Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,825 Year: 4,082/9,624 Month: 953/974 Week: 280/286 Day: 1/40 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   By Golly, Benghazi
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 311 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(6)
Message 2 of 50 (699085)
05-14-2013 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by dronestar
05-14-2013 11:33 AM


Oh Look, We Found The Smoking Gun
And Rep. Issa (R-Stupidity) has identified the Smoking Gun of the Cover-Up:
In the day following the Benghazi attacks, Obama appeared at the White House Rose Garden alongside then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In his remarks, Obama referred to the incident as an act of terror and used the phrase again at a campaign rally the day after in Denver, CO. I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished, he said.
But Issa claimed that Obama relied on the act of terror formulation to dissuade Americans from thinking it was a terror attack, thus improving his chances of re-election. [...] "The words that are being used carefully like you just said, ‘act of terror’ an ‘act of terror’ is different than a ‘terrorist attack.’"
See? There's a big difference between an attack which is an "act of terror" and and attack which is "terrorist". By his choice of words, President Obama must have fooled millions of Americans, millions of incredibly stupid Americans, into thinking that this was just an act of terror and not a terrorist act, and that's basically the only reason he won re-election, and not the fact that the Republicans are a bunch of unelectable loonies. Impeach! Impeach!
But then isn't it time we also investigated George W. Bush? Two days after 9/11, he described that event as an "act of terror". Of course, he wasn't even slightly black when he said it, which I guess makes all the difference. Certainly Rep. Issa had absolutely no objection to Bush's choice of words.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by dronestar, posted 05-14-2013 11:33 AM dronestar has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 311 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 3 of 50 (699086)
05-14-2013 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by dronestar
05-14-2013 11:33 AM


Personally, this 'coverup' is not even close to the many more horrific things critics of Obama can present. Am I missing something?
Yeah, you've got to wonder how the Republicans choose the things they're going to pretend to be outraged about.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by dronestar, posted 05-14-2013 11:33 AM dronestar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by dronestar, posted 06-25-2013 12:17 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 311 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 5 of 50 (699091)
05-14-2013 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by AZPaul3
05-14-2013 11:48 AM


Second, you are missing the will, the need, to find any way to destroy a sitting president of the opposite party, regardless of the harm it does to the nation, so that you can say that you can do better and should be handed power in the next election.
But what the Republican elite don't seem to realize is that this sort of thing only appeals to people who are already paranoid lunatics, and so would vote Republican anyway. It's not like if they can make mad people even madder they'll be so mad they'll vote Republican twice, they still only get one vote each no matter how divorced they are from reality. It was the same with the imaginary "death panels". No-one could believe that unless they were already insane enough to believe any crap that comes down from the high honchos of the GOP, in which case one of the stupid propositions they'd already believe is: "I should vote Republican". Having created an unscrupulous and dishonest propaganda machine, the Republicans apparently use it for the sole purpose of painting the lily.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by AZPaul3, posted 05-14-2013 11:48 AM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by AZPaul3, posted 05-14-2013 5:11 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 311 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 10 of 50 (699102)
05-14-2013 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Coyote
05-14-2013 12:34 PM


3 al Qaeda operatives took part in Benghazi attack
By Paul Cruickshank. Tim Lister. Nic Robertson and Fran Townsend, CNN
updated 9:23 AM EDT, Sat May 4, 2013
(CNN) -- Several Yemeni men belonging to al Qaeda took part in the terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi last September, according to several sources who have spoken with CNN.
One senior U.S. law enforcement official told CNN that "three or four members of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula," or AQAP, took part in the attack.
More...
Error
So it was an act of terror. Damn you, Obama, for telling the truth! You misled the public by describing the attacks using the exact same words that G.W.B. used to describe 9/11!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Coyote, posted 05-14-2013 12:34 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by dronestar, posted 05-14-2013 1:06 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 311 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 12 of 50 (699106)
05-14-2013 1:12 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by dronestar
05-14-2013 1:06 PM


Well, let's be straight here. Obama ALSO used the false excuse of the anti-muslim movie to redirect anger.
And he knew it was false because ... ?
And we know this because ... ?
And he wanted to "redirect anger" because ... ?
And we know this because ... ?
Oh, right, because loonies made stuff up.
Is this is the ONLY thing about this 'coverup' that has Coyote/Republicans annoyed?
It's not even one of the things that makes them annoyed. But they're too ashamed to admit why they really seize on any pathetic excuse to attack Obama.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by dronestar, posted 05-14-2013 1:06 PM dronestar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by dronestar, posted 05-14-2013 1:26 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 311 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 24 of 50 (699128)
05-14-2013 5:21 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by nwr
05-14-2013 5:01 PM


As far as I can tell, there are two important facts that are driving this investigation:
there is a Presidential election coming up in 2016;
Hilary Clinton might be a candidate in that election.
Well, I know that lies are cheap, but even so I think they ought to concentrate on pretending that she's a lesbian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by nwr, posted 05-14-2013 5:01 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 311 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 28 of 50 (699139)
05-14-2013 6:43 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by New Cat's Eye
05-14-2013 5:05 PM


Re: What scandal?
They knew that Al Qaeda was planning on attacking the embassy but didn't do anything about it, in fact, they got lax on security measures.
Has anyone suggested a motive, or are attacks on embassies just one of the things Obama enjoys, like the taste of babies and the crunching sound a kitten makes when you step on it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-14-2013 5:05 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 311 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 33 of 50 (699947)
05-28-2013 4:20 PM


Now At Last We Know

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-28-2013 4:43 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024