Why does the right insist Obama did not call it a terror attack?

Why does the right insist Obama did not call it a terror attack when reality shows o


  • Total voters
    18
Note to all diplomats:

If, in the future, you're under attack by an angry mob....please do us a favor and ask them why they are attacking you so we can stop the pseudo-intellectual pissing match that is certain to follow.

Thanks,

Your Commander in Chief whomever he/she may be from the future.

Pssst...Ah, Candy? In case you didn't get the memo...you progressives are no longer claiming it was an "angry mob". That whole narrative had to be abandoned when too many people testified under oath that it was an attack by well armed terrorists and you guys were looking WAY stupid. The NEW progressive narrative is..."It's under investigation, we will have no comment until after the election and anyone who demands one is politicizing the situation."

Pssst....Ah Moldsmile? In case you didn't get the memo....Obama mentioned it was a terrorist attack the day after it happened. Surely you saw the debate and Romney get field dressed over the innuendo, right?

Not only did I see the debate but I was so dumbfounded by both Obama's claim that he had called the attack in Bengazi a terrorist attack on September 12th and Candy Crowley's assertion that was indeed the case that I immediately went back and checked the transcript of Obama's Rose Garden speech. You see, I saw it the first time and I didn't recall Obama calling it an attack by terrorists. I remember the heat that both he and other members of his Administration took BECAUSE they refused to call it a terrorist attack. So like I said, I went back and revisited the President's speech that day and I STILL don't see where you think it is that he referred to the attack on the Embassy as a terrorist attack. I'm sorry but it's just not there, DESPITE what Candy Crowley erroneously stated.

Did Barack Obama say the word "terror" in a speech that day? Yes...yes he did. He used that word once while talking about the first 9/11 attacks and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the brave men and women that had given their lives to defend this country stating that no "acts" of terror would sway us from that duty. That was not a declaration that the Bengazi attack was carried out by terrorists because at that point the Obama Administration was already declaring that what happened that night was a result of the YouTube video inciting a mob to spontaneous violence...a narrative that they would continue to expound and expand on for the next week. You had Hilary Clinton declaring it was due to the YouTube video...you had Susan Rice declaring the YouTube was the culprit...and you had Barack Obama himself making that assertion. Mind you, they were doing this even though streaming video from that night showed no crowd of protesters before the attack and the CIA analysis of the attack stated that it was not a spontaneous attack by protesters but was believed to be a terrorist attack by an Al Queda affiliated terrorist group in Libya.

What's become painfully obvious, Candy is that one of two things took place following that attack...neither of which speaks very highly of this Administration's handling of the situation. Either they chose to disregard the intelligence information (including video tape) that said this had nothing to do with any video on YouTube, thus showing themselves to be hopelessly out of touch with the reality of what's going on in the Middle East...or they deliberately decided to lie to the American people a month before the election because having one of our Ambassadors killed by Al Queda on 9/11 might show their Middle East strategy to be coming apart at the seams.
 
Rachel Maddow gave a brilliant explanation the other night as to why rightwingers now simply refuse to accept the facts if they don't like them.

You mean because it's only liberals who redefine events to benefit the politicians who advance their ideology?
 
All I heard for weeks from Obama, his administration and media was that it was a spontaneous attack by protesters who were angered by a youtube video. How does that even begin to translate to an al Qaeda terrorist attack? The State Dept said it didn't come from them and they believed early on that it was al Qaeda related. Yet, that isn't the story we kept hearing from the administration. And when people ask where they got that story, we are the ones who are impugned.

If anyone wants to explain why the false story was put forth for so long, please step up. And don't attack people for being both puzzled and curious. Don't expect us to forget the story that was repeated a hundred times over and pretend that we were told the truth all along. Our memories won't allow that.
 
Last edited:
Rachel Maddow gave a brilliant explanation the other night as to why rightwingers now simply refuse to accept the facts if they don't like them.

Rachel Madcow has never given a brilliant anything...

