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.
Does someone need to be fired over this? Who was fired over 9/11? Didn't we know that terrorist attack was coming too? Who was fired over the attack on the USS Cole? That ship Geeze people..get a clue.shouldn't have been in that harbor to begin with.
"Didn't we know that terrorist attack was coming too? Please give us the report that stated WHEN or HOW the 9-11 attack was going to be the twin towers AND by commercial airplanes.
"Didn't we know that terrorist attack was coming too? Please give us the report that stated WHEN or HOW the 9-11 attack was going to be the twin towers AND by commercial airplanes.
Oh I don't pay attention to conspiracy theories, but there are plenty of claims we knew the attack was coming. You can Google it if you are interested in it.
Yes, it was also an act of terror, we both agree on this.
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
The only ones who think Obama was generalizing are people who don't want to admit they knew what Obama was talking about.
As opossed to standing on a dead person....
So sad, and such a bad argument...
If you consider that telling everyone it was becasue of a video "knowing what they are talking about" then we have figured out why you are arguing....you don't know either...
Oh I don't pay attention to conspiracy theories, but there are plenty of claims we knew the attack was coming. You can Google it if you are interested in it.
Yet, according to the senate report, the ambassador twice refused an offer by the military to reinstate a special ops force in Libya, just weeks before the attack.
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
So when 4 Americans die and a president says act of terror, it can mean anything, but when almost 3000 people die and a president says act of terror, then it can only mean one thing. Your logic makes no sense.
If you think that speech writers do not carefully pick their words for a very specific reason, you are blind, naive, and have not been paying attention. Those speech writers know EXACTLY what they are doing when they choose the words that they use. And if you think that NO ONE advised your dear leader what to say, which words to use, and why, you are doubly blind, naive, and have not been paying attention.
So when 4 Americans die and a president says act of terror, it can mean anything, but when almost 3000 people die and a president says act of terror, then it can only mean one thing. Your logic makes no sense.
Deflecting now you are
They knew the first day it was a terrorist attack why send Susan Rice and others out to deny it
Yet, according to the senate report, the ambassador twice refused an offer by the military to reinstate a special ops force in Libya, just weeks before the attack.
Guess that means the ambassador should be fired, maybe that would make the right wingers happy.
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.
