Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    THE lead bad guy SAYS the attack WAS because of the video.

    ALQEIDA bad guy said "yea, it wasnt us it was a video" Of course you believe that.

    all ground intelligence then and since, and the President of Libya at the time said it was a orchestrated attack by alqeida and had nothing to do with a video! Of course You dismiss that.

    Obama DID call it an "act of terror" the day after.

    Then for 5 days after that ^^^^ he and his staff ran the "it was a protest gone wrong over a video" into the ground including an embarassing display of cowardise in front of the UN!

    You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama.

    You wouldnt accept it if, he admitted it himself.



     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    THE lead bad guy SAYS the attack WAS because of the video.

    ALQEIDA bad guy said "yea, it wasnt us it was a video" Of course you believe that.


    How is "Of course you believe that" a response? You're just shooting the messenger because you cannot explain why the Al Queda bad guy would say "yes, I did it, because of the video" if the video wasn't reason.

    Can you please prove you have even the tiniest shred of honor and actually respond to THAT?

    Why would he lie? Terrorists love to claim responsibility and give their reasons. It's their MO, for chrissake. What is so hard about that for you? That it defeats your anti-Obama narrative?

     

     

    all ground intelligence then and since, and the President of Libya at the time said it was a orchestrated attack by alqeida and had nothing to do with a video! Of course You dismiss that.

    I don't dismiss it. Stop lying.

    What I I did was point to (1) intelligence that an attack told a bystander that it was because of the video, and (2) the lead orchestator said it was because of the video?

     Is your position that it "attack by Al Queda" and "attack because of video" are mutually exclusive? It literally cannot be both?

    Is your position that the it is impossible that the lead orchestrator did it because of the video, but other al queda tag-alongs did it because they just plain hate us?

    Why can you not face the facts?

     

     

    Obama DID call it an "act of terror" the day after.

     

    Then for 5 days after that ^^^^ he and his staff ran the "it was a protest gone wrong over a video" into the ground including an embarassing display of cowardise in front of the UN!


    Why do you dismiss the fact that the guy who orchestrated the attack said it WAS because of the video?

    Why do you think it is unreasonable to blame the video if there were 19 large protests in other places because of the video?

     

     

     

     

    You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama.

     

    You wouldnt accept it if, he admitted it himself.


    Again, you shoot them messenger because you cannot respond to the fact that "You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama."

     

     

     

     

    Thank you for proving yet again that you are a hyperpartisan idealogue. All you can do is repeat things your conservative propoganda tells you. When someone responds with real points of their own, you have no answer. Instead of admitting you were wrong or saying you don't know, you just shoot the messenger.

    Now THAT is what a "tool" looks like.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    THE lead bad guy SAYS the attack WAS because of the video.

    ALQEIDA bad guy said "yea, it wasnt us it was a video" Of course you believe that.

    all ground intelligence then and since, and the President of Libya at the time said it was a orchestrated attack by alqeida and had nothing to do with a video! Of course You dismiss that.

    Obama DID call it an "act of terror" the day after.

    Then for 5 days after that ^^^^ he and his staff ran the "it was a protest gone wrong over a video" into the ground including an embarassing display of cowardise in front of the UN!

    You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama.

    You wouldnt accept it if, he admitted it himself.



    Now THAT is just plain pathetic.

    Your responses get shot down, and so you just keep reposting the same thing?

     

     

    Isn't this funny? Whenever tvoter loses an argument, he resorts to trying to just plain troll the person who shot him down.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    THE lead bad guy SAYS the attack WAS because of the video.

    ALQEIDA bad guy said "yea, it wasnt us it was a video" Of course you believe that.

    all ground intelligence then and since, and the President of Libya at the time said it was a orchestrated attack by alqeida and had nothing to do with a video! Of course You dismiss that.

    Obama DID call it an "act of terror" the day after.

    Then for 5 days after that ^^^^ he and his staff ran the "it was a protest gone wrong over a video" into the ground including an embarassing display of cowardise in front of the UN!

