Obama, " Susan Rice Said what we told her to say"

Susan Rice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


this woman is perfectly qualified for the postion and has done nothing wrong.

Your lying and this woman will PROVE yet again to this world that you are the racist party and have NO facts to offer this country.

"This woman" misled the American people...either knowingly, which makes her a bold faced liar...or unknowingly which makes her clueless. Either way she is NOT perfectly qualified. That Sunday "performance" has made her eminently UNQUALIFIED.
 
Last edited:
Obama Said today that he is responsible for what Susan Rice told Americans about Benghazi. Well that's a surprise, but now that the election is over, he added, If you want to come after someone, come after me. It's not true that he followed that with, Na Na. He is a stand up guy after all. What actually happened in Benghazi still not being confirmed. Waiting for a more opportune moment, I mean, when the investigation is complete.

Oh I think the investigation is way complete.

Hell. They let four men die when they could have saved em.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the State Department denied all those requests for additional security.

Nor does it take a rocket scientist to know that they sat on their hands while three brave men fought for their lives.

It also doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that they thought the Libyan Security forces would defend the consulate. Guess not.

Nope. Sure doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what happened in Libya. Of course all of this is coming out after the election. Go figure.

Of course that fuck in the WH has his second term so I'm sure he could give a rats ass about 4 dead guys in Libya. He doesn't need anyone to vote for him again.
 
Susan Rice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


this woman is perfectly qualified for the postion and has done nothing wrong.

Your lying and this woman will PROVE yet again to this world that you are the racist party and have NO facts to offer this country.

"This woman" mislead the American people...either knowingly, which makes her a bold faced liar...or unknowingly which makes her clueless. Either way she is NOT perfectly qualified. That Sunday "performance" has made her eminently UNQUALIFIED.


Save your breath OS. Facts don't cut any ice with Splatters.

Rice is a Dem therefore she's the best, brightest and smartest.

If you think Splatters has given one ounce of thought to Benghazi and the deaths of those very brave men or the conduct of that fuck in the WH and his State Deparment then
your mistaken. They are all Dems and therefore above reproach.

Of course if this had happened on Bush's watch she would be screaming like a stuck pig.
 
Susan Rice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


this woman is perfectly qualified for the postion and has done nothing wrong.

Your lying and this woman will PROVE yet again to this world that you are the racist party and have NO facts to offer this country.

"This woman" mislead the American people...either knowingly, which makes her a bold faced liar...or unknowingly which makes her clueless. Either way she is NOT perfectly qualified. That Sunday "performance" has made her eminently UNQUALIFIED.

Yes I'm sure you were calling Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell the same thing in 2002-2003.

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
 
Well Boo. The conversation is about Barry's Rice.

You need to start another threat about Rummy, C Rice and Powell.
 
Susan Rice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


this woman is perfectly qualified for the postion and has done nothing wrong.

Your lying and this woman will PROVE yet again to this world that you are the racist party and have NO facts to offer this country.

"This woman" mislead the American people...either knowingly, which makes her a bold faced liar...or unknowingly which makes her clueless. Either way she is NOT perfectly qualified. That Sunday "performance" has made her eminently UNQUALIFIED.

Yes I'm sure you were calling Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell the same thing in 2002-2003.

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."

If you go and read the leaked top secret "Downing Street Memo's" you will see that shortly before Britain and the US invaded Iraq, one of the major concerns of Britain and the US was whether or not Saddam Hussein would use WMD's against an invasion and what the loss of life would be if he did. The truth is...our intelligence was faulty. We believed Saddam Hussein when he threatened to retaliate with WMD's in the event of an invasion. Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell were not lying when they said we know they have WMD's because they believed that Hussein DID have them.

What Susan Rice did was completely different. She was sent out by this Administration five days after the attack...at a time when it was known by the CIA, the State Department and the White House that this was NOT a spontaneous attack over a YouTube video...to none the less make that assertion. The Obama White House sent her out there to misinform us.
 
"This woman" mislead the American people...either knowingly, which makes her a bold faced liar...or unknowingly which makes her clueless. Either way she is NOT perfectly qualified. That Sunday "performance" has made her eminently UNQUALIFIED.

Yes I'm sure you were calling Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell the same thing in 2002-2003.

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."

