No, Obama Didn’t Call Benghazi “Act of Terror” in Speech (9/30)

[ScienceRocks]

He did say "act of terror", but he then want around saying it was a goddamn movie for the next 2-3 weeks. He shits on our first amendment by bowing to the islamic world for 10 ******* days. Same thing he did with the law over the ******* Trayvon issue...

Act of terror in this context=protesters doing violent things. Terrorizing.

-Obama didn't give the embassy what it needed even so he knew before time that it was likely to be attacked.
-He blamed the stupid video and gave the islamic world a stage to slam our first amendment. Failing to stand up for our beliefs.
-As late as a week ago carney was still lying about what happened
-Biden lied about needing more security

How the **** can anyone think this admin is doing a good job is simply nuts. At least Stalin wouldn't lie.

 

[BlindBoo]

Funny... I don't see the words 'The Benghazi attack was an' in front of 'act of terror'.

Do you? (squints) Perhaps you could highlight those words for me???

Wow, you're right he never used the words 'Benghazi', all he said was "we had a tough day a couple of days ago, for four Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Libya." before he told them that their "Act of Terror" will be punished. Shame on him.......

please show me the words 'their act of terror will be punished'.

I'll wait...

No, I won't You can't show me those words because he did not SAY those words. You keep putting words into Obama's mouth... 'he said this... he said that...' yet you fail to show those words you attribute to Obama in the transcript.

I don't care what your 'interpretation' of Obama's statement is.. I care what his actual words were... and he did NOT say the Benghazi attack was an act of terror.

Live with the FAIL, dumb ass.

Ah, such a nice self-declaration of victory.

 

[BlindBoo]

He did say "act of terror", but he then want around saying it was a goddamn movie for the next 2-3 weeks. He shits on our first amendment by bowing to the islamic world for 10 ******* days. Same thing he did with the law over the ******* Trayvon issue...

Act of terror in this context=protesters doing violent things. Terrorizing.

-Obama didn't give the embassy what it needed even so he knew before time that it was likely to be attacked.
-He blamed the stupid video and gave the islamic world a stage to slam our first amendment. Failing to stand up for our beliefs.
-As late as a week ago carney was still lying about what happened
-Biden lied about needing more security

How the **** can anyone think this admin is doing a good job is simply nuts. At least Stalin wouldn't lie.

Better lay off the Faux News for a while, you'll feel better.

 

[RollingThunder]

No, Obama Didn’t Call Benghazi “Act of Terror” in Speech (9/30)
Cmmentary ^ | 9/30/12 | Alana Goodman
No, Obama Didn

“Well, first of all, Candy, as you know, the President called it an act of terror the day after it happened,” David Axelrod told CNN’s Candy Crowley this morning, referring to a speech Obama made in the Rose Garden on Sept. 12.

Axelrod’s claim has been pushed by journalists over the past few days, most notably Josh Gerstein at Politico, in a blog post headlined “Obama talked of Libya attack as ‘terror’ 2 weeks ago”:

'snip'

If Obama wanted to call the Benghazi assault a terrorist attack in that speech, he had plenty of opportunities to do so. Instead, he described it as a “terrible act,” a “brutal” act, “senseless violence,” and called the attackers “killers,” not terrorists. It’s also important to consider the context. For a week after this speech, the White House would not call it a terrorist attack. The official position was that Libya was a spontaneous response to an anti-Islam film, not a premeditated or preplanned act.

It's really a shame that the right wing in America has ceased to be reality based.

Their retarded attempts at spinning this are just pathetic.

"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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

- Rose Garden speech on 9/11/12 specifically concerning the attacks in Benghazi the night before,

 

[hazlnut]

No, Obama Didn’t Call Benghazi “Act of Terror” in Speech (9/30)
Cmmentary ^ | 9/30/12 | Alana Goodman
No, Obama Didn

“Well, first of all, Candy, as you know, the President called it an act of terror the day after it happened,” David Axelrod told CNN’s Candy Crowley this morning, referring to a speech Obama made in the Rose Garden on Sept. 12.

