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.
Why must one theory about the attack on our ambassador be wrong for the other theory to be right? Has it not occurred to all of those debating on the side of Al Qaeda and Hezbollah that a planned attack could have used the movie trailer to incite people? Has it not occurred to any of you supporting the terrorist's version of what happened to the exclusion of what little information our government has released that our government needs time to do investigate, debrief, question and gather forensics before they can say for sure what happened? As with any crime, as more information comes out the original theory often changes. Those of you who are so welling to jump on anything that might make the president look bad, are doing exactly what the terrorist organizations want you to do. They'd love to divide and conquer us from within with their propaganda and you're all helping them.
Oh, so this is all about President Obama's ego and looking bad ?
Not all foreign events are about how one looks.
If they were lax on security, if they did ignore the warnings, if US State Dept did get complacent then this should come to light even if it makes them look bad.
Oh, so this is all about President Obama's ego and looking bad ?
Not all foreign events are about how one looks.
If they were lax on security, if they did ignore the warnings, if US State Dept did get complacent then this should come to light even if it makes them look bad.
That won't happen. They have been instructed (ordered) to provide as much cover as they can at ALL costs.
Now you just posted loyalty to the President and the admistration who said this was not terrorist attack but a protest against the film. And now you post you think it was a local terrorist group ?
FWIW of the 50 people arrested in Libya, many were not locals and a good number came from Mali and Algeria.
I said I think the local terrorist group took advantage of the advertising of the "movie"...(one can't seriously call that thing a "film").....to help in their attack in Libya, and let me add that the MAJOR thrust was not a terrorist attack commemorating 9/11 but that the local terrorists were opportunists in that they used the "movie" for cover and I don't think AQ had this thing planned.
How do you know that all 50 people arrested took part in the attack? Maybe they are just people who have information about the attack. Do you have any information regarding what these 50 people are saying.......from a credible source?
I said I think the local terrorist group took advantage of the advertising of the "movie"...(one can't seriously call that thing a "film").....to help in their attack in Libya, and let me add that the MAJOR thrust was not a terrorist attack commemorating 9/11 but that the local terrorists were opportunists in that they used the "movie" for cover and I don't think AQ had this thing planned.
How do you know that all 50 people arrested took part in the attack? Maybe they are just people who have information about the attack. Do you have any information regarding what these 50 people are saying.......from a credible source?
No, sorry. CNN World has articles on Angelina Jolie's trip to Syria.
Oh, so this is all about President Obama's ego and looking bad ?
Not all foreign events are about how one looks.
If they were lax on security, if they did ignore the warnings, if US State Dept did get complacent then this should come to light even if it makes them look bad.
You guys are the ones saying this makes Obama look bad. No, this is certainly not about Obama's ego. It's about your insistence on siding with terrorist organizations, taking their word over the word of our government, to try to make Obama's foreign policy look bad and by extension the President himself.
You guys are the ones saying this makes Obama look bad. No, this is certainly not about Obama's ego. It's about your insistence on siding with terrorist organizations, taking their word over the word of our government, to try to make Obama's foreign policy look bad and by extension the President himself.
Again..you are saying the Libyan President and Libyan Diplomats are terrorists ?
No, sorry. CNN World has articles on Angelina Jolie's trip to Syria.
Well, you keep telling us that you are reading other souces, worldwide sources, to get your information.....what are THEY saying about the information being given to them by these 50 people? You mean the "terrorists" are not giving out that information?
Oh, so this is all about President Obama's ego and looking bad ?
Not all foreign events are about how one looks.
If they were lax on security, if they did ignore the warnings, if US State Dept did get complacent then this should come to light even if it makes them look bad.
No, it's not about President Obama's ego. How on earth did you come up with that silly notion? And did you miss the fact based post below? No comment on that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber Presidents do not oversee the security of US Embassies abroad. It is as simple as that. The US Marines are in charge, and they answer to the Ambassador. If the Embassy was warned, they would have discussed it with the Ambassador, but obviously he did not feel there was a need for action. He was not concerned and went on a road trip. I would assume that in a place like Libya, they get security alerts all the time. Your partisan harping is sad. I am sure you can find better ways to attack the president. It is sad every time people use someone's death to push partisan politics.
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.
).....to help in their attack in Libya, and let me add that the MAJOR thrust was not a terrorist attack commemorating 9/11 but that the local terrorists were opportunists in that they used the "movie" for cover and I don't think AQ had this thing planned.