If you go and read the leaked top secret "Downing Street Memo's" you will see that shortly before Britain and the US invaded Iraq, one of the major concerns of Britain and the US was whether or not Saddam Hussein would use WMD's against an invasion and what the loss of life would be if he did. The truth is...our intelligence was faulty. We believed Saddam Hussein when he threatened to retaliate with WMD's in the event of an invasion. Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell were not lying when they said we know they have WMD's because they believed that Hussein DID have them.

What Susan Rice did was completely different. She was sent out by this Administration five days after the attack...at a time when it was known by the CIA, the State Department and the White House that this was NOT a spontaneous attack over a YouTube video...to none the less make that assertion. The Obama White House sent her out there to misinform us.

So then Powell was lying here then?

Powell said just the opposite. The occasion was a press conference on 24 February 2001 during Powell's visit to Cairo, Egypt. Answering a question about the US-led sanctions against Iraq, the Secretary of State said:

We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq...

The Memory Hole > 2001: Powell & Rice Declare Iraq Has No WMD and Is Not a Threat
 
Well Boo. The conversation is about Barry's Rice.

You need to start another threat about Rummy, C Rice and Powell.

Why Claudette? Just examples of them doing the President bidding, telling the public what the President wants them to say. Just like Susan Rice.
 
So Barrys Rice just told that pack of lies because Barry told her to?? Of course this was all right before an election. And they kept repeating the lies.

Okay. Gotcha.
 
you people are hating on this woman because she has an inny and is choloate.


That is all the racist party cares about anymore

I am wondering why Obama chose the Ambassador to the UN to carry the water for the lie about the video. Wouldn't it have made more sense to send out the normal national security people to tell the world about the video, or would it have been to obvious they were lying?
 
Susan Rice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


this woman is perfectly qualified for the postion and has done nothing wrong.

Your lying and this woman will PROVE yet again to this world that you are the racist party and have NO facts to offer this country.

The facts tell us that there are two possibilities here.

  1. The Administration sent her out after lying to her about what happened.
  2. She knew the truth and lied.
Either way, that makes her unqualified for any position that involves talking to world leaders, they will never know if she knows enough about the real facts to deal with them, or whether she is willing to lie for the political gain of her masters.
 
Obama Said today that he is responsible for what Susan Rice told Americans about Benghazi. Well that's a surprise, but now that the election is over, he added, If you want to come after someone, come after me. It's not true that he followed that with, Na Na. He is a stand up guy after all. What actually happened in Benghazi still not being confirmed. Waiting for a more opportune moment, I mean, when the investigation is complete.

So she is either a moron or a willing liar?

A Democrat lying??? Or telling subordinates to lie????

"I never told anyone to lie...not a single one!"

Dozens.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiIP_KDQmXs]Clinton, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman... - YouTube[/ame]
 
"This woman" mislead the American people...either knowingly, which makes her a bold faced liar...or unknowingly which makes her clueless. Either way she is NOT perfectly qualified. That Sunday "performance" has made her eminently UNQUALIFIED.

Yes I'm sure you were calling Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell the same thing in 2002-2003.

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."

If you go and read the leaked top secret "Downing Street Memo's" you will see that shortly before Britain and the US invaded Iraq, one of the major concerns of Britain and the US was whether or not Saddam Hussein would use WMD's against an invasion and what the loss of life would be if he did. The truth is...our intelligence was faulty. We believed Saddam Hussein when he threatened to retaliate with WMD's in the event of an invasion. Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell were not lying when they said we know they have WMD's because they believed that Hussein DID have them.

What Susan Rice did was completely different. She was sent out by this Administration five days after the attack...at a time when it was known by the CIA, the State Department and the White House that this was NOT a spontaneous attack over a YouTube video...to none the less make that assertion. The Obama White House sent her out there to misinform us.

OK, Oldstyle...it's not 5 days after the attack, it is 65 days after the attack. So tell us:

1) Who carried out the attack; names, organization etc?

2) What was their motives?

3) Can you rule out that the anti-Islam video as a cause or contributing cause?


I'll be waiting.........
 
Yes I'm sure you were calling Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell the same thing in 2002-2003.

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."

