login
Libya and Egypt Attacks (Page 6)
-
No new posts
|
 2012-09-14 9:05 PM in reply to: #4412325 |
Champion  7821     Brooklyn, NY |  Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attackscrusevegas - 2012-09-14 8:40 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-14 11:53 AM crusevegas - 2012-09-14 12:33 PM You’ll have to explain to me what the difference is between “raising the question” and “suggesting it was the case”. They sound like pretty much the same thing to me. And I’m sorry, but it’s cynical and disingenuous to toss out wild, completely unsubstantiated accusations and then hide behind, “I’m not saying it’s true—I’m saying it COULD BE true.” I’m troubled and cynical about the state of American politics too, but you really think that a sitting president would deliberately orchestrate the murder of American citizens abroad just to get a few percentage bumps in the polls? If he was capable of something that elaborate and diabolical, why not just arrange to dump a dead gay runaway in Paul Ryan’s bedroom and tip off the press? jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-14 9:46 AM crusevegas - 2012-09-14 11:02 AM Are you suggesting that the Obama administration made a concious choice to leave Americans in the ME unprotected so that they would be murdered, thus improving Obama's chance of winning this election? I really hope that's not what you're saying, because that's a pretty horrible accusation, but I'm not sure how else to interpret that. And don't give me the "I'm not saying it's true, I'm just saying it's possible"nonsense because one could just as easily say "Maybe the controversial film was secretly financed by Romney's election campaign. Y'know, I"m not saying it's true, but it's possible". scoobysdad - 2012-09-14 8:41 AM Obama skips out on intel meetings for weeks leading up to 9/11. American embassies are completely unprepared, perhaps even unarmed, to defend themselves on 9/11 despite credible reports of attack threats. Terrorists make good on those threats, running over two embassies and killing an American ambassador and several others. Obama acknowledges it was a "tough day" for him and jets off to Las Vegas for a fundraiser. Obama invites Muslim Brotherhood for a meeting at the White House, but refuses to meet with the prime minister of our only real ally in the region in light of escalating threats to their security. Why are we talking about Romney again? When our nation is at war or perceived to be we are less likely to changes leaders while involved in a conflict. I don't know and I'm not speculating but it possible that by leaving the embassies &/or consulates vulnerable like they were that it may improve his already good chance of being re-elected? I understood the tough day comment to me for for us as a nation than as him personally. I really wish he would have cancelled his Vegas Vacation speech, I had to sit stopped at the airport for a solid 30 minutes waiting for AF1 to take off. I thought I was pretty clear that I wasn't suggesting that was the case. I did raise the question. I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility for either the Dems or Repubs to consider such things for their own political gain. Now be clear, I said possibility, NOT probability. I like you would be incensed and outraged if it ever came to light that something of this nature occurred by either party. The big question that I've heard asked but NOT answered is why on the 11th anniversary of the biggest terrorist attack in the US history were our embassies and consulates so vulnerable and exposed.
I think you know the difference between someone raising the question as to if something is possible and someone saying it it probable. When something happens I think it's only prudent to consider all of the possibilities, even those that aren't probable. It appears you disagree. If you want me to go into further detail of the difference in the word possible and probable, let me know and I'll provide some analogies. Could you explain to me why our people and property, our sovereign property were not better protected leading up to and on the 11th anniversary of the terrorist attack on Sept 11th, 2001? Was it incompetence, calculated or something else? But thats the thing--you aren't just neutrally comparing "all of the possibilities". You're concocting wild theories about the president, whom you despise, without a shred of evidence, and with no effort to consider equally unlikely possibilities that reflect poorly on the candidate whom you prefer. Where is your "possible but improbable" theory about Romneys involvement,if you're "considering all the possibilities". Doesn't he stand to gain politically from this as well? Do you also think that the Bush Adminstration is responsible for 9/11? Lots of people do. You have to admit, "it's a possibility". |
| 2012-09-14 9:38 PM in reply to: #4412344 |
| Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-14 7:05 PM crusevegas - 2012-09-14 8:40 PM But thats the thing--you aren't just neutrally comparing "all of the possibilities". You're concocting wild theories about the president, whom you despise, without a shred of evidence, and with no effort to consider equally unlikely possibilities that reflect poorly on the candidate whom you prefer. Where is your "possible but improbable" theory about Romneys involvement,if you're "considering all the possibilities". Doesn't he stand to gain politically from this as well? Do you also think that the Bush Adminstration is responsible for 9/11? Lots of people do. You have to admit, "it's a possibility".jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-14 11:53 AM crusevegas - 2012-09-14 12:33 PM You’ll have to explain to me what the difference is between “raising the question” and “suggesting it was the case”. They sound like pretty much the same thing to me. And I’m sorry, but it’s cynical and disingenuous to toss out wild, completely unsubstantiated accusations and then hide behind, “I’m not saying it’s true—I’m saying it COULD BE true.” I’m troubled and cynical about the state of American politics too, but you really think that a sitting president would deliberately orchestrate the murder of American citizens abroad just to get a few percentage bumps in the polls? If he was capable of something that elaborate and diabolical, why not just arrange to dump a dead gay runaway in Paul Ryan’s bedroom and tip off the press? jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-14 9:46 AM crusevegas - 2012-09-14 11:02 AM Are you suggesting that the Obama administration made a concious choice to leave Americans in the ME unprotected so that they would be murdered, thus improving Obama's chance of winning this election? I really hope that's not what you're saying, because that's a pretty horrible accusation, but I'm not sure how else to interpret that. And don't give me the "I'm not saying it's true, I'm just saying it's possible"nonsense because one could just as easily say "Maybe the controversial film was secretly financed by Romney's election campaign. Y'know, I"m not saying it's true, but it's possible". scoobysdad - 2012-09-14 8:41 AM Obama skips out on intel meetings for weeks leading up to 9/11. American embassies are completely unprepared, perhaps even unarmed, to defend themselves on 9/11 despite credible reports of attack threats. Terrorists make good on those threats, running over two embassies and killing an American ambassador and several others. Obama acknowledges it was a "tough day" for him and jets off to Las Vegas for a fundraiser. Obama invites Muslim Brotherhood for a meeting at the White House, but refuses to meet with the prime minister of our only real ally in the region in light of escalating threats to their security. Why are we talking about Romney again? When our nation is at war or perceived to be we are less likely to changes leaders while involved in a conflict. I don't know and I'm not speculating but it possible that by leaving the embassies &/or consulates vulnerable like they were that it may improve his already good chance of being re-elected? I understood the tough day comment to me for for us as a nation than as him personally. I really wish he would have cancelled his Vegas Vacation speech, I had to sit stopped at the airport for a solid 30 minutes waiting for AF1 to take off. I thought I was pretty clear that I wasn't suggesting that was the case. I did raise the question. I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility for either the Dems or Repubs to consider such things for their own political gain. Now be clear, I said possibility, NOT probability. I like you would be incensed and outraged if it ever came to light that something of this nature occurred by either party. The big question that I've heard asked but NOT answered is why on the 11th anniversary of the biggest terrorist attack in the US history were our embassies and consulates so vulnerable and exposed.
I think you know the difference between someone raising the question as to if something is possible and someone saying it it probable. When something happens I think it's only prudent to consider all of the possibilities, even those that aren't probable. It appears you disagree. If you want me to go into further detail of the difference in the word possible and probable, let me know and I'll provide some analogies. Could you explain to me why our people and property, our sovereign property were not better protected leading up to and on the 11th anniversary of the terrorist attack on Sept 11th, 2001? Was it incompetence, calculated or something else? I'll address some of your concerns/comments/questions if you would do me the courtesy of telling me why our embassies, consulates & personnel were so vulnerable and inadequately prepared on the anniversary of 9/11. |
| 2012-09-14 10:54 PM in reply to: #4407320 |
| Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks So what's everyone's take on how long these protests keep up? Why don't we just do as they say and release the film maker to them? He sounds like a scumbag, con-artist to begin with. CNN described him as being "in hiding ever since the uprising started." followed by a report from outside his front door where the media was set up. Erin Burnett said "do we know where he's hiding?" and I dont know who the reporter was because I was listening in the car, he said "yeah, he's in the house behind me." Classic. |
