Fox And Issa Claim There's A Difference Between An "Act Of Terror" And A Terrorist At

[bodecea]

What a bunch of idiots.
Watch the speech for yourself. It's on You Tube.
He clearly called it terrorism. For all that it matters.

Man, you guys are absolutely destroying any credibility you may have had by trying to spin otherwise.

And trying to make an issue out of it - I'm just giving it to you straight - you look stupid.

Considering the source, this should be considered a compliment. For the befuddled:

A Terrorist is a member of a group using terror as a means towards a political end.

An Act of Terror is a seemingly random attack on a large group of people. For example Sandy Hook was an act of terror, but the perpetrator was not a terrorist.

Comprende?

So...if you commit an act of murder, you aren't necessarily a murderer. And if you commit an act of rape, you aren't necessarily a rapist.



oooooooooooooooooooooooooookaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.......................

 

[Polk]

These are the same people who think birth certificate and a certificate of birth are not the same thing.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

And what evidence do you have that proves the video that inspired protests,riots and deaths throughout the Muslim world was not the movtivating factor in the attacks on the American Consulate and the CIA Annex?

How is this for evidence?

One line is food for thought. Thanks.

Extremists don't speak for Libya - CNN.com

on the other hand.....

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/w...hazi-investigation.html?_r=2&ref=todayspaper&

Is this your attempt at a counter argument?

I hope not because your first link supports the evidence that it was a planned attack and not a spontaneous reaction to a video as does your second link.

I'm not understanding why you would ask for evidence then when presented with evidence you post links that support the evidence.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

What a bunch of idiots.
Watch the speech for yourself. It's on You Tube.
He clearly called it terrorism. For all that it matters.

Man, you guys are absolutely destroying any credibility you may have had by trying to spin otherwise.

And trying to make an issue out of it - I'm just giving it to you straight - you look stupid.

Considering the source, this should be considered a compliment. For the befuddled:

A Terrorist is a member of a group using terror as a means towards a political end.

An Act of Terror is a seemingly random attack on a large group of people. For example Sandy Hook was an act of terror, but the perpetrator was not a terrorist.

Comprende?

Then it should have been said that the attack in Benghazi was perpetrated by terrorist instead of simply saying it was an act of terror.

 

[bodecea]

These are the same people who think birth certificate and a certificate of birth are not the same thing.

Hey! It's all about what the definition of "is" is..........

 

[TemplarKormac]

What a bunch of idiots.
Watch the speech for yourself. It's on You Tube.
He clearly called it terrorism. For all that it matters.

Man, you guys are absolutely destroying any credibility you may have had by trying to spin otherwise.

And trying to make an issue out of it - I'm just giving it to you straight - you look stupid.

Considering the source, this should be considered a compliment. For the befuddled:

A Terrorist is a member of a group using terror as a means towards a political end.

An Act of Terror is a seemingly random attack on a large group of people. For example Sandy Hook was an act of terror, but the perpetrator was not a terrorist.

Comprende?

So...if you commit an act of murder, you aren't necessarily a murderer. And if you commit an act of rape, you aren't necessarily a rapist.



oooooooooooooooooooooooooookaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.......................

Tis the reasoning of a liberal I suppose.

 

[TemplarKormac]

These are the same people who think birth certificate and a certificate of birth are not the same thing.

Hey! It's all about what the definition of "is" is..........

Because there isn't any "there" there!

Get it?

 

[Polk]

These are the same people who think birth certificate and a certificate of birth are not the same thing.

Hey! It's all about what the definition of "is" is..........

Except for all the jokes you guys make about that, it was a legitimate issue. Words do mean things.

 

[Google]

Fox And Issa Claim There's A Difference Between An "Act Of Terror" And A Terrorist Attack

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Fox News have come to the same conclusion -- describing the attacks on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya as an "act of terror" is different, and somehow less accurate, than describing them as a terrorist attack.

On September 12, 2012, the day after the Benghazi attacks, Obama delivered a speech in the Rose Garden in which he referred to the attacks as an "act of terror," saying: "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for." The following day, Obama twice referred to the attacks as an act of terror, once in Colorado and once in Las Vegas.

During an appearance on Fox News' America Live, Issa accused Obama of minimizing the attacks by referring to them as an "act of terror," saying: "An act of terror is different than a terrorist attack. The truth is, this was a terrorist attack."

Issa is such a pathetic idiot.

People are seeing right through his little dog and pony show, and he's getting desperate to stay relevant.

Fool.

This administration seethes with dishonesty and corruption and the damn is breaking.

Obama?s claim he called Benghazi an ?act of terrorism? - The Washington Post

Sit there and cling to your delusions, reality and the truth is going to come to the surface.

Four Pinocchios

 

[bodecea]

And let's all remember.....Obama didn't say "Simon says....it was an Act of Terror"

 

[NYcarbineer]

Have you noticed the subtle shift that's taken place amongst the Bengazers?

