Rice acknowledges some of her Benghazi info was incorrect but has no regrets

[Harry Dresden]

No I pointed out the more consequential untruthful talking points delivered to the public by another Rice in a similar job, and as it turns out many more people were killed, yet she did get the promotion that Susan Rice was viciously denied.

Hypocrite is another name for todays Republicans.

here let me say what you forgot.....so are todays Democrats....

I......can accept that. Seeing how they are both sides of the same coin.

hey....your not as blind as they said you were.....

 

[tinydancer]

What did she say that was so bad? “What I said to you that morning, and what I did every day since, was to share the best information that we had at the time,” Rice told NBC's “Meet the Press” moderator David Gregory on Sunday. “The information I provided … was what we had at the moment.”.

What she shared didn't lead to any loss of life, she shared what her higher ups told her to, what is there for her to be sorry about?

Her statement that what she did was share the best information that we had at the time is what she has to be sorry about. That was NOT the best information that the Obama White House had at the time. The best information was that this WAS a terror attack and had ZERO to do with some obscure video. Rice misled the American people. The only question is whether she did so knowingly or was naive enough to believe what she was being told by Obama and Clinton. Either way she has a great deal to be "sorry" for because she's either incompetent or she's a liar...pick your poison.

Why should she be sorry for putting out a message that was given to her by her superiors? I don't care that is was or wasn't the "best information" they had at the time, the fact is that it was an attack on our embassy, if it was a video, if it was political, or even if it was initiated by a small fringe of idiots, it still was a terror attack on our embassy or installation.
I think that republicans/conservatives have a better case about the procedural issues that may or may not have happened prior to and during the attack. Attacking the "middle man" for a statement and information that she received and delivered, is pretty petty in my opinion.

It was bullshit and she knew it.

 

[tinydancer]

Who wants to come at me about this.

I will take you freaking out? What type of crazy are you on?

 

[tinydancer]

Liberals stop your lies. On every freaking board you are on.

 

[francoHFW]

Here's a giant Pub lie. ''We know Bengazi was not spontaneous and was not in reaction to that video.''

BIG LIE repeated endlessly. Maybe the FBI can find the attackers to ask them, hater dupes.

Always enlightening to hear from an MS-NBC dup. Actually, they know the attacks were planned in advance because of how they were carried out, so it could not have been a reaction to the video.

Fox horse patoot...You think these Libyan militias don't know how to attack a mission, and don't have the weapons right at hand. PFFFT. And anyway, the type of attack says NOTHING about their motives...

THEY CAN FIND ''MILITARY EXPERTS'' to say ANYTHING.

Even you must know your statement is illogical...

 

[kaz]

Here's a giant Pub lie. ''We know Bengazi was not spontaneous and was not in reaction to that video.''

BIG LIE repeated endlessly. Maybe the FBI can find the attackers to ask them, hater dupes.

Always enlightening to hear from an MS-NBC dup. Actually, they know the attacks were planned in advance because of how they were carried out, so it could not have been a reaction to the video.

Fox horse patoot...You think these Libyan militias don't know how to attack a mission, and don't have the weapons right at hand. PFFFT. And anyway, the type of attack says NOTHING about their motives...

THEY CAN FIND ''MILITARY EXPERTS'' to say ANYTHING.

Even you must know your statement is illogical...

More MS-NBC kool-aid. So your argument is that randomly after being outraged by a video, 125-150 men spontaneously attacked the American Consulate ... on September 11. We don't know that it was planned.

LOL, turn the channel dude, you're getting dumber and dumber and ...

 

[francoHFW]

OF COURSE IT WAS A TERROR ATTACK, OBAMA SAID SO THE NEXT DAY. BUT we STILL don't know the motive, or if international terrorism was involved. Ay caramba, dupes.

 

[tinydancer]

Here's a giant Pub lie. ''We know Bengazi was not spontaneous and was not in reaction to that video.''

BIG LIE repeated endlessly. Maybe the FBI can find the attackers to ask them, hater dupes.