| 2012-09-15 12:48 AM in reply to: #4412403 |
Master 2447 White Oak, Texas | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks GomesBolt - 2012-09-14 10:54 PM So what's everyone's take on how long these protests keep up? Why don't we just do as they say and release the film maker to them? He sounds like a scumbag, con-artist to begin with. CNN described him as being "in hiding ever since the uprising started." followed by a report from outside his front door where the media was set up. Erin Burnett said "do we know where he's hiding?" and I dont know who the reporter was because I was listening in the car, he said "yeah, he's in the house behind me." Classic. Really? I'm a bit drunk but does freedom of speech mean anything? I guess in your world we just turn over anyone they find offensive we can start with those that ridicule Islam then perhaps we can send the copic Christians then the homosexuals then the Catholics and perhaps follow that up with the entire state of Israel I guess maybe your safe at least for now. |
| 2012-09-15 5:23 AM in reply to: #4412363 |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks crusevegas - 2012-09-14 9:38 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-14 7:05 PM crusevegas - 2012-09-14 8:40 PM But thats the thing--you aren't just neutrally comparing "all of the possibilities". You're concocting wild theories about the president, whom you despise, without a shred of evidence, and with no effort to consider equally unlikely possibilities that reflect poorly on the candidate whom you prefer. Where is your "possible but improbable" theory about Romneys involvement,if you're "considering all the possibilities". Doesn't he stand to gain politically from this as well? Do you also think that the Bush Adminstration is responsible for 9/11? Lots of people do. You have to admit, "it's a possibility".jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-14 11:53 AM crusevegas - 2012-09-14 12:33 PM You’ll have to explain to me what the difference is between “raising the question” and “suggesting it was the case”. They sound like pretty much the same thing to me. And I’m sorry, but it’s cynical and disingenuous to toss out wild, completely unsubstantiated accusations and then hide behind, “I’m not saying it’s true—I’m saying it COULD BE true.” I’m troubled and cynical about the state of American politics too, but you really think that a sitting president would deliberately orchestrate the murder of American citizens abroad just to get a few percentage bumps in the polls? If he was capable of something that elaborate and diabolical, why not just arrange to dump a dead gay runaway in Paul Ryan’s bedroom and tip off the press? jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-14 9:46 AM crusevegas - 2012-09-14 11:02 AM Are you suggesting that the Obama administration made a concious choice to leave Americans in the ME unprotected so that they would be murdered, thus improving Obama's chance of winning this election? I really hope that's not what you're saying, because that's a pretty horrible accusation, but I'm not sure how else to interpret that. And don't give me the "I'm not saying it's true, I'm just saying it's possible"nonsense because one could just as easily say "Maybe the controversial film was secretly financed by Romney's election campaign. Y'know, I"m not saying it's true, but it's possible". scoobysdad - 2012-09-14 8:41 AM Obama skips out on intel meetings for weeks leading up to 9/11. American embassies are completely unprepared, perhaps even unarmed, to defend themselves on 9/11 despite credible reports of attack threats. Terrorists make good on those threats, running over two embassies and killing an American ambassador and several others. Obama acknowledges it was a "tough day" for him and jets off to Las Vegas for a fundraiser. Obama invites Muslim Brotherhood for a meeting at the White House, but refuses to meet with the prime minister of our only real ally in the region in light of escalating threats to their security. Why are we talking about Romney again? When our nation is at war or perceived to be we are less likely to changes leaders while involved in a conflict. I don't know and I'm not speculating but it possible that by leaving the embassies &/or consulates vulnerable like they were that it may improve his already good chance of being re-elected? I understood the tough day comment to me for for us as a nation than as him personally. I really wish he would have cancelled his Vegas Vacation speech, I had to sit stopped at the airport for a solid 30 minutes waiting for AF1 to take off. I thought I was pretty clear that I wasn't suggesting that was the case. I did raise the question. I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility for either the Dems or Repubs to consider such things for their own political gain. Now be clear, I said possibility, NOT probability. I like you would be incensed and outraged if it ever came to light that something of this nature occurred by either party. The big question that I've heard asked but NOT answered is why on the 11th anniversary of the biggest terrorist attack in the US history were our embassies and consulates so vulnerable and exposed.
