News legal analyst Peter Johnson, Jr. responded that Obama's response was similar to that after Benghazi (emphasis added):

DOOCY: Should this serve as a wake-up call to Canada and America, and could the president's failure to recognize terror as terror put us at risk? Peter Johnson, Jr. joins us live. 

JOHNSON: We need to take the wake-up call and say 'don't call back in five minutes.' The president, unfortunately Steve, and our friends out there this morning, has not recognized terror as terror -- Benghazi, Fort Hood, the Little Rock 2009 massacre of our American soldiers here on American soil, Alton Nolan and the beheading as you were talking about before. So the first step is recognition of the problem. We need to be strong and powerful enough to say yeah, there is a problem and we're going to contain it here in the United States. 

[...]

But the problem is, we haven't recognized it and called it as such. So today, the president needs to recognize this as terrorism. He didn't recognize it yesterday, although the Canadian prime minister did, and the world did, and anyone that could read about it or see it on the FoxNews.com site or on our television could say, what do you think it is? This is a radicalized Islamist terrorist. [Fox News, Fox & Friends10/23/14]

Rush Limbaugh: The Canadians,  “They're Not Pretending It Isn't Terrorism,” In Contrast To Obama. Radio host Rush Limbaugh was quick to juxtapose the Canadian PM's response next to Obama's, saying, “the Canadians, they're not pretending it isn't terrorism” :

LIMBAUGH: So what a contrast, or a juxtaposition, if you will. The Canadians -- they're not pretending it isn't terrorism. Stephen Harper went right out there and told everybody why this happened, who did it, and what their objectives were, and they're not going to be intimidated. And in Washington, kind of look, I don't know, ridiculous.

[...]

Political correctness on parade there in the White House. [Premiere Radio Networks, The Rush Limbaugh Show10/23/14]

In Reality, Obama Framed Canadian Shooting In Terms Of “Terrorism” And “Terrorist Activity”

President Obama: “We Have To Remain Vigilant” When “Dealing With These Kinds Of Acts of Senseless Violence Or Terrorism.”  When asked to address the Canadian shooting on October 22, President Obama referenced terrorism or terrorist activity three different times in connection to the event (emphasis added):

THE PRESIDENT: We don't yet have all the information about what motivated the shooting. We don't yet have all the information about whether this was part of a broader network or plan, or whether this was an individual or series of individuals who decided to take these actions. But it emphasizes the degree to which we have to remain vigilant when it comes to dealing with these kinds of acts of senseless violence or terrorism. And I pledged, as always, to make sure that our national security teams are coordinating very closely, given not only is Canada one of our closest allies in the world but they're our neighbors and our friends, and obviously there's a lot of interaction between Canadians and the United States, where we have such a long border.

And it's very important I think for us to recognize that when it comes to dealing with terrorist activity, that Canada and the United States has to be entirely in sync.  We have in the past; I'm confident we will continue to do so in the future.  And Prime Minister Harper was very appreciative of the expressions of concern by the American people.

[...]

Q:    What does the Canadian attack mean to U.S. security, Mr. President?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, we don't have enough information yet. So as we understand better exactly what happened, this obviously is something that we'll make sure to factor in, in the ongoing efforts that we have to counter terrorist attacks in our country. [Whitehouse.gov, 10/22/14]

And Immediately After Benghazi Attacks, He Called The Assault “Acts Of Terror”

Sept. 12: Obama Said Of Benghazi: “No Acts Of Terror Will Ever Shake The Resolve Of This Great Nation.”  On Sept. 12, the day after the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, President Obama gave a speech in the Rose Garden on the deaths of four U.S. diplomatic staff. He said, “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.” [WhiteHouse.gov, 9/12/12]

Sept. 13: Obama Again Referred To The Benghazi Attack As An “Act Of Terror” In Colorado. Campaigning in Golden, Colorado, on Sept. 13, Obama again classified the Benghazi attack as an “act of terror.” He told the crowd, “So what I want all of you to know is that we are going to bring those who killed our fellow Americans to justice. I want people around the world to hear me:  To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished.” [WhiteHouse.gov, 9/13/12]

Sept. 13: In Nevada, Obama Said Of Benghazi: “No Act Of Terror Will Dim The Light” Of American Values. Later on Sept. 13, Obama again labeled the Benghazi violence an “act of terror.” He told a crowd in Las Vegas, Nevada, “As for the ones we lost last night:  I want to assure you, we will bring their killers to justice. And we want to send a message all around the world -- anybody who would do us harm:  No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America.” [WhiteHouse.gov, 9/13/12]