Axelrod’s claim has been pushed by journalists over the past few days, most notably Josh Gerstein at Politico, in a blog post headlined “Obama talked of Libya attack as ‘terror’ 2 weeks ago”:

'snip'

If Obama wanted to call the Benghazi assault a terrorist attack in that speech, he had plenty of opportunities to do so. Instead, he described it as a “terrible act,” a “brutal” act, “senseless violence,” and called the attackers “killers,” not terrorists. It’s also important to consider the context. For a week after this speech, the White House would not call it a terrorist attack. The official position was that Libya was a spontaneous response to an anti-Islam film, not a premeditated or preplanned act.

Behold, the new birtherism...

 

[Amazed]

No, Obama Didn’t Call Benghazi “Act of Terror” in Speech (9/30)
Cmmentary ^ | 9/30/12 | Alana Goodman
No, Obama Didn

“Well, first of all, Candy, as you know, the President called it an act of terror the day after it happened,” David Axelrod told CNN’s Candy Crowley this morning, referring to a speech Obama made in the Rose Garden on Sept. 12.

Axelrod’s claim has been pushed by journalists over the past few days, most notably Josh Gerstein at Politico, in a blog post headlined “Obama talked of Libya attack as ‘terror’ 2 weeks ago”:

'snip'

If Obama wanted to call the Benghazi assault a terrorist attack in that speech, he had plenty of opportunities to do so. Instead, he described it as a “terrible act,” a “brutal” act, “senseless violence,” and called the attackers “killers,” not terrorists. It’s also important to consider the context. For a week after this speech, the White House would not call it a terrorist attack. The official position was that Libya was a spontaneous response to an anti-Islam film, not a premeditated or preplanned act.

Behold, the new birtherism...

Ooooo lookie, Nut has a new toy

 

[Merchant_of_Meh]

This is pointless semantics.

Conservatives will swear up and down he was talking about 9/11

Liberals will swear up and down he's talking about Benghazi.

The only person that knows for sure which he was referring to is Obama. Period.

More rubbish from both sides of the same coin.

 

[ScienceRocks]

He did say "act of terror", but he then want around saying it was a goddamn movie for the next 2-3 weeks. He shits on our first amendment by bowing to the islamic world for 10 ******* days. Same thing he did with the law over the ******* Trayvon issue...

Act of terror in this context=protesters doing violent things. Terrorizing.

-Obama didn't give the embassy what it needed even so he knew before time that it was likely to be attacked.
-He blamed the stupid video and gave the islamic world a stage to slam our first amendment. Failing to stand up for our beliefs.
-As late as a week ago carney was still lying about what happened
-Biden lied about needing more security

How the **** can anyone think this admin is doing a good job is simply nuts. At least Stalin wouldn't lie.

Better lay off the Faux News for a while, you'll feel better.

No, this is what I witnessed with my two eyes from Obama, Clinton, UN.Sec. ect. Even Candy said that Obama used the protest for two weeks after the rose garden.

Why can't you open your eyes. O'yess, you want to overthrow capitalism.

 

[BlindBoo]

He did say "act of terror", but he then want around saying it was a goddamn movie for the next 2-3 weeks. He shits on our first amendment by bowing to the islamic world for 10 ******* days. Same thing he did with the law over the ******* Trayvon issue...

Act of terror in this context=protesters doing violent things. Terrorizing.

-Obama didn't give the embassy what it needed even so he knew before time that it was likely to be attacked.
-He blamed the stupid video and gave the islamic world a stage to slam our first amendment. Failing to stand up for our beliefs.
-As late as a week ago carney was still lying about what happened
-Biden lied about needing more security

How the **** can anyone think this admin is doing a good job is simply nuts. At least Stalin wouldn't lie.

Better lay off the Faux News for a while, you'll feel better.

No, this is what I witnessed with my two eyes from Obama, Clinton, UN.Sec. ect. Even Candy said that Obama used the protest for two weeks after the rose garden.

Why can't you open your eyes. O'yess, you want to overthrow capitalism.

Well yes I guess if I were president I would want the terrorist who attacked us in Lybia to think we believed it was all about that You Tube video. But the Republican candidate sure let the terrorist know we're on to them. Good job Mittens.

Now throw out some senseless allegation: You want to torture little Kittens don't cha?

