Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity."
--- Barack Obama
I'll bet every time you post that, the blind Obama worshippers cover their eyes and say......." no,no,no "
Actually by the definition of the two terms, they are the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
act of terrorism - the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear
terrorist attack - a surprise attack involving the deliberate use of violence against civilians in the hope of attaining political or religious aims
You are right, there is a difference, one is considered a surprise attack an the other is a calculated use of violence. So was Benghazi a surprise attack or a calculated use of violence?
I highlighted in red where you said there is a difference.
Now you claim there is no difference...
"The attacks on the civilians in Benghazi were attacks on America."
-- Barack Obama
America was being attack where was Obama? Probably in bed so he could get up the next day to campaign for re-election. Obama wasn't one damn bit worried about America being attacked.
Obama is only concerned about Obama.
Yeah! Why wasn't Obama out there in Benghazi riding a unicorn with a machine gun in each hand mowing down terrorists.
Bush was reading to a classroom of kids while 9/11 was going on, guess he didn't care either.
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
The political spin at the U.N. speech
"That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity."
--- Barack Obama
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teddy52
I'll bet every time you post that, the blind Obama worshippers cover their eyes and say......." no,no,no "
How about Obama and Hillary Clinton using tax payer money to buy television ads in Pakistan and condemning the video. It was played out as if they were blaming the Benghazi attacks on the video even arresting the man who made the video.
At the very least they were more concerned about the Pakistanis than America being attacked.
So when the president referred to an act of terror. he could have meant anything while he never referred to the terrorist attack that had happened that day.Even a week later Susan rice was denying it was a terrorist attack
Rice never denied that it was a terrorist attack. She repeated the information contained in the initial CIA assessment.
"The earlier versions of the talking points did include references to evidence that an al Qaeda affiliate, Ansar al-Sharia, took part in the attack. They also included references to earlier CIA warnings about the terrorist threat in Benghazi.
All of that was edited out. The emails released by the White House show that the deletions were made after State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland asked for those terrorist references to be removed."
"That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity."
--- Barack Obama
That wasn't a reference specifically about Benghazi.
At time, the conflicts arise along the fault lines of race or tribe, and often they arise from the difficulties of reconciling tradition and faith with the diversity and interdependence of the modern world. In every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening. In every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they're willing to tolerate freedom for others. And that is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, where a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well.
"The earlier versions of the talking points did include references to evidence that an al Qaeda affiliate, Ansar al-Sharia, took part in the attack. They also included references to earlier CIA warnings about the terrorist threat in Benghazi.
All of that was edited out. The emails released by the White House show that the deletions were made after State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland asked for those terrorist references to be removed."
Rice's comments align almost exactly with the pre-edited CIA talking points. Rice even refers to items that didn't make it into the final draft of the talking points.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