First it was 'Obama never said it was an act of terror', but eventually that obvious lunacy became even too looney for the loons to try to keep alive,

so they're shifting to the 'an act of terror isn't terrorism' line, which I guess to the inmates is somehow better.

It's just the way the birthers went. Every time some birther nonsense got debunked, they just fell back to a new line of nonsense and carried on.

 

[Polk]

Have you noticed the subtle shift that's taken place amongst the Bengazers?

First it was 'Obama never said it was an act of terror', but eventually that obvious lunacy became even too looney for the loons to try to keep alive,

so they're shifting to the 'an act of terror isn't terrorism' line, which I guess to the inmates is somehow better.

It's just the way the birthers went. Every time some birther nonsense got debunked, they just fell back to a new line of nonsense and carried on.

Sure, because the one true faith can never be wrong.

 

[jwoodie]

What a bunch of idiots.
Watch the speech for yourself. It's on You Tube.
He clearly called it terrorism. For all that it matters.

Man, you guys are absolutely destroying any credibility you may have had by trying to spin otherwise.

And trying to make an issue out of it - I'm just giving it to you straight - you look stupid.

Considering the source, this should be considered a compliment. For the befuddled:

A Terrorist is a member of a group using terror as a means towards a political end.

An Act of Terror is a seemingly random attack on a large group of people. For example Sandy Hook was an act of terror, but the perpetrator was not a terrorist.

Comprende?

Then it should have been said that the attack in Benghazi was perpetrated by terrorist instead of simply saying it was an act of terror.

Correct.

 

[tinydancer]

Cripes I had this up in another thread. Left wingers are just desperately clinging to the their belief that Obama never ever thought it was a video; oh no, their dear leader in their minds now said it was terrorism right from the get go.

I wish I had the time to search out all the threads that the lefties on USMB put up arguing about free speech, and that this video was going too far and causing the deaths of the Americans at Benghazi and how free speech like an anti Islam film should be regulated.

Their argument last fall was "you can't yell fire in a crowded theater". Maybe I should spend the time and find their threads just to show what hypocrites liberals are.

Sept. 15-16: Susan Rice Contradicts Libyan President

Sept. 15: Obama discusses the Benghazi attack in his weekly address. He makes no mention of terror, terrorists or extremists.

He does talk about the anti-Muslim film and “every angry mob” that it inspired in pockets of the Middle East.

Obama: This tragic attack [in Benghazi] takes place at a time of turmoil and protest in many different countries.

I have made it clear that the United States has a profound respect for people of all faiths.

We stand for religious freedom. And we reject the denigration of any religion — including Islam.

Yet there is never any justification for violence. There is no religion that condones the targeting of innocent men and women. There is no excuse for attacks on our Embassies and Consulates.

Well there's no freaking gray there that he's pimping the "video made them do it" version of the attack on Benghazi.

Sept. 18: Obama Says ‘Extremists’ Used Video As ‘Excuse’

Sept. 18: Obama was asked about the Benghazi attack on “The Late Show with David Letterman.”

The president said, “Here’s what happened,” and began discussing the impact of the anti-Muslim video. He then said, “Extremists and terrorists used this as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies, including the consulate in Libya.”

He also said, “As offensive as this video was and, obviously, we’ve denounced it and the United States government had nothing to do with it. That’s never an excuse for violence.”

Obama blames the video.

Now on September 20th,he's still claiming it was a video that made the protestors get violent.

Sept. 20: Obama, at a town hall meeting, says “extremists” took advantage of the “natural protests” to the anti-Muslim video to attack the consulate in Benghazi.

He does not call it a “terrorist attack.”

Question: We have reports that the White House said today that the attacks in Libya were a terrorist attack. Do you have information indicating that it was Iran, or al Qaeda was behind organizing the protests?

Obama: Well, we’re still doing an investigation, and there are going to be different circumstances in different countries.

And so I don’t want to speak to something until we have all the information. What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests.

My my my oh my. They were still trying to keep the video reason alive ......

Sept. 24-25: Obama Refuses to Call It a Terrorist Attack

Sept. 24: Clinton meets with the Libyan president and calls the Benghazi attack a “terrorist assault.” She says, “As we all know, the United States lost a great ambassador and the Libyan people lost a true friend when Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the terrorist assault on our consulate in Benghazi.”

Sept. 24: Obama tapes an appearance on “The View,” and he’s asked by co-host Joy Behar whether the Libya attack was an act of terrorism or caused by the anti-Muslim video. He does not call it a terrorist attack and says, “We’re still doing an investigation.”

Sept. 25: Obama speaks at the United Nations. He praises Chris Stevens as “the best of America” and condemns the anti-Muslim video as “crude and disgusting.” He does not describe the Benghazi attack as a terrorist attack.

FactCheck.org : Benghazi Timeline

 

[tinydancer]

And FactCheck/Washington Post/Issa are all on the same page.


(September 11)

About 10:00 p.m.: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issues a statement confirming that one State official was killed in an attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. Her statement, which MSNBC posted at 10:32 p.m., made reference to the anti-Muslim video.