Always enlightening to hear from an MS-NBC dup. Actually, they know the attacks were planned in advance because of how they were carried out, so it could not have been a reaction to the video.

Fox horse patoot...You think these Libyan militias don't know how to attack a mission, and don't have the weapons right at hand. PFFFT. And anyway, the type of attack says NOTHING about their motives...

THEY CAN FIND ''MILITARY EXPERTS'' to say ANYTHING.

Even you must know your statement is illogical...

Franco you stupid shit.

You hired the Libyan Militias

 

[tinydancer]

OF COURSE IT WAS A TERROR ATTACK, OBAMA SAID SO THE NEXT DAY. BUT we STILL don't know the motive, or if international terrorism was involved. Ay caramba, dupes.

And he never said it was a terror attack. I can get you which way but loose. How do you want it asshole?

 

[kaz]

OF COURSE IT WAS A TERROR ATTACK, OBAMA SAID SO THE NEXT DAY. BUT we STILL don't know the motive, or if international terrorism was involved. Ay caramba, dupes.

Susan Rice: it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo

 

[Jarhead]

OF COURSE IT WAS A TERROR ATTACK, OBAMA SAID SO THE NEXT DAY. BUT we STILL don't know the motive, or if international terrorism was involved. Ay caramba, dupes.

He did not call it a terrorist attack the next day.

He called it an act of terror...and if, in fact, it was a bunch of people who spontaneously took over the consulate, that, too, would be an act of terror.

Dam....a drunk driver is committing an act of terror.

But he, in no way called it a terrorist attack.

An FYI...

An act of terror defines the result...it is an act that created terror.

A terrorist attack defines the attacker....one who is a terrorist.

You are easily duped by outstanding writers for our current President.

 

[francoHFW]

Always enlightening to hear from an MS-NBC dup. Actually, they know the attacks were planned in advance because of how they were carried out, so it could not have been a reaction to the video.

Fox horse patoot...You think these Libyan militias don't know how to attack a mission, and don't have the weapons right at hand. PFFFT. And anyway, the type of attack says NOTHING about their motives...

THEY CAN FIND ''MILITARY EXPERTS'' to say ANYTHING.

Even you must know your statement is illogical...

More MS-NBC kool-aid. So your argument is that randomly after being outraged by a video, 125-150 men spontaneously attacked the American Consulate ... on September 11. We don't know that it was planned.

LOL, turn the channel dude, you're getting dumber and dumber and ...

So what about all the other protests/attacks on embassies EARLIER that day that DEFINITELY were in reaction to the video and calls from the fundie Rush of the ME. WHICH HATER DUPES HAVE NEVER BEEN TOLD ABOUT...FUNCTIONAL IDIOT.

 

[Jarhead]

OF COURSE IT WAS A TERROR ATTACK, OBAMA SAID SO THE NEXT DAY. BUT we STILL don't know the motive, or if international terrorism was involved. Ay caramba, dupes.

And he never said it was a terror attack. I can get you which way but loose. How do you want it asshole?

My guess?

IN his asshole.

 

[BlindBoo]

Oh yeah...

and if the President truly believed it was a terrorist attack when he said "no act of terror....."....

Then what the **** was he doing the very next day, hopping on a plane and going to vegas for a fund raiser?

We found out in 1998, 2000 and 2001 what al Qaeda means by terrorist attack didn't we?

As terrible as it was, Benghazi was not one of those events.

Really?

So you base the severity of an attack on how many people died?

You know....their goal was to kill many more, but we got them out of there. So that's it? Since they failed to kill more, it is no big deal?

Only 6 people died when the WTC was first attacked.....so that wasn't something that warranted the President showing concern, anger and resolve?

Should the president have flown to Disneyland that day?

Wow....you really are reaching for straws.

I suppose you could but no that's not a comparison I would jump to given those dates. I was thinking more like suicide bombers, high value targets, grounding all fights, grabbing the worlds attention....

Everyone had been evacuated from Benghazi.

 

[Jarhead]

Fox horse patoot...You think these Libyan militias don't know how to attack a mission, and don't have the weapons right at hand. PFFFT. And anyway, the type of attack says NOTHING about their motives...

