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.
The argument is about the right wing propaganda machine making up a flat out lie that Obama never said the attack was a terror attack for two weeks, when he clearly stated it was on the first day and the video shows it.
The right wing machine is throwing a complete pissyfit because Willard got owned on parroting this lie on national TV.
Instead of apologizing for the lie, the right wing propaganda outlets are kicking the lie into high gear, as if lying more will somehow make the lie factual.
Can you not read??? It was nine paragraphs down until he said terror, and it was not in the same sentence as Benghazi. If he had said "This terror attack" instead on "No terror attack" I might agree with you, but he did not.
The tragedy happened and it's not America's fault. They're not goanna fire someone just to please you wing nuts.
Someone should be fired. 0bama and crew made people hate the film producer, outed him, and toseds him in jail, because his movie caused the death of four Americans... oooops, there never was a protest, they made it all up.
The highlight of tonight's debate and the most talked about point is when Obama made the statement "The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people in the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened -- that this was an act of terror -- and I also said that we're going to hunt down those who committed this crime."
Afterwards, Willard rebutted with one of the top right wing propaganda lies that's been making the rounds that Obama didn't state until weeks later that it was a terror attack.
Once the moderator confirmed that Obama, in fact did state it was a terror attack, Obama then said to the extent for her to say it again and a louder, which was a grand slam rubbing Willard's face in a pile of dog crap.
While the democrats were high-fiving each-other, the right wing propaganda machine went ballistic, continuing to spread the lie into insanity mode and attacking the moderator with horrific and nasty comments.
In the end, Candy was 100% correct, Obama did, in fact, state it was a terror attack on the first day.
Can you not read??? It was nine paragraphs down until he said terror, and it was not in the same sentence as Benghazi. If he had said "This terror attack" instead on "No terror attack" I might agree with you, but he did not.
I've watched the video and read the transcripts numerous times (It doesn't look like you have), he clearly states " No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for."
It's been proven beyond all doubt that the right wing machine is full of crap, and their flat out lie blew up in their faces.
Perfect example of prevaricator-in-chief bending the truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TempesT68
The highlight of tonight's debate and the most talked about point is when Obama made the statement "The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people in the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened -- that this was an act of terror -- and I also said that we're going to hunt down those who committed this crime."
Afterwards, Willard rebutted with one of the top right wing propaganda lies that's been making the rounds that Obama didn't state until weeks later that it was a terror attack.
Once the moderator confirmed that Obama, in fact did state it was a terror attack, Obama then said to the extent for her to say it again and a louder, which was a grand slam rubbing Willard's face in a pile of dog crap.
While the democrats were high-fiving each-other, the right wing propaganda machine went ballistic, continuing to spread the lie into insanity mode and attacking the moderator with horrific and nasty comments.
In the end, Candy was 100% correct, Obama did, in fact, state it was a terror attack on the first day.
Keep up the good work with your meltdown rightwingers
The problem is that he did not call it a "terrorist attack" but an "act of terror." A terrorist attack implies a planned attack by a terrorist organization (Al-Quade). You may remember that they said it was a "spontaneous" attack by an angry "mob" of protestors that had gotten "out of control." They blamed the attack on a video. They said it was not a "terrorist attack."
This bending of the truth to fit the situation is typical of Barack Obama. And Candy Crowley was complicit, even acknowledging to the viewers that Obama had indeed called it "an act of terror." But she had to admit afterward that she was wrong.
For many days afterward, the administration continued to blame it on a video, and insisted it was not a planned attack, but "spontaneous," and Hilary Clinton and Obama too (in front of the U.N.) apologized for the video.
The problem is that he did not call it a "terrorist attack" but an "act of terror." A terrorist attack implies a planned attack by a terrorist organization (Al-Quade). You may remember that they said it was a "spontaneous" attack by an angry "mob" of protestors that had gotten "out of control." They blamed the attack on a video. They said it was not a "terrorist attack."
This bending of the truth to fit the situation is typical of Barack Obama. And Candy Crowley was complicit, even acknowledging to the viewers that Obama had indeed called it "an act of terror." But she had to admit afterward that she was wrong.
For many days afterward, the administration continued to blame it on a video, and insisted it was not a planned attack, but "spontaneous," and Hilary Clinton and Obama too (in front of the U.N.) apologized for the video.
Obama played the game for weeks even after finding out quickly what the story was.
There is/was no games being played. Militants in a hot-zone area of the world in retaliation for <fill in the blank>. Nobody covered anything up. The first thing he said the following morning was that it was an act of terror as Mitt so unwittingly pointed out.
Th Bush Administration ignored a mountain of evidence leading up to 9/11 and then used bad information to get us involved in the war in Iraq. During that entire time after 9/11 (2002 through 2008), US diplomatic facilities were attacked 12 TIMES resulting in 60 deaths. The only thing to left to ask yourself is, "Why is this one being so overly politicized by the GOP when all of their miscues get a free pass?" Simple. It's an election year and they have NOTHING else to go on. The truth is, the Obama Administration has been very tough on terror and have the death of Osama bin Laden, heavy sanctions on Iran, troop surges and drone strikes against the Taliban and Al Qaeda, etc. to show for it.
There is/was no games being played. Militants in a hot-zone area of the world in retaliation for <fill in the blank>. Nobody covered anything up. The first thing he said the following morning was that it was an act of terror as Mitt so unwittingly pointed out.
You need to hear or read what 0bama said in the Rose Garden, he did not say "Benghazi was a terrorist attack."
So who are you mad at? Candy Crowley for admitting she made a mistake and that Romney was correct?
Now who's dumbed down?
The "left" shoots from the hip and askes questions later.
They said it was a video, to cover for their incompetence and dereliction of duty. Obama was too busy making friends on "The View" and elsewhere, and skipped the Daily Security Briefings that all other Presidents take very seriously. Had he not been skipping these briefings, he would have known of the other attacks from earlier in the summer.
This is a man that should not be in charge of our country. We are in great danger with a man such as Obama in such a position.
There are there disturbing scenarios for why Obama and his administration went about a month, with the false narrative that the Benghazi attack was started with a protest about a movie that went badly. We know for a fact that there never was a protest in Benghazi, much less one about a movie.
1. Obama never met with the heads of the various intelligence agencies, and never asked them “What happened in Benghazi,” and he just made up his own version of events, and went with it for a month. But that would mean that dozens and dozens of intel community personnel, who knew the truth but sat on their hands and allowed our president to go on TV for a month, and look like a fool.
or
2. Obama did meet with the heads of the various intelligence agencies, and asked them “What happened in Benghazi,” and they either lied to him, or withheld information, and purposely allowed him to be misled and allowed him to go on TV for a month, and look like a fool. But this too means that dozens and dozens of intel community personnel, who knew the truth but sat on their hands.
or
3. The most disturbing scenario is that the president did ask the heads of the various intelligence agencies what happened, they told him the truth, and he decided to mislead the world, with his false narrative of a Benghazi attack that started with a protest about a movie that it went badly.
I find it implausible that dozens of people in the intel community colluded to keep the president misinformed for weeks, because if that is true, we have a lot of bad intel folks that need to be fired or jailed.
You missed at least one other possibility. The intel folks had no idea what happened or what caused it to happen, or disagreed among themselves, Whether that would be worse than your 3rd scenario
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.
Perfect example of prevaricator-in-chief bending the truth.
Keep up the good work 
