• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Conservatives hypocrites on Lybia attack.

J

James D Hill

DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
6,984
Reaction score
1,034
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I seem to remember a certen war that cost us thousands of American dead started on the lie that Saddam had nerve gas and radioactive material to make a dirty bomb. When called out on it the President said it was bad intellegence. Now the conservatives are going nutty over an attack that maybe or maybe not was caused by bad intellegence. I heard the President call it a terror attack the next day and the conservatives are screaming bloody murder. 4 dead is bad 4500 dead is much worse. Stop making political hay on a bad situation you conservative hypocrites. We stood by Bush during 9-11 so why not stand by this president during this mess?
 
James D Hill said:
... I heard the President call it a terror attack the next day...
Click to expand...

You heard wrong. I just saw the entire speech replayed, and it is clear to me that he was referring to 9/11/2001 when he said we will not be deterred by terrorist attacks. He did not refer to the Benghazi attack as a terrorist attack, and for the next two weeks he sent his munchkins out to proclaim the attack was provoked by a video. And only now is he revising his stump speech to leave out the line about "al Qaeda is on the run" (and thereby implicitly admitting that his worldwide apology tour was a waste of time).
 
Diogenes said:
You heard wrong. I just saw the entire speech replayed, and it is clear to me that he was referring to 9/11/2001 when he said we will not be deterred by terrorist attacks. He did not refer to the Benghazi attack as a terrorist attack, and for the next two weeks he sent his munchkins out to proclaim the attack was provoked by a video. And only now is he revising his stump speech to leave out the line about "al Qaeda is on the run" (and thereby implicitly admitting that his worldwide apology tour was a waste of time).
Click to expand...

You are nuts. There is no question that he was referring to Benghazi. That's what he was speaking about -- not 9/11. :lol:

On September 12: "Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe. 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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

Can you point out the 9/11 reference?

"On September 13, at a campaign event in Las Vegas, Obama vowed to bring the killers to justice. He then added, "No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America."
 
"Acts" is a plural. Think about it.
 
Diogenes said:
You heard wrong. I just saw the entire speech replayed, and it is clear to me that he was referring to 9/11/2001 when he said we will not be deterred by terrorist attacks. He did not refer to the Benghazi attack as a terrorist attack, and for the next two weeks he sent his munchkins out to proclaim the attack was provoked by a video. And only now is he revising his stump speech to leave out the line about "al Qaeda is on the run" (and thereby implicitly admitting that his worldwide apology tour was a waste of time).
Click to expand...

Who cares. He used the word terror and the conservatives are fishing for outrage. I don't remember the left starting a witch hunt right after the towers where brought down on 9-11. Why wan't Obama given the same respect this time.You can not stop every terror attack no matter who is in office.
 
I hate to minimize lose of any life, but...Al Qaeda killed 4 people. Not exactly a demonstration of worldwide organizational strength. Some nut job in a theater can do worse than that. I think AQ is on the run. Insisting Obama did not say terror with the right tone in his voice is more of the RW outrage of the day sillyiness.
Diogenes said:
You heard wrong. I just saw the entire speech replayed, and it is clear to me that he was referring to 9/11/2001 when he said we will not be deterred by terrorist attacks. He did not refer to the Benghazi attack as a terrorist attack, and for the next two weeks he sent his munchkins out to proclaim the attack was provoked by a video. And only now is he revising his stump speech to leave out the line about "al Qaeda is on the run" (and thereby implicitly admitting that his worldwide apology tour was a waste of time).
Click to expand...
 
nota bene said:
"Acts" is a plural. Think about it.
Click to expand...

The conservatives are splitting hairs just to generate an outrage. We did not do that to GW Bush right after 9-11 and we also gave Bush the benifit of the doubt in the end when we got sucked into a war with Iraq due to false infomation.
 
AdamT said:
You are nuts. There is no question that he was referring to Benghazi. That's what he was speaking about -- not 9/11. :lol:

On September 12: "Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe. 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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

Can you point out the 9/11 reference?

"On September 13, at a campaign event in Las Vegas, Obama vowed to bring the killers to justice. He then added, "No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America."
Click to expand...

Then why oh why did the WH send out Rice and others to defend the obama administration on the Sunday talk shows without telling them it was an act of terror?

Failure to communicate???

Instead of 'act of terror' maybe we should start discussing act of incompetence.
 
AdamT said:
You are nuts. There is no question that he was referring to Benghazi. That's what he was speaking about -- not 9/11. :lol:

On September 12: "Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe. 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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

Can you point out the 9/11 reference?

"On September 13, at a campaign event in Las Vegas, Obama vowed to bring the killers to justice. He then added, "No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America."
Click to expand...
The quote you posted is accurate. But why, I wonder, if you went to the trouble post that part would you not post the other part, the damning part, the part that leaves no f'ing doubt that the intent was to try to pin the attack on the video?

Here it is. Barrack Obama, Rose Garden, 9-12-12.

Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.
Click to expand...

He is CLEARLY linking the attacks with the video with this statement. It's no doubt, dead bang.
 
James D Hill said:
Who cares. He used the word terror and the conservatives are fishing for outrage. I don't remember the left starting a witch hunt right after the towers where brought down on 9-11. Why wan't Obama given the same respect this time.You can not stop every terror attack no matter who is in office.
Click to expand...

GWB kept us safe from domestic terror attacks after 9/11 and there were no attacks on our friggin Ambassadors, either!
 