    You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama.

    You wouldnt accept it if, he admitted it himself.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Now THAT is just plain pathetic.

    Your responses get shot down, and so you just keep reposting the same thing?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You shot nothing down! Do you really think you are fooling people?

    You took alqeidas word over our intelligence and the President of Libya.

    You know after Obama called benghazi an "act of terror"; he then for 5 days including in front of the UN called it a protest over a video gone bad; which everyone but, the hyperpartisan left know was NOT true!

     

     

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

     

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    THE lead bad guy SAYS the attack WAS because of the video.

    ALQEIDA bad guy said "yea, it wasnt us it was a video" Of course you believe that.

    all ground intelligence then and since, and the President of Libya at the time said it was a orchestrated attack by alqeida and had nothing to do with a video! Of course You dismiss that.

    Obama DID call it an "act of terror" the day after.

    Then for 5 days after that ^^^^ he and his staff ran the "it was a protest gone wrong over a video" into the ground including an embarassing display of cowardise in front of the UN!

    You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama.

    You wouldnt accept it if, he admitted it himself.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Now THAT is just plain pathetic.

    Your responses get shot down, and so you just keep reposting the same thing?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You shot nothing down! Do you really think you are fooling people?

    You took alqeidas word over our intelligence and the President of Libya.

    You know after Obama called benghazi an "act of terror"; he then for 5 days including in front of the UN called it a protest over a video gone bad; which everyone but, the hyperpartisan left know was NOT true!

    [/QUOTE]

    Typical. You think people are too dense to see through your ignorance.

    Thank you for underestimating peoples intelligence and over estimating yours.

     lol

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    THE lead bad guy SAYS the attack WAS because of the video.

    ALQEIDA bad guy said "yea, it wasnt us it was a video" Of course you believe that.

    all ground intelligence then and since, and the President of Libya at the time said it was a orchestrated attack by alqeida and had nothing to do with a video! Of course You dismiss that.

    Obama DID call it an "act of terror" the day after.

    Then for 5 days after that ^^^^ he and his staff ran the "it was a protest gone wrong over a video" into the ground including an embarassing display of cowardise in front of the UN!

    You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama.

    You wouldnt accept it if, he admitted it himself.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Now THAT is just plain pathetic.

    Your responses get shot down, and so you just keep reposting the same thing?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You shot nothing down! Do you really think you are fooling people?

    You took alqeidas word over our intelligence and the President of Libya.

    You know after Obama called benghazi an "act of terror"; he then for 5 days including in front of the UN called it a protest over a video gone bad; which everyone but, the hyperpartisan left know was NOT true!

    [/QUOTE]

    Typical. You think people are too dense to see through your ignorance.

    Thank you for

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    THE lead bad guy SAYS the attack WAS because of the video.

    ALQEIDA bad guy said "yea, it wasnt us it was a video" Of course you believe that.

    all ground intelligence then and since, and the President of Libya at the time said it was a orchestrated attack by alqeida and had nothing to do with a video! Of course You dismiss that.

    Obama DID call it an "act of terror" the day after.

    Then for 5 days after that ^^^^ he and his staff ran the "it was a protest gone wrong over a video" into the ground including an embarassing display of cowardise in front of the UN!

    You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama.

    You wouldnt accept it if, he admitted it himself.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Now THAT is just plain pathetic.

    Your responses get shot down, and so you just keep reposting the same thing?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You shot nothing down! Do you really think you are fooling people?

    You took alqeidas word over our intelligence and the President of Libya.

    You know after Obama called benghazi an "act of terror"; he then for 5 days including in front of the UN called it a protest over a video gone bad; which everyone but, the hyperpartisan left know was NOT true!

    [/QUOTE]

    Typical. You think people are too dense to see through your ignorance.

    Thank you for

    [/QUOTE]

    OK, speaking of ignorance ...

