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.
I guess in the future in Obama should start referencing people's social security numbers so we
that we can be sure who he is talking about.
At the time was there another group of four Americans who had just been killed that he might have been referring to?
Exactly!
I guess he should have said "Acts of terror - in case you didn't hear me - I was talking about terrorism, spelled t-e-r-r-o-r-i-s-m. Also, please make sure you know that the reason I called a press conference the day after an attack on our consulate is to talk about that attack, not the World Series."
I guess we're wasting our time here because, as I've said many times, he made 3 speeches immediately after the attack. One was in the Rose Garden and the others were in Colorado and Las Vegas. 3 times he used the word "terror" and the Republicans keep saying he didn't mean it. It doesn't matter. I posted a video and have watched it 3 times and still cannot possibly understand how the same Republicans who vehemently opposed increasing security spending for our embassies and consulates, voted at least twice to cut spending in half, are now criticizing the President for lack of security. It's mind-boggling to say the least. It's as if they've created a non-stop hate train that its supporters will board no matter how far off track it's moving.
would: Expressing the conditional mood, indicating the consequence of an imagined event or situation: "he would lose his job"
So if he said "will" that would be saying he expects another attack, right? It was a warning. Are you serious about what you wrote? I can't tell because it's too absurd to even discuss. He continued to say that justice will be done while referring to the deaths of the 4 men killed. I keep saying there's no point in discussing this matter and then I continue to post, so I guess that makes me just as silly.
I guess he should have said "Acts of terror - in case you didn't hear me - I was talking about terrorism, spelled t-e-r-r-o-r-i-s-m. Also, please make sure you know that the reason I called a press conference the day after an attack on our consulate is to talk about that attack, not the World Series."
I guess we're wasting our time here because, as I've said many times, he made 3 speeches immediately after the attack. One was in the Rose Garden and the others were in Colorado and Las Vegas. 3 times he used the word "terror" and the Republicans keep saying he didn't mean it. It doesn't matter. I posted a video and have watched it 3 times and still cannot possibly understand how the same Republicans who vehemently opposed increasing security spending for our embassies and consulates, voted at least twice to cut spending in half, are now criticizing the President for lack of security. It's mind-boggling to say the least. It's as if they've created a non-stop hate train that its supporters will board no matter how far off track it's moving.
OK so if a guy gets murdered at work and the owner of the company tells the family the guy got killed....whats that got to do with the wifes repeated conversations with her husband about some twisted nut at the job that was threatening him, and his upset over unanswered complaints at work...?
An answer to this analogy is required , Obama is going down...the whole world is militating against Obama and his brainwashed followers who cannot answer simple, very simple questions.
So if he said "will" that would be saying he expects another attack, right?
No. By saying "would" he's saying he imagines a terrorist attack might take place and he's warning that it will not go unpunished.
Obama never directly called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror. Notice the LACK of a determiner referring to the attack in Benghazi in the relevant statement:"To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished."
Obama is guilty of will full negligence in the Begazzi incident and everybody in the whole world knows it.
The whole world will militate against Obama, and...
A debate on monday is not even possible without a full explanation, that would be my position along with the merit in the explained entries in the last couple of pages in this thread.
The gala event and dinner was a mockery against the disposition of leadership...this is no time for shaking hands or smiling with the leader, ( or template re owner of the Co..in my exactly fitting analogy)
Without proper logical rebut...this effort stands, for and in truth.
The putrid hatred of the other is rife in this thread. The people responsible for this act of terror (quoting some American politician) have been apprehended. You lot should just get over the fact that you have a black man for a president.
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.
It was a warning. Are you serious about what you wrote? I can't tell because it's too absurd to even discuss. He continued to say that justice will be done while referring to the deaths of the 4 men killed. I keep saying there's no point in discussing this matter and then I continue to post, so I guess that makes me just as silly. 
