Page 19 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 226

Thread: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists[W:130]

  1. #181
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,986

    Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

    Quote Originally Posted by Gill View Post
    What sucks is your lazy attempt to emulate your other idol, Billy. Want to debate the meaning of "is" now ??
    That doesn't make sense. You were wrong, just own up to it. In her speech, Hillary did not say the attack on Benghazi was the result of the video. You were 100% wrong.

    Very sad.
    What's sad is how you won't admit you were wrong, when it is indisputably clear you were.

    One last point on your lie
    A lie? Do you even know what that word means? Only a blind partisan would say providing direct evidence is a lie.

    .... who is in charge of U.S. Consulates ??? Could it be the State Department. Who was in charge of the State Department.
    What does that have to do with anything? You're used quite a few of fallacious arguments already in this thread. I guess there's nothing quite like a red herring in the afternoon.

    A consulate is part of an embassy.
    But a consulate is NOT an embassy.

    The consulate was attacked. Embassies around the Middle East were the target of hate. This is EXACTLY what Hillary said. Attempts to spin are sad.

    Your attempt to claim she was not talking about Benghazi in a memorial for the Americans killed in Benghazi is disgusting.
    Why would you bother repeating a lie I've already disproven? Is that really the dishonest tactic you wish to employ to try and get around the fact you're wrong?

    I never said she wasn't talking about Benghazi as the focus of her speech. What I DID say is she never said Benghazi was attacked because of the video and to prove it I showed where she clearly separated out what happened at the consulate in Benghazi and what happened at other embassies.

    then why don't you start by telling the truth.
    Says the person tossing out strawman arguments, red herrings and repeating lies already disproven.

    Another denial.
    Another lie.

    You should really try reading the posts
    I did read the posts. I even put them in order for you. How can you still not understand, when I even repeated them in order?

    I said Clinton told the parents that she would make sure the video author would be taken care of.
    And then went on to ask why she didn't promise to go after the real perpetrators. I responded to that by saying (paraphrase) "hasn't enough people already done so" and you replied (paraphrased) "yes like Clinton and Obama".

    You're drowning in this argument and no amount of directionless flailing will bring your head above water on this one. The evidence is clear right before you.

    She never told them directly that day that she or anyone else would bring the murderers to justice.
    Good try, but once again you're wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hillary
    Reasonable people and responsible leaders in these countries need to do everything they can to restore security and hold accountable those behind these violent acts. And we will, under the president’s leadership, keep taking steps to protect our personnel around the world.
    http://www.state.gov/secretary/20092.../09/197780.htm

    Of course, both her and Obama made empty promises AFTER the memorial that the murderers would be taken care of, then never lifted a finger to actually do it.


    So once again you admit she has said she'd go after the real murderers! Holy crap, I don't know that I've ever seen anyone torpedo their own argument as much as you've done in this thread.


    At the end of the day you were provably wrong about her blaming Benghazi on the video when she gave the memorial speech, you're wrong when you claim I said her memorial speech wasn't about Benghazi (and just where in the world you came up with that ridiculous assertion is beyond me), you're provably wrong when you said Clinton never said anyone should go after those responsible and you've contradicted your claim she's never promised to go after the real killers.

    I know there are certain people in this world who don't give a rat's rear end about facts and the truth, so long as it promotes their political agenda. Right now, it appears you're one of those people, by making statements which unbiased evidence proves false. How about you do the honorable thing and admit you've been wrong on so many of the things you've stated?
    Last edited by Slyfox696; 05-16-14 at 05:35 PM.

  2. #182
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    It was lost in the bureaucracy of government, but yes, you're not wrong about this in general.

    She didn't, that's been established. Furthermore, Stevens twice refused security.

    That's not her job. Secretaries of state don't engage active military personnel. Furthermore, the attack WAS responded to. The 4 man team from the Annex (and the Libyan security team) responded to the attack at the consulate and the 6 man team from Tripoli responded to the situation as well.

    She repeated what the intelligence had initially told her, which we now know was wrong.

    This is just a lie, and such an obvious one I don't know why you said it. The whole "what difference does it make" quote came from her Congressional testimony.

    Except we all know now who and why, so it would seem kind of stupid at this point to still be asking questions.

    Like I said, you obviously have no ability to be objective on this issue.

    It is, as evident by this very post.
    You don't seem to understand that context is not opinion, it's truth. You've already admitted you're proudly ignorant of the context, so the only one being partisan here is you.

    No, people who willfully ignore context in order to push their political agenda, regardless of the facts, are the dangerous ones. People who parse words and meanings accurately and as they were intended are the ones who preserve the liberty in this country.

    I'm not passing my opinion as fact, I'm passing facts as facts. Just because you're ignorant to them, it doesn't make them any less true.

    By the way, you still haven't apologized. Does this mean you lied when you said you would?



    No, YOU should read the transcript I linked to. She said American EMBASSIES were the target of rage and violence because of the video, which was 100% true. But the attack in Benghazi was at the CONSULATE, not the EMBASSY.

    You are 100% wrong.

    It's an injustice he violated the law and was punished in the manner he knew he'd be punished?

    You don't really understand things very well, now do you?

    Most likely. Doesn't change the fact he was the one violated the law.