I think you know the difference between someone raising the question as to if something is possible and someone saying it it probable. When something happens I think it's only prudent to consider all of the possibilities, even those that aren't probable. It appears you disagree. If you want me to go into further detail of the difference in the word possible and probable, let me know and I'll provide some analogies. Could you explain to me why our people and property, our sovereign property were not better protected leading up to and on the 11th anniversary of the terrorist attack on Sept 11th, 2001? Was it incompetence, calculated or something else? I'll address some of your concerns/comments/questions if you would do me the courtesy of telling me why our embassies, consulates & personnel were so vulnerable and inadequately prepared on the anniversary of 9/11. Can you do me the courtesy of fixing the formatting on ths thread with your next reply? I'd doit myself but I'm writing this on my phone and I can never figure it how to do it. It's getting really long and looks horrible. Anywho, to your question. I dunno. It's not as if attacks on our embassies have been regular annual events on 9/11, have they? This was a specific response to this controversial film and not a general uprising against the US, at least thats the story. So I guess you could ask the question why were the embassies unprepared to defend themselves period, but as coredump said, embassies aren't meant to be fortresses--they're an extension of our diplomacy. My point is that I don't think the embassies were any more or less unprepared on 9/11 this year than at any other time. |
| 2012-09-15 5:29 AM in reply to: #4407320 |
| Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks Yep shoulda had sarc font. Look at the next paragraph in my last post CB. The Media is basically giving the guy up for anyone who wants to show up at his house. They showed his house on television. Salman Rushdie still has a bounty on his head for "Satanic Verses". This clown is going to have to live in seclusion for the rest of his life. But if the media says stuff like "yeah he's in the house behind me" they're giving him up. My formatting was off so I understand your response. |
| 2012-09-15 10:35 AM in reply to: #4412461 |
Master 2447 White Oak, Texas | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks GomesBolt - 2012-09-15 5:29 AM Yep shoulda had sarc font. Look at the next paragraph in my last post CB. The Media is basically giving the guy up for anyone who wants to show up at his house. They showed his house on television. Salman Rushdie still has a bounty on his head for "Satanic Verses". This clown is going to have to live in seclusion for the rest of his life. But if the media says stuff like "yeah he's in the house behind me" they're giving him up. My formatting was off so I understand your response.
Ahh ok sorry for the blast. |
| 2012-09-16 9:28 AM in reply to: #4412458 |
| Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-15 3:23 AM Can you do me the courtesy of fixing the formatting on ths thread with your next reply? I'd doit myself but I'm writing this on my phone and I can never figure it how to do it. It's getting really long and looks horrible. Anywho, to your question. I dunno. It's not as if attacks on our embassies have been regular annual events on 9/11, have they? This was a specific response to this controversial film and not a general uprising against the US, at least thats the story. So I guess you could ask the question why were the embassies unprepared to defend themselves period, but as coredump said, embassies aren't meant to be fortresses--they're an extension of our diplomacy. My point is that I don't think the embassies were any more or less unprepared on 9/11 this year than at any other time. Okay, I guess as the press secretary said, it had nothing to do with America, it's policies and especially NOTHING to do with the Obama foreign policy or the Obama Administration. When I saw the press secretary answering questions and making that statement I saw it as pure comedy. If you chose to believe that in it's entirety, that is your prerogative. As far as me being unfair and NOT presenting all options or possibilities I am not a news organization pretending to be fair and balanced or any of the others that fair and balanced left the harbor many elections ago. I'm expressing my opinions and/or thoughts. As far as you being so outraged about my speculation that President Obama and staff could have conveniently overlooked taking adequate or extra precautions for our embassy/consulate and staff leaving them at risk and ripe for an attack, as I mentioned it was just a thought and not something I thought was probable. Now what set of events or the things this administration has perpetrated that could lead one to this speculation. 1. I think the most important thing to President Obama is being re-elected, I think he would do anything he thought he could get away with to achieve being re-elected. 2. His past and current relationships and the things he's done in the past. 2a. Fast and furious is one. All the time he was touting how our gun laws need to be changed to keep American guns out of Mexico he and his administration (IMO) were committing crimes to get guns into Mexico to prove his case. This cost at least the life of one American Citizen who was serving his country. So you can be outraged and tell me it's far fetched and impossible if you want, I would suggest, if you think the attacks on Sept. 11, 2012 on our people and our sovereign property were 100% completely due to this film and it was just a coincidence that they occurred on 9/11, you, and I mean this as respectively as I can are being more than a little naive. |
