Breaking On Fox

And?

Obama said it was an act of terror.


not quite....


now where did i hear him flat out say......


THIS was an act of terror.
THIS act was an attack of terror.

Obama did not say in his rose garden address.... THIS indecent is a terrorist attack.


Context is difficult for the simple-minded, obviously.

Obama began with the attack in Benghazi, and then he also tied it to the 9/11 attack, and since he was talking about both things and then actually tied them together, he pluralized the word "act" because, you see, he was talking about 2 terrorist ATTACKS, not 1 terrorist ATTACK.

I know many of our friends on the right are against education and evolution, so make sure to remind them of this fact so that they learn and evolve, instead of staying willfully ignorant.


My dog had a broken leg.

Pitt bulls can be very mean.

Is my dog a pitt bull or did he get attacked by one?

When you are dealing with Obamama --- my dog is a pitt bull when desirable and he got attacked by one when THAT is desirable.... The problem is that my dog neither got attacked by one, nor is one...

These are what's know as Obama Bin Lyin' FACTS.... Had Americans bought his initial lie he would have never come back to claim he called it a terrorist attack. The only reason he EVER did was because he got busted trying to pretend that he had a handle on terrorism.

Context, in this matter would require followup - - Obamama was asked point blank on more than one occasion over the following two weeks and would NEVER call it a terror attack ---- if he REALLY called it an act of terror at the one day mark, why would he not answer the same way when asked point blank over the next two weeks?

Obviously, his minister of misinfomation was in full spin mode!
 
Checked the MSM this morning and found the story on all the networks EXCEPT..... wait for it...NBC.
Supposedly, Jay Carney is supposed to address reporters this morning. let's see if any of the MSM will ask the questions.
 
There are no links yet, but Greta says FOX has emails proving that the WhiteHouse knew it was a terrorist attack as it was happening on the ground in Benghazi.

529.gif
.
529.gif
.
529.gif


"Greta Van Susteren was agog over the “breaking news” that amounted to a bunch of emails showing that the White House knew that a terror group had claimed responsibility for the attacks on Benghazi. Of course, “claimed responsibility” is not the same thing as actually being responsible but in her excitement to finger the Obama administration as having engaged in some kind of nefarious cover up, Van Susteren didn’t bother with that pesky detail. Instead, she actually blamed the Obama administration for any of her own network’s reporting mistakes."


529.gif
.
529.gif
.
529.gif
.
529.gif
.
529.gif
.
528.gif
 
So. To sum this all up, bush attacking the wrong country and starting a war is fine. Obama saying An act of terror and not saying terrorism is grounds for impeachment? Fucking hacks.
 
So. To sum this all up, bush attacking the wrong country and starting a war is fine. Obama saying An act of terror and not saying terrorism is grounds for impeachment? Fucking hacks.

Why did Obama spend two weeks trying to blame a video when he knew within two hours that an Al Qaeda affiliated group had claimed responsibility. Why didn't Obama send the help that was an hour away?
 
Just because some group claimed responsibility for the attack.

Doesn't mean they actually were responsible. :cool:

I'm of the opinion that if they claimed responsibility, they should get responsibility and the drone that goes with it.
This is looking like a huge cover up. The American people should be told why our consulate was denied appropriate security. We should be told why help that was an hour away wasn't sent when they were monitoring the situation in real time. We should be told if our ambassador was facilitating weapons transfers from Libya to Syria by way of Turkey.
 

Forum List

Back
Top