If you go and read the leaked top secret "Downing Street Memo's" you will see that shortly before Britain and the US invaded Iraq, one of the major concerns of Britain and the US was whether or not Saddam Hussein would use WMD's against an invasion and what the loss of life would be if he did. The truth is...our intelligence was faulty. We believed Saddam Hussein when he threatened to retaliate with WMD's in the event of an invasion. Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell were not lying when they said we know they have WMD's because they believed that Hussein DID have them.

What Susan Rice did was completely different. She was sent out by this Administration five days after the attack...at a time when it was known by the CIA, the State Department and the White House that this was NOT a spontaneous attack over a YouTube video...to none the less make that assertion. The Obama White House sent her out there to misinform us.

OK, Oldstyle...it's not 5 days after the attack, it is 65 days after the attack. So tell us:

1) Who carried out the attack; names, organization etc?

2) What was their motives?

3) Can you rule out that the anti-Islam video as a cause or contributing cause?


I'll be waiting.........

First of all let's be honest with ourselves here...the YouTube video as a "cause" for all of the violence that took place in Libya and across the globe has always been a joke. The truth is that Islamic extremists make up excuses for their violent acts...in this case an obscure video that had been out for years and had been seen by practically nobody.

The "motive" for an attack on 9/11? Do I really have to spell that out for you? Suffice it to say that date will always be an important one for Islamic extremists and we will have to be especially vigilant each and every time it occurs. Ambassador Stevens seemed to understand that...the idiots that are currently running our State Department couldn't seem to grasp the concept.

As for "who" carried out the attack? It appears to be an offshoot of Al Queda that has sprung up in post Quadafi Libya just as other offshoots of the original Al Queda are taking root all over the Middle East, Africa and Asia. We would probably know more about who carried out the attack if the Obama White House's first reaction to the attack wasn't to blame it on something they knew never occurred and investigated it properly and promptly. The truth is the White House stonewalled things as much as they could to delay any conclusions until AFTER the election. An organized attack by Islamic extremists on 9/11 didn't jive with the Obama reelection mantra of "we have Al Queda on the ropes" so the Obama spin doctors simply called it a spontaneous attack because of the You Tube video even though they KNEW it was no such thing.

Now we're finding out from David Petraeus' testimony that someone changed the wording of the CIA's assessment of what happened in Benghazi...leaving out that the CIA felt it was an Al Queda operation and instead calling the attackers simply "extremists". It will be interesting to find out "who" it was that changed that assessment.
 
Last edited:
Rice has a history of shielding human rights violators...

"Critics say that since her failure to advocate an intervention in the terrible genocide in Rwanda in 1994 — Bill Clinton later said his administration's unwillingness to act was the worst mistake of his presidency — she has conducted a dubious and naïve policy of looking the other way at allies who commit atrocities, reflecting to some degree the stark and emotionless realpolitik sometimes associated with Obama, who is traveling this week to another formerly isolated dictatorship: Burma.
Most recently, critics say, Rice held up publication of a U.N. report that concluded that the government of Rwandan President Paul Kagame, with whom she has a long and close relationship, was supplying and financing a brutal Congolese rebel force known as the M23 Movement. M23’s leader, Bosco Ntaganda, is wanted by the International Criminal Court for recruiting child soldiers and is accused of committing atrocities. She has even wrangled with Johnnie Carson, the assistant secretary of State for the Bureau of African Affairs, and others in the department, who all have been more critical of the Rwandans, according to some human-rights activists who speak with State's Africa team frequently."
Susan Rice: Benghazi May Be Least of Her Problems - NationalJournal.com

And that's why Obama favors her.
 
So she lied to the American public and Obamination admits he told her to lie....so arrest Obamination for high crimes.
 
If you go and read the leaked top secret "Downing Street Memo's" you will see that shortly before Britain and the US invaded Iraq, one of the major concerns of Britain and the US was whether or not Saddam Hussein would use WMD's against an invasion and what the loss of life would be if he did. The truth is...our intelligence was faulty. We believed Saddam Hussein when he threatened to retaliate with WMD's in the event of an invasion. Rice, Rumsfeld and Powell were not lying when they said we know they have WMD's because they believed that Hussein DID have them.

What Susan Rice did was completely different. She was sent out by this Administration five days after the attack...at a time when it was known by the CIA, the State Department and the White House that this was NOT a spontaneous attack over a YouTube video...to none the less make that assertion. The Obama White House sent her out there to misinform us.

