Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   By Golly, Benghazi
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 1 of 50 (699084)
05-14-2013 11:33 AM


quote:
Critics including Republican Party members accused the Obama White House and State Department of over-emphasizing or fabricating the role of Islamic anger over the anti-Islamic movie Innocence of Muslims and alleged that the administration was reluctant to label the attack as "terrorist".
On CNN's State of the Union with Candy Crowley on September 30, Crowley observed that "Friday we got the administration's sort of definitive statement that this now looks as though it was a pre-planned attack by a terrorist group, some of whom were at least sympathetic to al Qaeda,"
"it interferes with the depiction that the administration is trying to convey that al Qaeda is on the wane ... It was either willful ignorance or abysmal intelligence to think that people come to spontaneous demonstrations with heavy weapons, mortars, and the attack goes on for hours."
2012 Benghazi attack - Wikipedia
Personally, this 'coverup' is not even close to the many more horrific things critics of Obama can present. Am I missing something?

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-14-2013 11:45 AM dronestar has seen this message but not replied
 Message 3 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-14-2013 11:46 AM dronestar has replied
 Message 4 by AZPaul3, posted 05-14-2013 11:48 AM dronestar has seen this message but not replied
 Message 6 by Panda, posted 05-14-2013 12:23 PM dronestar has replied
 Message 18 by Phat, posted 05-14-2013 3:58 PM dronestar has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 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 284 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

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 4 of 50 (699087)
05-14-2013 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by dronestar
05-14-2013 11:33 AM


First you're missing the premise that any hint of error or miss-step no matter how minor or innocent in an American administration must be a major scandal requiring constant charges of coverup and aiming at impeachment.
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.
Gather these two postulates in your quiver and you will no longer be shooting blanks. Don't you just love mixed metaphores?
Edited by AZPaul3, : expanded

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

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-14-2013 12:16 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 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

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3713 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 6 of 50 (699092)
05-14-2013 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by dronestar
05-14-2013 11:33 AM


quote:
it interferes with the depiction that the administration is trying to convey that al Qaeda is on the wane
How does an attack by a group that isn't al Qaeda interfere with the depiction that al Qaeda is on the wane?
Is there anything to support that accusation, apart from the weasel worded and unsupported claim that "some of whom were at least sympathetic to al Qaeda"?
Nope. Thought not.
Just more hate-filled and ignorant hyperbole.
dronester writes:
Am I missing something?
It's hard to tell from here; are you wearing your tin-foil hat?

"There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane

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 7 by dronestar, posted 05-14-2013 12:34 PM Panda has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 7 of 50 (699096)
05-14-2013 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Panda
05-14-2013 12:23 PM


WIKI writes:
it interferes with the depiction that the administration is trying to convey that al Qaeda is on the wane
Uhhh, . . . that was a quote from Wiki, not me. Did you not notice the quote was between quote lines?
Panda writes:
Just more hate-filled and ignorant hyperbole.
Uhhh, . . . thanks for your continued support.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Panda, posted 05-14-2013 12:23 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Panda, posted 05-14-2013 1:28 PM dronestar has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 8 of 50 (699097)
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...
Sources: 3 al Qaeda operatives took part in Benghazi attack | CNN

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by dronestar, posted 05-14-2013 12:46 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied
 Message 10 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-14-2013 12:58 PM Coyote has not replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 9 of 50 (699100)
05-14-2013 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Coyote
05-14-2013 12:34 PM


It seems the administration is admitting this now. I presume you are perturbed because it took a while before this truth was fully admitted?
I think we are in agreement, it was certainly naughty of the Obama administration, but is there something more to this?
Can you expand please?

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

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 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

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 11 of 50 (699103)
05-14-2013 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Dr Adequate
05-14-2013 12:58 PM


DA writes:
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!
Well, let's be straight here. Obama ALSO used the false excuse of the anti-muslim movie to redirect anger. Big wippeedoo.
But, I keep asking, is this all there is to it? Is this is the ONLY thing about this 'coverup' that has Coyote/Republicans annoyed?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-14-2013 12:58 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-14-2013 1:12 PM dronestar has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 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

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 13 of 50 (699107)
05-14-2013 1:26 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Dr Adequate
05-14-2013 1:12 PM


DA writes:
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.
I seem to be arguing for both Coyote and Obama at the same time. Roles I am not very comfortable with.
I am guessing that republicans would have prefered that the Obama administration not expressed it was the anti-muslim movie until facts were known?
Coyote, am I in the ballpark? Can someone from the right throw me a bone?
Edited by dronester, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-14-2013 1:12 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3713 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 14 of 50 (699108)
05-14-2013 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by dronestar
05-14-2013 12:34 PM


dronester writes:
Uhhh, . . . that was a quote from Wiki, not me. Did you not notice the quote was between quote lines?
...says the idiot that didn't notice my quote was between quote lines.
dronester writes:
Uhhh, . . . thanks for your continued support.
You will continue to get what you deserve.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

"There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by dronestar, posted 05-14-2013 12:34 PM dronestar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by dronestar, posted 05-14-2013 1:31 PM Panda has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 15 of 50 (699110)
05-14-2013 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Panda
05-14-2013 1:28 PM


Panda writes:
You will continue to get what you deserve.
Sayth the man who says I am hate-filled.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Panda, posted 05-14-2013 1:28 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Panda, posted 05-14-2013 1:36 PM dronestar has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024