    1) You've got to stop calling this guy Al Qaeda.  Ansar al Sharia is a local militia - not a global terror network.

    2) When terrorists do something horrible, they claim credit.  Ansar al Sharia claimed credit - Al Qaeda did not.  They think they have a point to make - this guy's point was that he wasn't happy with the treatment of the prophet.  He expressed remorse over the death of Ambassador Stevens.  Where are the Al Qaeda videos celebrating the killing of an ambassador?

    3) You say it's ridiculous to distrust our intelligence community - great!  To this day, they maintain the attack was at least in part a reaction to the events in Cairo.  They've never held any other position.

    4) Magarief had no information of his own - he was offering an opinion.  Of course, if he was of the opinion that Ansar al Sharia was to blame, would he openly express it, knowing that he would then be caught between risking war with the US or the militas that control much of his country, and who are recently responsible for the death of the last Libyan leader? 

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    THE lead bad guy SAYS the attack WAS because of the video.

    ALQEIDA bad guy said "yea, it wasnt us it was a video" Of course you believe that.

    all ground intelligence then and since, and the President of Libya at the time said it was a orchestrated attack by alqeida and had nothing to do with a video! Of course You dismiss that.

    Obama DID call it an "act of terror" the day after.

    Then for 5 days after that ^^^^ he and his staff ran the "it was a protest gone wrong over a video" into the ground including an embarassing display of cowardise in front of the UN!

    You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama.

    You wouldnt accept it if, he admitted it himself.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Now THAT is just plain pathetic.

    Your responses get shot down, and so you just keep reposting the same thing?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You shot nothing down! Do you really think you are fooling people?

    You took alqeidas word over our intelligence and the President of Libya.

    You know after Obama called benghazi an "act of terror"; he then for 5 days including in front of the UN called it a protest over a video gone bad; which everyone but, the hyperpartisan left know was NOT true!

    [/QUOTE]

    Typical. You think people are too dense to see through your ignorance.

    Thank you for

    [/QUOTE]

    OK, speaking of ignorance ...

    1) You've got to stop calling this guy Al Qaeda.  Ansar al Sharia is a local militia - not a global terror network.

    2) When terrorists do something horrible, they claim credit.  Ansar al Sharia claimed credit - Al Qaeda did not.  They think they have a point to make - this guy's point was that he wasn't happy with the treatment of the prophet.  He expressed remorse over the death of Ambassador Stevens.  Where are the Al Qaeda videos celebrating the killing of an ambassador?

    3) You say it's ridiculous to distrust our intelligence community - great!  To this day, they maintain the attack was at least in part a reaction to the events in Cairo.  They've never held any other position.

    They have absolutely said the evidence shows it was a cooordinated attack and there was no protest and it was carried out over two locations and took over 12 hours. Buy a clue!

    4) Magarief had no information of his own - he was offering an opinion.  Of course, if he was of the opinion that Ansar al Sharia was to blame, would he openly express it, knowing that he would then be caught between risking war with the US or the militas that control much of his country, and who are recently responsible for the death of the last Libyan leader?  

    [/QUOTE]

    Look if tyou want to try to credit this guy who is an affliate of alqeida and in turn discredit our personnel that were there on the ground that is your right.

    I think it is foolish and only done for political reasons but, that is your burden to carry.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    And tvoter  still can't answer. So he'll report my posts and pretend they weren't there.


    What utter swine.

     

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    THE lead bad guy SAYS the attack WAS because of the video.

    ALQEIDA bad guy said "yea, it wasnt us it was a video" Of course you believe that.


    How is "Of course you believe that" a response? You're just shooting the messenger because you cannot explain why the Al Queda bad guy would say "yes, I did it, because of the video" if the video wasn't reason.

    Can you please prove you have even the tiniest shred of honor and actually respond to THAT?

    Why would he lie? Terrorists love to claim responsibility and give their reasons. It's their MO, for chrissake. What is so hard about that for you? That it defeats your anti-Obama narrative?