 

[NYcarbineer]

No, Obama Didn’t Call Benghazi “Act of Terror” in Speech (9/30)

Check the transcript.
Check the transcript.Check the transcript.
Check the transcript.
Check the transcript.
Check the transcript.
Check the transcript.
Check the transcript.
Check the transcript.


Check the transcript.

We did.

The words 'The attack in Benghazi were an act of terror' do not appear.

What? Was there a claim that Obama used that sentence, word for word?

 

[LilOlLady]

Village Idiot, referring to the incident as "no act of terrorism" is the same as saying "it's an act of terorism." Apples and oranges are both fruits?


Its like calling murder committed doing war collateral damage.

 

[Conservative]

Village Idiot, referring to the incident as "no act of terrorism" is the same as saying "it's an act of terorism." Apples and oranges are both fruits?


Its like calling murder committed doing war collateral damage.

talk about a village idiot. he wasn't talking specifically about Benghazi at that point. Read the ******* transcript, dumb ass.

 

[Amazed]

Village Idiot, referring to the incident as "no act of terrorism" is the same as saying "it's an act of terorism." Apples and oranges are both fruits?


Its like calling murder committed doing war collateral damage.

Priceless irony, YOU are this Boards Village idiot.

 

[BlindBoo]

Village Idiot, referring to the incident as "no act of terrorism" is the same as saying "it's an act of terorism." Apples and oranges are both fruits?


Its like calling murder committed doing war collateral damage.

talk about a village idiot. he wasn't talking specifically about Benghazi at that point. Read the ******* transcript, dumb ass.

The entire speech from the Rose Garden was specifically about Benghazi. Especially when he was talking about Acts of Terror.

Only a partisan in ultra-spin mode would try to claim the subject was 9-11 at that point in the speech.

 

[RollingThunder]

No, Obama Didn’t Call Benghazi “Act of Terror” in Speech (9/30)
Cmmentary ^ | 9/30/12 | Alana Goodman
No, Obama Didn

“Well, first of all, Candy, as you know, the President called it an act of terror the day after it happened,” David Axelrod told CNN’s Candy Crowley this morning, referring to a speech Obama made in the Rose Garden on Sept. 12.

Axelrod’s claim has been pushed by journalists over the past few days, most notably Josh Gerstein at Politico, in a blog post headlined “Obama talked of Libya attack as ‘terror’ 2 weeks ago”:

'snip'

If Obama wanted to call the Benghazi assault a terrorist attack in that speech, he had plenty of opportunities to do so. Instead, he described it as a “terrible act,” a “brutal” act, “senseless violence,” and called the attackers “killers,” not terrorists. It’s also important to consider the context. For a week after this speech, the White House would not call it a terrorist attack. The official position was that Libya was a spontaneous response to an anti-Islam film, not a premeditated or preplanned act.

Behold, the new birtherism...

Indeed. The pathetic righwingnut retards are always grasping at straws but this bit of reality denial takes the cake. Did Obama label the attack on our consulate in Benghazi an "act of terror" as Romoney and the rightwing echo chamber of retards wants to deny? Yes, he did, on two occasions, on Sept 11th and Sept 13th, as the transcripts prove. Was the government also still investigating the attack and trying to determine if this attack was in some way connected to the widespread rioting and demonstrations over the offensive anti-Muslim video that had been occurring all over the region. Well of course they were. Only idiots jump to conclusions without checking. There were several initial reports out of Benghazi that said that gunmen attacked during a demonstration over the video. Check the BBC reports on the incident published on Sept 12th, 13th and 14th that talk about US officials already suspecting that terrorist groups were involved and Libyan officials saying that the attack happened during "an anti-US protest".

Libya attack: Obama vows justice for killed US envoy.
BBC
12 September 2012
(excerpts)
President Barack Obama has vowed to bring to justice those who carried out the attack that killed the US ambassador to Libya. Ambassador J Christopher Stevens died after gunmen stormed the consulate amid protests over an anti-Islamic film. US officials said Washington was investigating whether the attack was organised in advance, rather than a spontaneous assault sparked by demonstrations over the film. Officials told Reuters there were suspicions that a militia known as the Ansar al-Sharia brigade was involved in the attack. The group has denied the claim. They also cited reports suggesting al-Qaeda's north Africa-based affiliate, known as al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, may have been involved, the news agency reports. The protests followed rallies in Cairo, where demonstrators angry at the film, called Innocence of Muslims, breached the walls of the US embassy and tore down the flag.