OK, Oldstyle...it's not 5 days after the attack, it is 65 days after the attack. So tell us:

1) Who carried out the attack; names, organization etc?

2) What was their motives?

3) Can you rule out that the anti-Islam video as a cause or contributing cause?


I'll be waiting.........

First of all let's be honest with ourselves here...the YouTube video as a "cause" for all of the violence that took place in Libya and across the globe has always been a joke. The truth is that Islamic extremists make up excuses for their violent acts...in this case an obscure video that had been out for years and had been seen by practically nobody.

The "motive" for an attack on 9/11? Do I really have to spell that out for you? Suffice it to say that date will always be an important one for Islamic extremists and we will have to be especially vigilant each and every time it occurs. Ambassador Stevens seemed to understand that...the idiots that are currently running our State Department couldn't seem to grasp the concept.

As for "who" carried out the attack? It appears to be an offshoot of Al Queda that has sprung up in post Quadafi Libya just as other offshoots of the original Al Queda are taking root all over the Middle East, Africa and Asia. We would probably know more about who carried out the attack if the Obama White House's first reaction to the attack wasn't to blame it on something they knew never occurred and investigated it properly and promptly. The truth is the White House stonewalled things as much as they could to delay any conclusions until AFTER the election. An organized attack by Islamic extremists on 9/11 didn't jive with the Obama reelection mantra of "we have Al Queda on the ropes" so the Obama spin doctors simply called it a spontaneous attack because of the You Tube video even though they KNEW it was no such thing.

Now we're finding out from David Petraeus' testimony that someone changed the wording of the CIA's assessment of what happened in Benghazi...leaving out that the CIA felt it was an Al Queda operation and instead calling the attackers simply "extremists". It will be interesting to find out "who" it was that changed that assessment.

You are making shit up Oldstyle. There were violent protests in 20 countries. And we know they were caused by the anti-Islam film.

Anti-US protests spread to 20 countries throughout Muslim world

The White House did not 'stonewall' or delay any investigations. The FBI couldn't get in there because of security hazards.

Security Fears Hobble Inquiry on Libya Attack

September 28, 2012

BENGHAZI, Libya — Sixteen days after the death of four Americans in an attack on a United States diplomatic mission here, fears about the near-total lack of security have kept F.B.I. agents from visiting the scene of the killings and forced them to try to piece together the complicated crime from Tripoli, more than 400 miles away.

Investigators are so worried about the tenuous security, people involved in the investigation say, that they have been unwilling to risk taking some potential Libyan witnesses into the American Embassy in Tripoli. Instead, the investigators have resorted to the awkward solution of questioning some witnesses in cars outside the embassy, which is operating under emergency staffing and was evacuated of even more diplomats on Thursday because of a heightened security alert.

“It’s a cavalcade of obstacles right now,” said a senior American law enforcement official who is receiving regular updates on the Benghazi investigation and who described the crime scene, which has been trampled on, looted and burned, as so badly “degraded” that even once F.B.I. agents do eventually gain access, “it’ll be very difficult to see what evidence can be attributed to the bad guys.”

Piecing together exactly how Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans died here would be difficult even under the best of conditions. But the volatile security situation in post-Qaddafi Libya has added to the challenge of determining whether it was purely a local group of extremists who initiated the fatal assault or whether the attackers had ties to international terrorist groups, as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton suggested Wednesday.

The Libyan government has advised the F.B.I. that it cannot ensure the safety of the American investigators in Benghazi. So agents have been conducting interviews from afar, relying on local Libyan authorities to help identify and arrange meetings with witnesses to the attack and working closely with the Libyans to gauge the veracity of any of those accounts.

“There’s a chance we never make it in there,” said a senior law enforcement official.

Also hampering the investigation is fear among Libyan witnesses about revealing their identities or accounts in front of Libyan guards protecting the American investigators, because the potential witnesses fear that other Libyans might reveal their participation and draw retribution from the attackers.

One person with knowledge of the inquiry said the investigators had gathered some information pointing to the involvement of members of Ansar al-Shariah, the same local extremist group that other witnesses have identified as participating in the attack.
 

Forum List

Back
Top