     

     

    all ground intelligence then and since, and the President of Libya at the time said it was a orchestrated attack by alqeida and had nothing to do with a video! Of course You dismiss that.

    I don't dismiss it. Stop lying.

    What I I did was point to (1) intelligence that an attack told a bystander that it was because of the video, and (2) the lead orchestator said it was because of the video?

     Is your position that it "attack by Al Queda" and "attack because of video" are mutually exclusive? It literally cannot be both?

    Is your position that the it is impossible that the lead orchestrator did it because of the video, but other al queda tag-alongs did it because they just plain hate us?

    Why can you not face the facts?

     

     

    Obama DID call it an "act of terror" the day after.

     

    Then for 5 days after that ^^^^ he and his staff ran the "it was a protest gone wrong over a video" into the ground including an embarassing display of cowardise in front of the UN!


    Why do you dismiss the fact that the guy who orchestrated the attack said it WAS because of the video?

    Why do you think it is unreasonable to blame the video if there were 19 large protests in other places because of the video?

     

     

     

     

    You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama.

     

    You wouldnt accept it if, he admitted it himself.


    Again, you shoot them messenger because you cannot respond to the fact that "You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama."

     

     

     

     

    Thank you for proving yet again that you are a hyperpartisan idealogue. All you can do is repeat things your conservative propoganda tells you. When someone responds with real points of their own, you have no answer. Instead of admitting you were wrong or saying you don't know, you just shoot the messenger.

    Now THAT is what a "tool" looks like.




     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    THE lead bad guy SAYS the attack WAS because of the video.

    ALQEIDA bad guy said "yea, it wasnt us it was a video" Of course you believe that.

    all ground intelligence then and since, and the President of Libya at the time said it was a orchestrated attack by alqeida and had nothing to do with a video! Of course You dismiss that.

    Obama DID call it an "act of terror" the day after.

    Then for 5 days after that ^^^^ he and his staff ran the "it was a protest gone wrong over a video" into the ground including an embarassing display of cowardise in front of the UN!

    You CANNOT show that the line of blame traces all the way back to Obama.

    You wouldnt accept it if, he admitted it himself.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Now THAT is just plain pathetic.

    Your responses get shot down, and so you just keep reposting the same thing?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You shot nothing down! Do you really think you are fooling people?

    You took alqeidas word over our intelligence and the President of Libya.

    You know after Obama called benghazi an "act of terror"; he then for 5 days including in front of the UN called it a protest over a video gone bad; which everyone but, the hyperpartisan left know was NOT true!

    [/QUOTE]

    Typical. You think people are too dense to see through your ignorance.

    Thank you for

    [/QUOTE]

    OK, speaking of ignorance ...

    1) You've got to stop calling this guy Al Qaeda.  Ansar al Sharia is a local militia - not a global terror network.

    2) When terrorists do something horrible, they claim credit.  Ansar al Sharia claimed credit - Al Qaeda did not.  They think they have a point to make - this guy's point was that he wasn't happy with the treatment of the prophet.  He expressed remorse over the death of Ambassador Stevens.  Where are the Al Qaeda videos celebrating the killing of an ambassador?

    3) You say it's ridiculous to distrust our intelligence community - great!  To this day, they maintain the attack was at least in part a reaction to the events in Cairo.  They've never held any other position.

    They have absolutely said the evidence shows it was a cooordinated attack and there was no protest and it was carried out over two locations and took over 12 hours. Buy a clue!

    4) Magarief had no information of his own - he was offering an opinion.  Of course, if he was of the opinion that Ansar al Sharia was to blame, would he openly express it, knowing that he would then be caught between risking war with the US or the militas that control much of his country, and who are recently responsible for the death of the last Libyan leader?  

    [/QUOTE]

    Look if tyou want to try to credit this guy who is an affliate of alqeida and in turn discredit our personnel that were there on the ground that is your right.