Well geeze, 9-11 was kinda a big deal. Give GWB a pass for an attack on the homeland with 1000's dead, but Obama and 4 killed in a diplomatic outpost...goodness this is so hard to discuss with you guys. Hey, did you hear Obama was CIC when OBL was killed?
marsden said:
GWB kept us safe from domestic terror attacks after 9/11 and there were no attacks on our friggin Ambassadors, either!
Click to expand...
 
marsden said:
GWB kept us safe from domestic terror attacks after 9/11 and there were no attacks on our friggin Ambassadors, either!
Click to expand...

Someone has their partisan blinders on too tight.

In addition to 9/11 under Bush's watch ON United States soil, not even including all the overseas attacks:


2001 anthrax attacks. A March 2004 State Department report on "Significant Terrorist Incidents, 1961-2003" quotes then-Attorney General John Ashcroft saying of the letters containing anthrax mailed to various targets: "When people send anthrax through the mail to hurt people and invoke terror, it's a terrorist act." Five people were killed as a result of those letters in the autumn of 2001.

2002 attack against El Al ticket counter at LAX. In July 2002, Hesham Mohamed Hadayet opened fire at an El Al Airlines ticket counter at Los Angeles International Airport killing two people and wounding four others before being shot dead. A 2004 Justice Department report stated that Hadayet's case had been "officially designated as an act of international terrorism."

2002 DC-area sniper. The state of Virginia indicted Washington, D.C.-area sniper John Allen Muhammad -- along with his accomplice, a minor at the time -- on terrorism charges for one of the murders he committed during a three-week shooting spree across Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. Muhammad was convicted, sentenced to death, and subsequently executed for the crime.

2006 UNC SUV attack. In March 2006, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill graduate Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar drove an SUV into an area of campus, striking nine pedestrians. According to reports, Taheri-azar said he acted because he wanted to "avenge the deaths or murders of Muslims around the world." Taheri-azar also reportedly stated in a letter: "I was aiming to follow in the footsteps of one of my role models, Mohammad Atta, one of the 9/11/01 hijackers, who obtained a doctorate degree."​


terror_attacks_by_president.jpg

terror_fatalities_by_president.jpg
 
mak2 said:
Well geeze, 9-11 was kinda a big deal. Give GWB a pass for an attack on the homeland with 1000's dead, but Obama and 4 killed in a diplomatic outpost...goodness this is so hard to discuss with you guys. Hey, did you hear Obama was CIC when OBL was killed?
Click to expand...

I see, so life of our ambassadors is cheap as long as its Obama that must be defended, is that it?
 
UH, no, there you go again. Thousands were killed on Bush's watch. Say that out loud then we can discuss how many have been killed on Obama's. Talk bout glareing double standard.
j-mac said:
I see, so life of our ambassadors is cheap as long as its Obama that must be defended, is that it?
Click to expand...
 
mak2 said:
UH, no, there you go again. Thousands were killed on Bush's watch. Say that out loud then we can discuss how many have been killed on Obama's. Talk bout glareing double standard.
Click to expand...

There I go? I am not the one minimizing the death of an ambassador, and three other American's in a terrorist attack on an embassy, that need I even say, is an act of war, or the resulting cover up, and lies to the American people over, and over, and over for 2 weeks. I am not the one who thought it was a good idea to go in front of the UN Gen. Assy, and apologize for a stupid youtube trailer 6 times, nor am I the one who spent taxpayer money to air an apology commercial for said stupid trailer, in Pakistan....

You sir are the one minimizing here.
 
How many Americans were killed in America during GWB's watch? Say it then we can talk. Otherwise I dont think there is much to discuss.
j-mac said:
There I go? I am not the one minimizing the death of an ambassador, and three other American's in a terrorist attack on an embassy, that need I even say, is an act of war, or the resulting cover up, and lies to the American people over, and over, and over for 2 weeks. I am not the one who thought it was a good idea to go in front of the UN Gen. Assy, and apologize for a stupid youtube trailer 6 times, nor am I the one who spent taxpayer money to air an apology commercial for said stupid trailer, in Pakistan....

You sir are the one minimizing here.
Click to expand...
 
mak2 said:
How many Americans were killed in America during GWB's watch? Say it then we can talk. Otherwise I dont think there is much to discuss.
Click to expand...


It is a silly question designed to further minimize Obama's failure to ensure the safety of our embassy, and consulate in Benghazi...I won't play that game, but I will continue to think it is sad the lengths that Obama supporters will go to when defending this failure.
 
:roll: OK fine. Did you hear Obama got Osama?
j-mac said:
It is a silly question designed to further minimize Obama's failure to ensure the safety of our embassy, and consulate in Benghazi...I won't play that game, but I will continue to think it is sad the lengths that Obama supporters will go to when defending this failure.
Click to expand...
 
Old-Timers disease . . . memory is fleeting. I blame it on 20-second soundbites. What's weird . . . it only seems to effect tea baggers, staunch GOP supporters, and the GW Bush crowd.
 
more like a complete break with reality.
DiavoTheMiavo said:
Old-Timers disease . . . memory is fleeting. I blame it on 20-second soundbites. What's weird . . . it only seems to effect tea baggers, staunch GOP supporters, and the GW Bush crowd.
Click to expand...
 
mak2 said:
UH, no, there you go again. Thousands were killed on Bush's watch. Say that out loud then we can discuss how many have been killed on Obama's. Talk bout glareing double standard.
Click to expand...

You are either with us or against us. Too bad Obama did not have the courage to use the same tactics. Not really . . . I was just being passive aggressive in noting the far right's (not real Republican) hypocrisy.
 
DiavoTheMiavo said:
Old-Timers disease . . . memory is fleeting. I blame it on 20-second soundbites. What's weird . . . it only seems to effect tea baggers, staunch GOP supporters, and the GW Bush crowd.
Click to expand...


Watch it youngster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom