09/17/2012 09:11 am ET Updated Nov 17, 2012

Terror Over Politics, Mr. Romney

Assassinating an ambassador, along with three other diplomats and servicemen, is an act of war. The United States of America was attacked by fundamentalist Islamists in Bengazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. The date itself cries out terror, with no need to explain, as the burn in our heart defines the date.

The film about the prophet Muhammad, which is thought to have sparked the attack, is provocative and downright stupid. It offends many and ignites rage amongst believers. Moreover, it is outrageous and that such an amateur film is taken seriously and is translated to terror and murder.

Ambassador Christopher Stevens was a diplomat who was true to his mission and passion. Not many diplomats have a passion for third-world war-torn countries. It's enough to watch his YouTube introduction before leaving for his assignment in Libya. Chris Stevens wanted only good for the fresh democracy, which was struggling to rise up from the debris left from the Qadafi regime. Stevens wanted to put Libya on track, and had a vision for its future -- a vision that would help the Libyan student get a degree, or the Libyan mother struggling to feed her children. He had a place for Libya and the Middle East in his heart, and as beautiful and cultural the Middle East be, he got the treatment of the ugly, dark and unfortunate Middle East. May he rest in peace, and may his vision for peace be an inspiration for all diplomats on their mission to achieve peace.

As I have stated, the assassination of diplomats and attacks on embassies is an act of war. When anyone, whether they are radical Islamists or other fundamentalists, attack a United States embassy abroad, it's not only an attack on American values, but a physical terrorist attack on the United States of America. And on the day of an attack on the United States, Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential candidate, chose to attack the commander-in-chief, President Barack Obama.

Mitt Romney does not understand that terror has no room for politics. As a presidential candidate, he should have made a statement mourning the diplomats and condemning global and Islamist terror. Instead, Romney chose to personally attack President Obama on a day when unity binds the parties together, as terror is not a partisan issue. It seems that for Romney, terror is partisan.

Voters and citizens should be disgusted by Romney's use of the assassinations for politics. The United States and the world do not deserve to have this man, who prioritize politics over terror, as the leader of the free world. This is not a man who should oversee from the oval office while the Arab Spring transforming to Islamist Autumn. This is not a man who voters should trust while in the ballot box.