    I think it is foolish and only done for political reasons but, that is your burden to carry.

    [/QUOTE]

    Of the four points I made to support your ignorance, you conceded three, and replied to one with added ignorance.  Do you think the fact that the attack was co-ordinated and lasted for hours disqualifies the influence of the video? 

    Afghanistan

    Afghanistan's Taliban claimed responsibility on the Camp Bastion attack in southern Helmand province which U.S. officials said killed two American Marines, saying it was in response to Innocence of Muslims. Camp Bastion, in southern Helmand province, came under mortar, rocket-propelled grenade and small arms fire late on September 14. Nearly 20 insurgents disguised as US troops breached the base and destroyed several hangars and fueling facilities. Before they were all killed or captured, the insurgents also managed to destroy six jet fighters and damage two others.[236][237]

    Egypt

    On September 21, 2012, an Egyptian militant group attacked Israeli soldiers near the Egypt-Israel border, killing one Israeli.[240] In the ensuing gunfight between the Israeli Caracal Battalion and the militants,[218] three militants were killed. The militant group cited the video as their motive for the attack.[7]

    Yemen [edit]

    In Yemen, the protests started on September 13, after Abdul Majid al-Zindani, a cleric and former mentor to Osama bin Laden, called on followers to emulate the attacks in Egypt and Libya.[48]

    Hours later, protesters had stormed the grounds of the U.S. embassy in Sana'a. Police fired into the air in an attempt to hold back the crowds, but failed to prevent them from gaining access to the compound and setting fire to vehicles. Guards in Sana'a used tear gas and a water cannon to drive back the crowd. At least 4 protesters were killed and 11 others injured; 24 guards were also injured.[5][49]

    The U.S. responded by sending a Marine FAST unit to Yemen.[50]

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from pymus1. Show pymus1's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    The whitehouse had to put out a fake cover story so they could get the healthcare kid re-elected. Aren't we lucky folks! 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    If Obama wanted to lie to improve his re-election chances, he could have just promised everyone a 20% tax cut, and 4% GDP growth.

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    While the 60 Minute piece was well presented, I did not learn one thing I did not already know about Benghazi.

    Those who profess to have perhaps were not really paying enough attention OR want to believe they heard more information was uncovered to support their negative opinion of the Obama administration IMO.

    Reading through this thread just strenghened the opinion I had already formed after watching the piece on 60 Minutes.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If Obama wanted to lie to improve his re-election chances, he could have just promised everyone a 20% tax cut, and 4% GDP growth.

    [/QUOTE]

    Or he could have dodged accountability on a terror attack and went on a week long tour calling it a protest gone wrong.

    He also could have said, "The ACA will save every family 2,500.00 a year on insurance premiums" and "If, you like you current plan and you current doctor, you can keep them, PERIOD"

    But, keep shilling for them, they depend on you all maintaining the 47% who defend them and they lies and policies regardless!

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to slomag's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    If Obama wanted to lie to improve his re-election chances, he could have just promised everyone a 20% tax cut, and 4% GDP growth.

    [/QUOTE]

    Or he could have dodged accountability on a terror attack and went on a week long tour calling it a protest gone wrong.

    He also could have said, "The ACA will save every family 2,500.00 a year on insurance premiums" and "If, you like you current plan and you current doctor, you can keep them, PERIOD"

    But, keep shilling for them, they depend on you all maintaining the 47% who defend them and they lies and policies regardless!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Take a look at the map of the protests in the area.  Do you understand that your argument - the last year of fake outrage and posturing - it all boils down to the fact that you think one of these blue markers (the one in the city with easiest access to heavy artillery, controlled by a religious extremist militia) was not in some way related to the anti-muslim video?  You concede (at least I've never heard a conservative argument to the contrary) that the rest of these blue markers were related to outrage over the video.  You concede that there was a co-ordinated attack that killed Americans in Afghanistan that was directly related to the video.  But you hold firm to the belief that there's one marker on the map that could not possibly, under any circumstances, be related, and anybody who connected the two a week after the attack was is a dirty liar.  