| 2012-09-16 3:51 PM in reply to: #4413320 |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks crusevegas - 2012-09-16 9:28 AM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-15 3:23 AM Can you do me the courtesy of fixing the formatting on ths thread with your next reply? I'd doit myself but I'm writing this on my phone and I can never figure it how to do it. It's getting really long and looks horrible. Anywho, to your question. I dunno. It's not as if attacks on our embassies have been regular annual events on 9/11, have they? This was a specific response to this controversial film and not a general uprising against the US, at least thats the story. So I guess you could ask the question why were the embassies unprepared to defend themselves period, but as coredump said, embassies aren't meant to be fortresses--they're an extension of our diplomacy. My point is that I don't think the embassies were any more or less unprepared on 9/11 this year than at any other time. Okay, I guess as the press secretary said, it had nothing to do with America, it's policies and especially NOTHING to do with the Obama foreign policy or the Obama Administration. When I saw the press secretary answering questions and making that statement I saw it as pure comedy. If you chose to believe that in it's entirety, that is your prerogative. As far as me being unfair and NOT presenting all options or possibilities I am not a news organization pretending to be fair and balanced or any of the others that fair and balanced left the harbor many elections ago. I'm expressing my opinions and/or thoughts. As far as you being so outraged about my speculation that President Obama and staff could have conveniently overlooked taking adequate or extra precautions for our embassy/consulate and staff leaving them at risk and ripe for an attack, as I mentioned it was just a thought and not something I thought was probable. Now what set of events or the things this administration has perpetrated that could lead one to this speculation. 1. I think the most important thing to President Obama is being re-elected, I think he would do anything he thought he could get away with to achieve being re-elected. 2. His past and current relationships and the things he's done in the past. 2a. Fast and furious is one. All the time he was touting how our gun laws need to be changed to keep American guns out of Mexico he and his administration (IMO) were committing crimes to get guns into Mexico to prove his case. This cost at least the life of one American Citizen who was serving his country. So you can be outraged and tell me it's far fetched and impossible if you want, I would suggest, if you think the attacks on Sept. 11, 2012 on our people and our sovereign property were 100% completely due to this film and it was just a coincidence that they occurred on 9/11, you, and I mean this as respectively as I can are being more than a little naive. "I disagree" barely scratches the surface of how I feel about that post, but I'll leave it at that and bow out of this thread. |
| 2012-09-16 10:37 PM in reply to: #4413609 |
Master 2447 White Oak, Texas | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-16 3:51 PM I agree Do ya really think it was about a film that has never been made? and that the attack on 9-11 had no meaning reallycrusevegas - 2012-09-16 9:28 AM "I disagree" barely scratches the surface of how I feel about that post, but I'll leave it at that and bow out of this thread. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-09-15 3:23 AM Can you do me the courtesy of fixing the formatting on ths thread with your next reply? I'd doit myself but I'm writing this on my phone and I can never figure it how to do it. It's getting really long and looks horrible. Anywho, to your question. I dunno. It's not as if attacks on our embassies have been regular annual events on 9/11, have they? This was a specific response to this controversial film and not a general uprising against the US, at least thats the story. So I guess you could ask the question why were the embassies unprepared to defend themselves period, but as coredump said, embassies aren't meant to be fortresses--they're an extension of our diplomacy. My point is that I don't think the embassies were any more or less unprepared on 9/11 this year than at any other time. Okay, I guess as the press secretary said, it had nothing to do with America, it's policies and especially NOTHING to do with the Obama foreign policy or the Obama Administration. When I saw the press secretary answering questions and making that statement I saw it as pure comedy. If you chose to believe that in it's entirety, that is your prerogative. As far as me being unfair and NOT presenting all options or possibilities I am not a news organization pretending to be fair and balanced or any of the others that fair and balanced left the harbor many elections ago. I'm expressing my opinions and/or thoughts. As far as you being so outraged about my speculation that President Obama and staff could have conveniently overlooked taking adequate or extra precautions for our embassy/consulate and staff leaving them at risk and ripe for an attack, as I mentioned it was just a thought and not something I thought was probable. Now what set of events or the things this administration has perpetrated that could lead one to this speculation. 1. I think the most important thing to President Obama is being re-elected, I think he would do anything he thought he could get away with to achieve being re-elected. 2. His past and current relationships and the things he's done in the past. 2a. Fast and furious is one. All the time he was touting how our gun laws need to be changed to keep American guns out of Mexico he and his administration (IMO) were committing crimes to get guns into Mexico to prove his case. This cost at least the life of one American Citizen who was serving his country. So you can be outraged and tell me it's far fetched and impossible if you want, I would suggest, if you think the attacks on Sept. 11, 2012 on our people and our sovereign property were 100% completely due to this film and it was just a coincidence that they occurred on 9/11, you, and I mean this as respectively as I can are being more than a little naive. |
| 2012-09-17 4:23 PM in reply to: #4413925 |
Master 2701 Salisbury, North Carolina | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks Libyan president: it's obvious attacks were "preplanned, predetermined." Does that change anything for some of you ? |
| 2012-09-17 4:27 PM in reply to: #4415380 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks tri42 - 2012-09-17 4:23 PM Libyan president: it's obvious attacks were "preplanned, predetermined." Does that change anything for some of you ?
