Benghazi attack - Terrorists or unruly crowd?

[piece-itpete]

I'll have to tell my wife!





Pete

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

I'll have to tell my wife!





Pete

Just shave, Dude!

[JBS...]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Did it ever occur to y'all that to some people having sex with a woman is only if it is penis in vagina, BJs are not really sex. Maybe we should have sex education in schools.

ummm, I think it's called oral sex...

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by JBS...

ummm, I think it's called oral sex...

Ummm, it's called sardonic humor. Get with it, Jb. Run outta coffee this morning?

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Ummm, it's called sardonic humor. Get with it, Jb. Run outta coffee this morning?

He drinks tea.

And bathes in it.

John

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by Boreas

He drinks tea.

And bathes in it.

John

Probably uses a long funnel and butt chugs it...

[Wasillaguy]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Probably uses a long funnel and butt chugs it...

Would that be considered sex?

"I did not have sexual relations with that tea, Miss Lipton w/Lemon. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people. Thank you!"

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by Wasillaguy

Would that be considered sex?

Only if you got a stiffy while doing it, Was.

[wgrr]

Originally Posted by whell

I've read the transcript. Obama referred generically to "acts of terror".

In the same speech, he also said:

"Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None."

A generic reference to acts of terrorism, followed be a clear link between the violence on September 11, 2012 and "efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others."

If you want to cling to that generic statement as an indication that Obama identified the Benghazi attack as an act of terrorists, then you choose to cling to a very thin thread. His actions following the Rose Garden speech do nothing to strengthen that thread. For example:

Obama sent out his surrogate Susan Rice to the Sunday talk shows with talking points that clearly linked the violence to the video. (She later blamed her performance on the Sunday talk show circuit on being provided faulty talking points by the intelligence community.) Then the maker of the video was arrested (for parole violations) and remains jailed without bail. The Administration pleaded with Google to take the video off of YouTube. Obama then went to the United Nations and linked the video to the attacks.

I think it would be quite generous to suggest that, at the very least, Obama spoke with a forked tongue on this. Granted that the emails, at that time, didn't necessarily represent an opportunity for a conclusive finding by authorities about the cause of the violence. I'll also grant that member of the intelligence community, State Dept, and others did refer to events in Benghazi as a terrorist attack in the weeks following the attack. However, it certainly begs the question why Obama went to great pains for 2 weeks to blame the motivation for an attack on a US asset in Benghazi (that also just happened to occur on the anniversary of 9/11/2001) on a video when there was much competing evidence against that conclusion.

After the attacks, after the White House received emails that these appear to have been planned terrorist attacks, after individuals in the intelligence community, and even Hillary Clinton, stated that these were acts of terrorism carried out by millitants, here were the president's words to the UN on 9/25/12:

"We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them. I know there are some who ask why don't we just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws. Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech. (My note - Interesting that Obama talked about constitutional protections on free speech to the UN, but begged YouTube to take down the video.)

Here in the United States, countless publications provoke offense. Like me, the majority of Americans are Christian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs. As president of our country, and commander in chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day, and I will always defend their right to do so.

Americans have fought and died around the globe to protect the right of all people to express their views -- even views that we profoundly disagree with. We do so not because we support hateful speech, but because our founders understood that without such protections, the capacity of each individual to express their own views and practice their own faith may be threatened."

Later in the same speech:

"There is no speech that justifies mindless violence. There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. There is no video that justifies an attack on an embassy."

In fact, in that entire speech, the word "terrorist" is used only once. Its a reference to Iran as an example of the religious intolerance that the US does not exemplify, and because of that religious intolerance Iran sponsors terrorist acts.

And by the way, your shouting doesn't change the facts.

He was in the Rose Garden to give a speech about the tragedy in Bengahzi. Anything he said in that speech referred to Benghazi. Whether it was an angry mob mad about the movie, a militant group mad about the movie or a planned attack all three are terrorism.

Once again, it is now a know fact, that the CIA was feeding the President information that it was an angry mob that attacked the consulate and killed four American foreign service workers. Obama and others privy to the CIA information simply passed it along. Once the CIA changed their assessment and determined it was a planned attack the official White House position changed as well.

The only person who deserves real scrutiny on this issue is Darrel Issa for his Friday document dump that had classified information in it and blew the cover of several agents.

Believe all the right wing spin you want to. Tragedies like Bengahzi can can take many months, of investigation, to learn the truth about what happened. Now, if you are Romney the planet Kolob beams the exact facts to you via your magic underwear. Then you can go out armed with the facts and rant and rave about Obama's poor handling of the situation before the bodies are cold. To politicize this situation is shameless for both Romney and all the Republicans that egged it on.

[mezz]

Obama, in numerous appearances, as well as members of his admin were clearly and without nuance stating for roughly two weeks after Sept 11, 2012 that this was a spontaneous attack and there was no mention of terrorism. Now evidence is showing that the admin and the president basically sat and watched events on the ground unfold and seem to have failed to act to protect US embassy staff. Four American's are dead and this president needs to accept responsibility instead of continuing to engage in lies and cover-ups over this.