    Wait, wait, wait...let's go back...You said:


    And now you're saying Clinton has promised them that!

    Good job on exposing yourself as just another person interested in mindless political attacks. When you thought you could attack her for not making a promise you did, and when you realized you had to say she made a promise, you still twisted that to attack her. You people crack me up. Never interested in the truth, only political spin.

    Yes, yes it very much is. It came from the person who falsely attributed to Hillary something she didn't say and then later tried to criticize Hillary for something you now say she's done.

    You're right, it's VERY obvious from whom the untruths come.
    She was the head of the State Department. You need to learn a bit about command responsibility. Specially if you think she is qualified to be commander in chief. She's responsible for everything that happens in her department. Everything.
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  3. #183
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    She was the head of the State Department. You need to learn a bit about command responsibility. Specially if you think she is qualified to be commander in chief. She's responsible for everything that happens in her department. Everything.
    And she has said as much-she says she takes full responsibility.

    These Hillary supporters try to make arguments she herself wont make, isn't that remarkable.

  4. #184
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    And she has said as much-she says she takes full responsibility.

    These Hillary supporters try to make arguments she herself wont make, isn't that remarkable.
    Yet, most of her supporters claim she wasn't responsible for anything in particular.

    Funny.
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  5. #185
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    Yet, most of her supporters claim she wasn't responsible for anything in particular.

    Funny.
    There is a separation from reality amongst her supporters (and the Presidents).
    In Hillarys own words this was unacceptable, she takes responsibility, and the events did not happen because any lack of funding.
    And yet they continue to make those arguments. Its almost like they are on auto-pilot at this point, with the same discredited defenses.
    Methinks its a tough time to be a liberal.

  6. #186
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists[W:130]

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists - The Daily Beast

    "The State Department under Hillary Clinton fought hard against placing the al Qaeda-linked militant group Boko Haram on its official list of foreign terrorist organizations for two years. And now, lawmakers and former U.S. officials are saying that the decision may have hampered the American government's ability to confront the Nigerian group that shocked the world by abducting hundreds of innocent girls."

    More Hilary dithering that resulted in tragedy.
    Hillary is clueless and God help us she could be our next president simply because she is a woman...They did interviews at George Washington university and they asked students would they vote for Hillary. Most said they would because it would be nice to have a woman president.....When asked is they could name one accomplishment she had as SOS they could name none...

    THis could be our next presidentt????????????? God help us if she is.
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  7. #187
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists[W:130]

    Clinton Accepts Blame for Benghazi - WSJ.com

    The matter of who was responsible for the Benghazi ineptitude and consequent cover-up seems to be clear, though it does does not absolve others in this Administration.

  8. #188
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    This is just a lie, and such an obvious one I don't know why you said it. The whole "what difference does it make" quote came from her Congressional testimony.
    This is not a lie, this is you not understanding context. She sent the Ambassador to the UN to face questions about the Benghazi attack at the Sunday shows. Please do not accuse me of lying again.
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  9. #189
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,986

    Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    She was the head of the State Department.
    Which means she's in charge of people who are in charge.
    You need to learn a bit about command responsibility.
    I understand it just fine. You seem to struggle with it. You seem to think one person is capable of micromanaging every aspect of a large governmental division.
    Specially if you think she is qualified to be commander in chief.
    I've not affirmed or denied that. All I'm saying is people are being dishonest when they take her quote out of context.
    She's responsible for everything that happens in her department. Everything.
    That's just asinine and indicative of small minded thinking. I don't necessarily mean you, I'm speaking in society as a whole. One person does not run everything.
    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    This is not a lie, this is you not understanding context. She sent the Ambassador to the UN to face questions about the Benghazi attack at the Sunday shows. Please do not accuse me of lying again.
    If you'd stop lying, I wouldn't have to accuse you of lying. Hillary Clinton has, multiple times, faced questions about the attack. You were 100% wrong.

    Oh, and as for your snipe about "context", you didn't provide any. You provided no timetable for your quote and included everything from months before the attack to present day. So not only did you make a fictitious statement, your comment about context is laughable since you didn't provide any. What REALLY makes you comment laughable is how people are now so suddenly worried about context, when that's been my point this entire time.

    You crack me up. Carry on with the blind hatred.

  10. #190
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    Which means she's in charge of people who are in charge.
    I understand it just fine. You seem to struggle with it. You seem to think one person is capable of micromanaging every aspect of a large governmental division.
    I've not affirmed or denied that. All I'm saying is people are being dishonest when they take her quote out of context.
    That's just asinine and indicative of small minded thinking. I don't necessarily mean you, I'm speaking in society as a whole. One person does not run everything.
    If you'd stop lying, I wouldn't have to accuse you of lying. Hillary Clinton has, multiple times, faced questions about the attack. You were 100% wrong.

    Oh, and as for your snipe about "context", you didn't provide any. You provided no timetable for your quote and included everything from months before the attack to present day. So not only did you make a fictitious statement, your comment about context is laughable since you didn't provide any. What REALLY makes you comment laughable is how people are now so suddenly worried about context, when that's been my point this entire time.

    You crack me up. Carry on with the blind hatred.
    Are you not yet aware that Hillary Clinton has already taken full responsibility for Benghazi?

Page 19 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •