Over the past several weeks, many have criticized President Obama’s handling of the turmoil in Libya as inconsistent. His press releases centered on preserving both American and Muslim values. Unfortunately, the freedoms of speech with regard to the “Innocence of the Muslims” video and the limitations of other countries contradict. Mr. Obama should have stuck with one position: defending free speech. Firstly, Mr. Obama cannot please everyone, but his contrasting positions come across as desperate; he initially sympathizes with the Muslims (according to Mitt Romney), and shockingly a few days later, he gives a speech praising America’s freedoms. Mr. Obama has tempered, and according to some, even justified, the murders’ actions by publicly condemning the inflammatory video. How can he ask Americans to sympathize when our dear ambassadors lie dead? Perhaps his actions stem from the necessity to obtain the votes of the Moderates and Independents in the light of the upcoming November elections. Regardless, picking two responses to such situations splits people against him, hurting both his reputation and political stance.

Mr. Obama should have anticipated these security concerns because although we uphold the values of free speech, some countries and individuals do not. Presuming that the Innocence of the Muslims video concurs with preconceived notions of incendiary speech, the fault lies with the individual filmmaker rather than the government. But, demonstrators in Pakistan violently targeted representatives of our government. As President, Mr. Obama possesses a duty to ensure the safety of US diplomats, regardless if their location is in America itself or in a US embassy in Libya. For that reason, Mr. Obama must take action and work with the UN to promote peace and tolerance. He promises to conduct a full investigation, bring the assailants to justice, and beef up international US embassy security. I will hold him to his word.