THEY CAN FIND ''MILITARY EXPERTS'' to say ANYTHING.

Even you must know your statement is illogical...

More MS-NBC kool-aid. So your argument is that randomly after being outraged by a video, 125-150 men spontaneously attacked the American Consulate ... on September 11. We don't know that it was planned.

LOL, turn the channel dude, you're getting dumber and dumber and ...

So what about all the other protests/attacks on embassies EARLIER that day that DEFINITELY were in reaction to the video and calls from the fundie Rush of the ME. WHICH HATER DUPES HAVE NEVER BEEN TOLD ABOUT...FUNCTIONAL IDIOT.

People died in those protests...and thus they were acts of terror....but not TERRORIST attacks.

As for Rush......give it a rest.

 

[Jarhead]

We found out in 1998, 2000 and 2001 what al Qaeda means by terrorist attack didn't we?

As terrible as it was, Benghazi was not one of those events.

Really?

So you base the severity of an attack on how many people died?

You know....their goal was to kill many more, but we got them out of there. So that's it? Since they failed to kill more, it is no big deal?

Only 6 people died when the WTC was first attacked.....so that wasn't something that warranted the President showing concern, anger and resolve?

Should the president have flown to Disneyland that day?

Wow....you really are reaching for straws.

I suppose you could but no that's not a comparison I would jump to given those dates. I was thinking more like suicide bombers, high value targets, grounding all fights, grabbing the worlds attention....

Everyone had been evacuated from Benghazi.

Everyone had been evacuated from Benghazi? Funny. I was under the impression people died.
A consulate is not a high value target?
An Ambassador is not a high value target?
It did not grab the worlds attention?

Wow.

What news do you watch?

Oh...and by the way......on 9-11......tens of thousands were evacuated safely. From a ratio standpoint, the dead compared to the survivors was a much more encouraging ratio at the WTC than it was in Benghazi.

 

[Sallow]

More MS-NBC kool-aid. So your argument is that randomly after being outraged by a video, 125-150 men spontaneously attacked the American Consulate ... on September 11. We don't know that it was planned.

LOL, turn the channel dude, you're getting dumber and dumber and ...

So what about all the other protests/attacks on embassies EARLIER that day that DEFINITELY were in reaction to the video and calls from the fundie Rush of the ME. WHICH HATER DUPES HAVE NEVER BEEN TOLD ABOUT...FUNCTIONAL IDIOT.

People died in those protests...and thus they were acts of terror....but not TERRORIST attacks.

As for Rush......give it a rest.

What?

Seriously..you have some pretty interesting language gymnastics.

 

[tinydancer]

OF COURSE IT WAS A TERROR ATTACK, OBAMA SAID SO THE NEXT DAY. BUT we STILL don't know the motive, or if international terrorism was involved. Ay caramba, dupes.

Why are we still talking about their lies?

 

[kaz]

Fox horse patoot...You think these Libyan militias don't know how to attack a mission, and don't have the weapons right at hand. PFFFT. And anyway, the type of attack says NOTHING about their motives...

THEY CAN FIND ''MILITARY EXPERTS'' to say ANYTHING.

Even you must know your statement is illogical...

More MS-NBC kool-aid. So your argument is that randomly after being outraged by a video, 125-150 men spontaneously attacked the American Consulate ... on September 11. We don't know that it was planned.

LOL, turn the channel dude, you're getting dumber and dumber and ...

So what about all the other protests/attacks on embassies EARLIER that day that DEFINITELY were in reaction to the video and calls from the fundie Rush of the ME. WHICH HATER DUPES HAVE NEVER BEEN TOLD ABOUT...FUNCTIONAL IDIOT.

What is the relevance to the question? What exactly does that there were street demonstrations mean regarding that suddenly 125-150 armed men were attacking a US consulate?

 

[mamooth]

Have the ODS cranks been able to come up with a consistent coherent story here? Their flipflops come so fast and furious, I can never keep up with what the latest kook Benghazi conspiracy theory is.