The Middle East....NRA, etc and arguing....

[Gloria]

So in his statements specifically about the attacks in Benghazi and Cairo, he says 'Terrorist Attacks', but was somehow referring to something else?

Come on. Willard and the FOX tribe were so far into the bubble of their conspiracy theory that they lost sight of reality. Now they are trying to save face by claiming that when Obama said Act of Terror, he didn't mean terrorism. Weak. Pathetic.

Then why the subterfuge about a UTube video that only had 17 hits up until that time??? Why not admitt that it was a planned terrorist attack?? Why did the white house have representatives telling the world that this was just a few good old boy Muslims out there whooping it up because they were upset over a video.

We know now from CBS news ( Not FOX) that the State Department (Hillary "it's my fault" Clinton) notified the White House Situation Room two hours after the attack started and that and that an Al Kada group had already claimed responsibility. We know that the attack lasted another 5 hours and that two of the Americans were killed in the last hour. That is a total of 7 hours. Why wasn't something done? We know that there were military assets available.....you know things like those big boats that airplanes take off and land on. There was also a special operations group at the Naval Air Station in Sigonella, Italy, less than an hour's flight from Libya.

Yes...Weak. Pathetic....applied to our Commander-in-chief.

[Kouak]

So in his statements specifically about the attacks in Benghazi and Cairo, he says 'Terrorist Attacks', but was somehow referring to something else?

Come on. Willard and the FOX tribe were so far into the bubble of their conspiracy theory that they lost sight of reality. Now they are trying to save face by claiming that when Obama said Act of Terror, he didn't mean terrorism. Weak. Pathetic.

I searched for "terrorist attack" on this page and did not have a single hit in the transcript of the speech. Where did you find the phrase?

[Naturist Mark]

I searched for "terrorist attack" on this page and did not have a single hit in the transcript of the speech. Where did you find the phrase?

Oh you got us. He actually said "acts of terror" and that's ENTIRELY DIFFERENT! I guess it was all just a conspiracy to sell America out to the Muslims ...

[Gloria]

I guess it was all just a conspiracy to sell America out to the Muslims ...

Now that is a very interesting concept.

Care to discuss it?

[Skinview]

So in his statements specifically about the attacks in Benghazi and Cairo, he says 'Terrorist Attacks', but was somehow referring to something else?

What statements? That wasn't in the above transcript.

Come on. Willard and the FOX tribe were so far into the bubble of their conspiracy theory that they lost sight of reality. Now they are trying to save face by claiming that when Obama said Act of Terror, he didn't mean terrorism. Weak. Pathetic.

I am with Kouak and Gloria on this. Obama said,

"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."

linking the attacks to the video, long before he used the words "acts of terror", and he was talking about 9/11, Iraq and Afgahnistan shortly before he used the words "acts of terror". Its not at all clear that he was refering to Bengazi. Obama could reasonably say that he intended to label the attack as an act of terror, but given his earlier comment about rejecting "all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others", its pretty obvious that Obama was thinking that the attack was the spontaneous action of a mob in response to a video, rather than a planned attack with the premeditated intention of killing the US personnel there. So Romney's point was right, but the whole issue got sidetracked by one word floating around the speach that was at best a superficial tag that didn't really describe what Obama thought had happened.

[Naturist Mark]

http://www.inquisitr.com/376608/cond...ll-the-pieces/

[Gloria]

http://www.inquisitr.com/376608/cond...ll-the-pieces/

Well I agree with Condi Rice. We should wait until all the investigations are complete. However she did that interview last week. Now we learn that Obama was watching that whole attack in the White House Situation Room. Remember this foreign policy failure is a "serious charge" and to liberals the seriousness of the charges always out-weigh lack of evidence or investigations.

Another thing, and I'm sure Condi will agree with me on this one, is impeachment.

Suppose this thing is swept under the rug until after the election and Obama is re-elected. Then the results of the investigation finally come out and Obama is found guilty of treason. That means he faces impeachment and justified jail time. But the greater danger to our country in that situation is the fact that we then get Joe Biden as president for the remainder of the term.

No...I think we should allow the media to follow this minute by minute and let informed voters decide that we really need a new President in November.

[BinCo]

Well I agree with Condi Rice. We should wait until all the investigations are complete. However she did that interview last week. Now we learn that Obama was watching that whole attack in the White House Situation Room. Remember this foreign policy failure is a "serious charge" and to liberals the seriousness of the charges always out-weigh lack of evidence or investigations.

Another thing, and I'm sure Condi will agree with me on this one, is impeachment.

Suppose this thing is swept under the rug until after the election and Obama is re-elected. Then the results of the investigation finally come out and Obama is found guilty of treason. That means he faces impeachment and justified jail time. But the greater danger to our country in that situation is the fact that we then get Joe Biden as president for the remainder of the term.

No...I think we should allow the media to follow this minute by minute and let informed voters decide that we really need a new President in November.

I guess you need reminding: "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S." . Thousands died when Bush ignored the warnings and Republicans don't seem to care. Four die in a turmoil filled country and Republicans are going nuts.

Hypocrisy?

[Yogi Bare]

I guess you need reminding: "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S." . Thousands died when Bush ignored the warnings and Republicans don't seem to care. Four die in a turmoil filled country and Republicans are going nuts.

Hypocrisy?

Absolutely! The Republicans have showed time and time again their propensity to display hypocrisy. The question is: why do they do it? The other question is: why woudn't they acknowlege that they do so?

[Illinois59]

I guess you need reminding: "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S." . Thousands died when Bush ignored the warnings and Republicans don't seem to care. Four die in a turmoil filled country and Republicans are going nuts.

Hypocrisy?

Bush was warned of a possible terrorist attack using airplanes during the summer of 2001. It is puzzling to me that the hijacking of four airliners at the same time on September 11 didn't trigger a much faster response with fighter aircraft. After all, how many times have four airliners been hijacked at the same time and our intelligence warned of aircraft being used in terrorist actions? Bush should have been impeached considering that over 750 times more people died in the 2001 attack.