Libya attack: US to investigate Benghazi assault
BBC
13 September 2012
(excerpts)
The US is investigating whether the attack in Libya that killed the US ambassador and several other people was planned in advance, officials say. The assault had earlier been thought to have been a spontaneous reaction to protests over an anti-Islamic film. Armed men stormed the consulate in the city of Benghazi on Tuesday night. Officials have now said the attack was complex and professional, and reports suggest the perpetrators may have had links to jihadist groups. A senior US official quoted by AFP news agency said the Benghazi attackers appeared to have used the demonstrations as a pretext to staging an assault. "This was a complex attack," he told the news agency. "They seemed to have used this [protest] as an opportunity." US officials told Reuters news agency there were suspicions that a militia known as the Ansar al-Sharia brigade was responsible, although the group has denied the claim. They said there were also reports that al-Qaeda's north Africa-based affiliate, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, may have been involved, the news agency reports.


US Libyan consulate attack: Timeline of events
BBC
14 September 2012
(excerpts)
Investigators are trying to piece together exactly what happened during Tuesday's US consulate attack in the Libyan city of Benghazi. They are trying to establish whether the assault was planned or spontaneous. Libyan Deputy Interior Minister Wanis al-Sharif has told reporters he believes militants used an anti-US protest as cover for the attack, and may have had help from inside the country's security services.


Transcript Truthers: Conservatives Deny Obama Called Libya Attack An "Act Of Terror"
October 16, 2012
(excerpts)
During tonight's presidential debate, moderator Candy Crowley corrected Mitt Romney's false claim that President Obama did not refer to the September 11 attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya as an act of terrorism the day after the attack. Crowley was right, and Romney was wrong: In his September 12 remarks, the president 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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America." Despite this, conservatives in the media are insisting that Obama never said that.

UPDATE 2: Obama also referred to the Benghazi attack as an "act of terror" while campaigning in Colorado on September 13:

"Let me say at the outset that obviously our hearts are heavy this week -- we had a tough day a couple of days ago, for four Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Libya. Yesterday I had a chance to go over to the State Department to talk to friends and colleagues of those who were killed. And these were Americans who, like so many others, both in uniform and civilians, who serve in difficult and dangerous places all around the world to advance the interests and the values that we hold dear as Americans. And a lot of times their work goes unheralded, doesn't get a lot of attention, but it is vitally important. We enjoy our security and our liberty because of the sacrifices that they make. And they do an outstanding job every single day without a lot of fanfare. So what I want all of you to know is that we are going to bring those who killed our fellow Americans to justice. (Applause.) I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America.​

​

 

[ScienceRocks]

Read all about it...Obama spins and lies!!!!


Time line of lies!

Obama's Benghazi Lies - Home

Destroys Obama's case. It wasn't about a ******* terrorist attack, BUT the protest over our freedom of speech.

On the 13th he was talking about the protest when he said terrorized.

Susan Rice said on the 16th that this wasn't a pre-planned attack. LIES

On the 18th Obama went on the letterman show and blamed our first amendment for the attack. LIES!!!

If the terrorized was supposed to mean a terrorist attack. Well, Obama sure inserted his foot in his ass.

Clinton on the 21st was the first to say it was a Terrorist attack. SPIN!

Obama on the view on the 25th said it was about the ******* video! Spin some more!!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD4a9GHBF_U&feature=related]Carney maintains Libya attack was not preplanned - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPzjayOh-PU&feature=relmfu]Who is responsible for the attack in Benghazi? - YouTube[/ame]



O'shit did Obama **** up on security?

Biden blatantly lied about Chris Stevens wanting more Security
The Fact Checker


“We weren’t told they wanted more security there. We did not know they wanted more security.”

— Biden, speaking of the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya

Biden’s bold statement was directly contradicted by State Department officials just this week, in testimony before a congressional panel and in unclassified cables released by a congressional committee.

“All of us at post were in sync that we wanted these resources,” said Eric Nordstrom, the top regional security officer in Libya earlier this year. A Utah national guardsman who led a security team, Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, said: “We felt great frustration that those requests were ignored or just never met.”