Clinton: Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.

The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.

Sept.12: Obama Labels Attack ‘Act of Terror,’ Not ‘Terrorism’

Sept. 12: Clinton issues a statement confirming that four U.S. officials, not one, had been killed. She called it a “violent attack.”

Clinton: All the Americans we lost in yesterday’s attacks made the ultimate sacrifice. We condemn this vicious and violent attack that took their lives, which they had committed to helping the Libyan people reach for a better future.

Sept. 12: Clinton delivers a speech at the State Department to condemn the attack in Benghazi and to praise the victims as “heroes.” She again makes reference to the anti-Muslim video in similar language.

Clinton: Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our Embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. America’s commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear — there is no justification for this, none.

Sept. 12: Obama delivers a morning speech in the Rose Garden to address the deaths of U.S. diplomats in Libya. He said, “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.”

He also makes reference to the anti-Muslim video when he says: “Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None.”

He uses the term “act of terror” later that night when talking about the attack at a campaign event in Las Vegas.

Sept. 12: After his Rose Garden speech, Obama tapes an interview for “60 Minutes.” Obama says he didn’t use the word “terrorism” in his Rose Garden speech because “it’s too early to know exactly how this came about.”

Steve Kroft, the show’s host, wonders how the attack could be described as a “mob action” since the attackers were “very heavily armed.”

Obama says “we’re still investigating,” but he suspects “folks involved in this . . . were looking to target Americans from the start.”

⬐ Click to expand/collapse the full transcript ⬏

Kroft: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya attack.

Obama: Right.

Kroft: Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?

Obama: Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans and we are going to be working with the Libyan government to make sure that we bring these folks to justice one way or the other.

Kroft: It’s been described as a mob action. But there are reports that they were very heavily armed with grenades. That doesn’t sound like your normal demonstration.

Obama: As I said, we’re still investigating exactly what happened. I don’t want to jump the gun on this.

But you’re right that this is not a situation that was exactly the same as what happened in Egypt.

And my suspicion is, is that there are folks involved in this, who were looking to target Americans from the start.

FactCheck.org : Benghazi Timeline

 

[PredFan]

Fox And Issa Claim There's A Difference Between An "Act Of Terror" And A Terrorist Attack

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Fox News have come to the same conclusion -- describing the attacks on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya as an "act of terror" is different, and somehow less accurate, than describing them as a terrorist attack.

On September 12, 2012, the day after the Benghazi attacks, Obama delivered a speech in the Rose Garden in which he referred to the attacks as an "act of terror," saying: "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for." The following day, Obama twice referred to the attacks as an act of terror, once in Colorado and once in Las Vegas.

During an appearance on Fox News' America Live, Issa accused Obama of minimizing the attacks by referring to them as an "act of terror," saying: "An act of terror is different than a terrorist attack. The truth is, this was a terrorist attack."

Issa is such a pathetic idiot.

People are seeing right through his little dog and pony show, and he's getting desperate to stay relevant.

Fool.

Hey hazelnut you stupid twit, why did obama just yesterday, blame the video AGAIN?

Because he's still lying out of his ass.

 

[idb]

If everyone gets so upset about the words used surely it shows that Obama was right to pick his words carefully until he had more information.

 

[Google]

Watching the Daily Show last night, I couldn't believe that the same man who insinuated Bush somehow falsified information from the intelligence agencies of Britain, France, Australia, and our own CIA that said Iraq was developing nuclear/biological weapons so that he could invade Iraq to get its oil--this same man is saying right wingers concerned about Bengazi are tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorists.

The same people that screamed that Bush was reading our emails, and warrantless wiretap this and that--and Prescot Bush. Michael Moore was out there spewing 911 truther conspiracies, and he was invited to sit next to Jimmy Carter at the DNC convention.

Hypocrites to the core. Everything they accused Bush of doing, their messiah has doubled down on. And now, they are claiming they are victims.

This administration is criminal in every meaning of the word.

 

[blackhawk]

In the Rose Garden speech President Obama was making a general statement about terrorism not a direct statement about the Benghazi attack being a terrorist attack. For the sake of argument let's say Obama was calling the Benghazi attack a terrorist attack in the Rose Garden speech why did Susan Rice then go on the Sunday talk shows a mere few days later and say the attack was in response to video?

 

[westwall]

The OP still believes a video caused BenGhazi...but dont worry, he's a pussy and wont return to the thread

And what evidence do you have that proves the video that inspired protests,riots and deaths throughout the Muslim world was not the movtivating factor in the attacks on the American Consulate and the CIA Annex?

No no ...
You've got it all wrong.
You are suppose to swallow THEIR talking points without evidence.
You atre to assume that what they say is correct. They've never been wrong before, now have they?

No, it's you who has it wrong, you spread your legs wide and wait for whatever lie the admin wants to shove up your ass, and then you roll over and say "thank you sir, may I have another!"


You're a good little collectivist drone propagandist. In other words you are incapable of thinking for yourself. I doubt you can wipe yourself....