|
| 2012-09-17 5:09 PM in reply to: #4415389 |
Master 2701 Salisbury, North Carolina | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks LOL.  |
| 2012-09-17 9:24 PM in reply to: #4415380 |
| Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks tri42 - 2012-09-17 2:23 PM Libyan president: it's obvious attacks were "preplanned, predetermined." Does that change anything for some of you ? How many people were demonstrating when the spontaneous mortar and RPG's were pulled out and spontaneously fired? Do regular citizens usually carry those for self defense in Libya? |
| 2012-09-17 9:58 PM in reply to: #4407320 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks I have to admit this thing seems to just keep getting weirder. The attempt of the administration to try and tie the attacks to the youtube video with 9/11 just being a coincidence seems downright strange based on the evidence that's been coming out. It also seems so obvious that "if" the attack is just a "spontaneous" event from an out of control protest then the administration has no fault in the event so there's an obvious motive for them to spin it. It seems like every day there's more news that comes out that contradicts the "video" protest story. Today I read an article where they interviewed a wounded guard who said there wasn't anyone outside the consulate prior to the attack. huh? wtf? Then tonight I read this article about the youtube video itself may be a complete hoax. huh? wtf? <gets out tinfoil hat> I know earlier in this thread we were debating on this helping Obama by showcasing his foreign policy, but I think it's pretty obvious they're in full on damage control mode now. Edited by tuwood 2012-09-17 10:02 PM |
| 2012-09-17 10:42 PM in reply to: #4407320 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks I have not really cared about yet another protest against the U.S. in the ME. As far as the video and what not... don't care. I have not read this thread and have no idea the number of derailments that have occured. I watched the national news tonight and how it just keeps getting bigger and more out of control. Now the leader of Hezbalah or some other "official" oganization is demanding the U.S. pass laws to protect Mohamad and Islam from people saying bad things about them.... well there is NO.... and then there is #&$^$ NO. I simply can not believe this nonsense. You can't even wish some one Merry Christmas in fear of offending them, but we cater to these idiots and appologize for a week. This is truely some of the silliest crap I have seen in a long time. |
| 2012-09-17 10:51 PM in reply to: #4407320 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks I was sent this today, and while I understand it's a bit more complicated these days.......it's not all THAT complicated. There was a day when an attack on our embassy, with our ambassador killed, would have been considered an act of war. Those were easier times. Edited by Left Brain 2012-09-17 11:07 PM (reagen.jpg) Attachments ---------------- reagen.jpg (36KB - 8 downloads) |
| 2012-09-18 7:52 AM in reply to: #4415862 |
| Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks powerman - 2012-09-17 11:42 PM I have not really cared about yet another protest against the U.S. in the ME. As far as the video and what not... don't care. I have not read this thread and have no idea the number of derailments that have occured. I watched the national news tonight and how it just keeps getting bigger and more out of control. Now the leader of Hezbalah or some other "official" oganization is demanding the U.S. pass laws to protect Mohamad and Islam from people saying bad things about them.... well there is NO.... and then there is #&$^$ NO. I simply can not believe this nonsense. You can't even wish some one Merry Christmas in fear of offending them, but we cater to these idiots and appologize for a week. This is truely some of the silliest crap I have seen in a long time. When I heard about the UN religious defamation resolution, my first thought was "Wha?" my second thought was "now who are we going to make the bad guys in our action movies..."