She uses quite a few half truths though...

Madcow is counted on by the left to get their talking points out there. Didn't she get her start on the failed "Air America?" She and others couldn't keep a radio program going, but the left thinks she deserves her own show. That is how it works when a person is willing to say anything to support one side, no matter how ridiculous.
 
Because he didn't. He repeatedly blamed it on a video.

For the second time in this thread alone, here is the President, calling the attack an act of terror, on 9-12

President Obama Speaks on the Attack on Benghazi - YouTube


So now please go to the top of the thread and answer the poll for yourself.

Calling it an act of terror and blaming it on unrest over a movie is NOT (I repeat NOT) blaming it on terrorists. Are you really this stupid? Of course you are.
 
Rachel Maddow gave a brilliant explanation the other night as to why rightwingers now simply refuse to accept the facts if they don't like them.

You mean because it's only liberals who redefine events to benefit the politicians who advance their ideology?

The fact that it has been proven beyond any doubt that the president on September 12th called the attack an act of terror,

coupled with the fact that no conservative here will openly admit it,

proves that Maddow is absolutely right.
 
Rachel Maddow gave a brilliant explanation the other night as to why rightwingers now simply refuse to accept the facts if they don't like them.

You mean because it's only liberals who redefine events to benefit the politicians who advance their ideology?

The fact that it has been proven beyond any doubt that the president on September 12th called the attack an act of terror,

coupled with the fact that no conservative here will openly admit it,

proves that Maddow is absolutely right.

Except he didn't, did he?
 
BUSH IGNORED MULTIPLE 911 WARNINGS

On May 1 the CIA said that a terrorist group in the U.S. was planning an attack.
On June 22 it warned that this attack was "imminent."
On June 29 the brief warned of near-term attacks with "dramatic consequences" including major casualties.
On July 1, the briefing said that the terrorist attack had been delayed but "will occur soon."
On July 24, the president was told again that the attack had been delayed but would occur within months.
Bush Received More Warnings About 9/11 Than We Realized - Business Insider

“You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.”
Matt 7.5
 
Rachel Maddow gave a brilliant explanation the other night as to why rightwingers now simply refuse to accept the facts if they don't like them.

You mean because it's only liberals who redefine events to benefit the politicians who advance their ideology?

The fact that it has been proven beyond any doubt that the president on September 12th called the attack an act of terror,

coupled with the fact that no conservative here will openly admit it,

proves that Maddow is absolutely right.

Too funny, you and the kooks seem to be the only people in America that believe that.

...and if you think Maddow gave a brilliant anything it shows what a moron you are.
 
Why does the right insist Obama did not call it a terror attack when reality shows otherwise?


President Obama Speaks on the Attack on Benghazi - YouTube

Because Village Idiots will take their word as face value and not bother to check to see if what they say is true.
Just as the scriptures commend you to search out the scriptures as to what you hear is true.
The reason Romney has so many supporters knowing that he is a liar but they do not care.
 
Last edited:
The reason Romney has so many supporters knowing that he is a liar but they do not care.

He could make smoothies out of kittens.

Has my vote out of the two.

They do not practice what their GOD preach to them but what they expect from others. Hypocrites.
Make sure of all things, holding fast to what is true.
1 Thessalonians 5;21.
 
Last edited:
I do have to hand it to the liberals they are quite adept at changing the story. They develop their own story line and run with it, truth be damned.

The truth is Obama didn't protect American citizens.

The truth is that the Obama administration lied their asses off for days.

The truth is that this isn't about whether or not Obama called it terrorism, it was an ATTACK ON AMERICA. A coordinated and well planned attack. The liberal left's storyline wishes to paint this as an attack on Obama and what he said when. But it is not, it is about Obama not protecting Americans and pretending to take responsibility yet suffers no consequences. Same with Hillary. 4 dead Americans and nothing, no one, not one has the integrity to step down. People died and Obama lied and all he cares about his his political career.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top