    You don't have to reply - you've proven yourself incapable of defending any position you claim to have.  Just look at the map and try to reconcile what you claim you believe. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to pymus1's comment:

    The whitehouse had to put out a fake cover story so they could get the healthcare kid re-elected. Aren't we lucky folks!


    The conservative media was blaring "scandal scandal scandal" from 9/12/12 a.m., right up until the election, and the story was exactly the same as it was now.

    What you call a "fake cover story" had nothing to do with his re-election.

    The fact that you Rs ran an empty suit who promised to be "severely conservative" and who couldn't connect with peoplef or his life is why Obama won. Probably didn't help that the VP was on the first right as well.

     

     

    Sorry...but the nation is more towards the center than that. You can't win with fringe candidates.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    Look if tyou want to try to credit this guy who is an affliate of alqeida



    Why would he lie about why he carried out the attack?

    Are you saying you haven't noticed that terrorists love going on and on and on and ON about why they did something evil?

    They give speeches, they write letters, they make videos. It's their M.O.

     

     

     

    Why would he lie?

    Why would he lie to protect Obama?

    Is he glad that Obama gave the order that got Osama bagged?

     

     

     

    I know...you don't have answers, so you will report this post instead of replying.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Look if tyou want to try to credit this guy who is an affliate of alqeida

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Why would he lie about why he carried out the attack?

     

    Are you saying you haven't noticed that terrorists love going on and on and on and ON about why they did something evil?

    They give speeches, they write letters, they make videos. It's their M.O.

     

     

     

    Why would he lie?

    Why would he lie to protect Obama?

    Is he glad that Obama gave the order that got Osama bagged?

     

     

     

    I know...you don't have answers, so you will report this post instead of replying.

    [/QUOTE]

    Or even how could he lie?  According to BDC conservatives, nobody even saw the video, so his response to the question should have been "what video"?  Tvoter et al think he was prepped by Jay Carney.

    Post preserved for posterity :)

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    Wait a minute...  he is Obama!

     

    In disguise!

     

    Duh!

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to pymus1's comment:
    [QUOTE]The whitehouse had to put out a fake cover story so they could get the healthcare kid re-elected. Aren't we lucky folks!

    The conservative media was blaring "scandal scandal scandal" from 9/12/12 a.m., right up until the election, and the story was exactly the same as it was now.

    What you call a "fake cover story" had nothing to do with his re-election.

    The fact that you Rs ran an empty suit who promised to be "severely conservative" and who couldn't connect with peoplef or his life is why Obama won. Probably didn't help that the VP was on the first right as well. 

    Sorry...but the nation is more towards the center than that. You can't win with fringe candidates.

    [/QUOTE]

    lol

    There is no way the POTUS thought this attack was over a video for more than 24 hours (that's being generous) unless he did not talk to anyone intentionally because he just wanted to think that.

    Theres video from the UAV that flew over, but, perhaps Obama doesnt know that.

    How many other protests included trainied personnel with RPG's, heavy automatic weapons, and were organized to "protest"  in waves of shooting and destruction, then followed the occupants over a mile while they were ambushed in the streets to continue the attack er oh protest?

    get real!

     

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Benghazi; 60 minutes gets more answers!

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Look if tyou want to try to credit this guy who is an affliate of alqeida

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Why would he lie about why he carried out the attack?

     

    Are you saying you haven't noticed that terrorists love going on and on and on and ON about why they did something evil?

    They give speeches, they write letters, they make videos. It's their M.O.

     

     

     

    Why would he lie?

    Why would he lie to protect Obama?

    Is he glad that Obama gave the order that got Osama bagged?

     

     

     

    I know...you don't have answers, so you will report this post instead of replying.

    [/QUOTE]


     

     

    Of course he replies to a different post. ANything but the one that shoots his dumb azz down.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share