|
| 2012-09-18 8:20 AM in reply to: #4416108 |
Slower Than You 9566 Cracklantaburbs | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks It's almost comical watching the MSM continuing to parrot that all these protest are about a video that has been out for months. |
| 2012-09-20 10:17 AM in reply to: #4416165 |
Champion 6056 Menomonee Falls, WI | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/report-never-anti-american-prot... Interesting new report from CBS reporting there never was a protest outside the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. This raises a number of important questions, including: Why did the Administration basically fabricate the story that the attack was part of a spontaneous demonstration against a film clip posted by an inconsequential "filmmaker" that had been posted on youtube for months? Why did the press work so hard to sell this fabrication? Why was security in high-threat foreign U.S. diplomatic posts so inadequate? Why is this new revelation not a top headline story? Something stinks in St. Louis... er, D.C. |
| 2012-09-20 10:45 AM in reply to: #4420262 |
| Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks scoobysdad - 2012-09-20 8:17 AM http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/report-never-anti-american-prot... Interesting new report from CBS reporting there never was a protest outside the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. This raises a number of important questions, including: Why did the Administration basically fabricate the story that the attack was part of a spontaneous demonstration against a film clip posted by an inconsequential "filmmaker" that had been posted on youtube for months? Typical Administration response to most things "It's not our fault, we didn't do it someone else is to blame" Why did the press work so hard to sell this fabrication? The majority of the press leans significantly to the ideals of the President and the democrats and they feel obligated to protect their own, the truth is a distant second for the majority of the media. Why was security in high-threat foreign U.S. diplomatic posts so inadequate? I've speculated on this earlier in the thread and I think this is the most important question to get to the bottom of, I'm not going to hold my breath. Why is this new revelation not a top headline story? I think the answer is the same to your 2nd question. Something stinks in St. Louis... er, D.C. Sadly, I believe the stench emanates from both sides of the isle. |
| 2012-09-29 1:42 PM in reply to: #4420340 |
Master 2701 Salisbury, North Carolina | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks Pretty obvious that the skewed world view was on the part of the Obama admin. thinking they would push the film as the cause instead of a planned terror attack. Honestly, with the media coverage like it is, they can get away with it. |
| 2012-09-30 7:13 AM in reply to: #4407320 |
| Austin, Texas or Jupiter, Florida | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks Interesting video perhaps the most complete list of instances of the media overlooking this admins actions. He brings up Benghazi-gate, Valerie Jarrett having a Secret Service detail, Plouffe getting $100K from an Iranian Front in Kenya, Stephanopolous calling Rahm and Axelrod for pointers daily and the media ignoring the whole thing. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/09/29/pat_caddell_media_have_become_an_enemy_of_the_american_people.html |
| 2012-09-30 8:43 AM in reply to: #4433665 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks GomesBolt - 2012-09-30 6:13 AM Interesting video perhaps the most complete list of instances of the media overlooking this admins actions. He brings up Benghazi-gate, Valerie Jarrett having a Secret Service detail, Plouffe getting $100K from an Iranian Front in Kenya, Stephanopolous calling Rahm and Axelrod for pointers daily and the media ignoring the whole thing. He was saying something known for a while. We no longer have a watch dog. The Press gave Bush a free pass with 9/11 and not one hard question was asked during the build up for war. After things fell apart then they started asking some tough questions. It was too late.http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/09/29/pat_caddell_media_have_become_an_enemy_of_the_american_people.html Like Obama or not, we can disagree. We do not have to get our tin foil hats out and have a drink with some birthers.... but what the press has done with this administration is darn near criminal. Nobody asks any hard questions. They are not reporting, they are making the news they want. I can not comprehend how a organizer, lawyer, legislator, lecturer, Senator that has not accomplished one significant bit of work, or piece of legislation, or verdict has risen to the status and position Obama has... and is completely drooled over and fawned over by the media for accomplishing absolutely nothing. I am completely baffled. |
| 2012-10-01 9:47 AM in reply to: #4407320 |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: Libya and Egypt Attacks I would suggest that “The Press” as we’ve come to know them, no longer exists. I think that the days of the relentless journalists pursuing a story for the sake of the truth a la Woodward and Bernstein are long gone. The media exists for two reasons today: entertainment and politics. Today’s media spends far more time, money, and effort chronicling Lindsey Lohan’s latest meltdown than they do pursuing stories with legitimate impact on the world. If only today’s investigative reporters were one percent as tenacious as the celebrity paparazzi, we might expect some actual news from the major outlets. And, as I said, what few media outlets aren’t dedicated 24/7 to feeding the public’s insatiable desire for stupid non-stories that people can share on Facebook have chosen a political side and serve as little more than the media arm of the Democrats or the Republicans. It makes no more sense to complain about the NYT’s selective reporting than it does to complain about FOX. You’re right—there is no watch dog anymore. All we can do is read as many stories as we can and try to piece together the truth. |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK