Embassy Attacks
- Thread starter Babagounj
- Start date
raceanoncr
Well-Known Member
Lots of name calling here. I thought the radical right didn't resort to name calling?
Speaking of people named RICE, what about Condolessa Rice? Did you forget all the "MIS STATEMENTS" she made while holding office under bush?
Lets see how your outrage meter works,.... you are upset because Susan Rice went on tv to say the attack on the ambassadors compound was because of a video and not a terror attack... YOURE SO MAD , you spend hours posting the latest fox news talking points...
Condolessa Rice told the nation that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER and that not only turned out to be untrue, but it got over 7000 americans killed and over 250 thousand civilians killed.
Condolessa Rice testified to the 9/11 committee that she had "NO PRIOR KNOWLEDGE" of terrorists planning to use airplanes to fly into buildings, then a memo and a report with HER signature on it appears later proving she LIED to congress.
Yet in contrast, you have POSTED NOTHING about Condolessas deliberate lies to the american people, but you just cant take Susan Rice saying the attack was because of a video.
How do you live with yourself? I think some would call this a hypocrisy, but then again, similiar minds would probably congratulate you for ignoring Condolessa Rice's lies.
TOS.
moreluck
golden ticket member
When it already says"troll" on the label, it's just a moniker!!
Babagounj
Strength through joy
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/31/cia-ignored-station-chief-in-libya-when-creating-t/
CIA officer confirmed no protests before misleading Benghazi account given
Before the Obama administration gave an inaccurate narrative on national television that the Benghazi attacks grew from an anti-American protest, the CIA’s station chief in Libya pointedly told his superiors in Washington that no such demonstration occurred, documents and interviews with current and former intelligence officials show.
The attack was “not an escalation of protests,” the station chief wrote to then-Deputy CIA Director Michael J. Morell in an email dated Sept. 15, 2012 — a full day before the White House sent Susan E. Rice to several Sunday talk shows to disseminate talking points claiming that the Benghazi attack began as a protest over an anti-Islam video.
CIA officer confirmed no protests before misleading Benghazi account given
Before the Obama administration gave an inaccurate narrative on national television that the Benghazi attacks grew from an anti-American protest, the CIA’s station chief in Libya pointedly told his superiors in Washington that no such demonstration occurred, documents and interviews with current and former intelligence officials show.
The attack was “not an escalation of protests,” the station chief wrote to then-Deputy CIA Director Michael J. Morell in an email dated Sept. 15, 2012 — a full day before the White House sent Susan E. Rice to several Sunday talk shows to disseminate talking points claiming that the Benghazi attack began as a protest over an anti-Islam video.
oldngray
nowhere special
The CIA’s former deputy director disclosed Wednesday that Obama administration officials were alerted the day before they went on national television that a key tenet of their original Benghazi storyline might be inaccurate.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/2/cia-leader-morell-denies-role-benghazi-cover-up/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/2/cia-leader-morell-denies-role-benghazi-cover-up/
Make sure you keep it in context GRAY.
What he said was that CIA contacted the NATIONAL DEFENSE OFFICE and NOT the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION itself.
While the NDO does work for OBAMA, it doesnt mean they TALKED to OBAMA.
There are many branches of security within the White House, but as MORELL said, HE DIDNT SPEAK TO OBAMA, HAD NO COMMUNCATION WITH OBAMA, SENT NO EMAILS TO OBAMA, nor did OBAMA SPEAK TO HIM.
Very clearly this was his testimony.
Again, another hearing that was a complete waste of time.
The issue is dead.
TOS
Last edited by a moderator:
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
Now if you could re-read post # 6, is there really anything left to talk about here? We all get it, and most of us agree... Obama sucks. We done yet?
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
Langley, Virginia?
oldngray
nowhere special
Newly released emails on the Benghazi terror attack suggest a senior White House aide played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her controversial Sunday show appearances -- where she wrongly blamed protests over an Internet video.
"The goal of the White House was to do one thing primarily, which was to make the president look good. Blame it on the video and not [the] president's policies," he said.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...use-aide-involved-in-prepping-rice-for-video/
"The goal of the White House was to do one thing primarily, which was to make the president look good. Blame it on the video and not [the] president's policies," he said.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...use-aide-involved-in-prepping-rice-for-video/
Well that was creative editing. Your quote is from Tom Fitton, not a senior White House aide. Fitton is a partisan hack.
You probably knew that, but it didn't fit your narrative.
oldngray
nowhere special
The Rhodes email, with the subject line: "RE: PREP Call with Susan: Saturday at 4:00 pm ET," was sent to a dozen members of the administration's inner circle, including key members of the White House communications team such as Press Secretary Jay Carney.
In the email, Rhodes specifically draws attention to the anti-Islam Internet video, without distinguishing whether the Benghazi attack was different from protests elsewhere.
The email lists the following two goals, among others:
"To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy."
"To reinforce the President and Administration's strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges."
The email goes on to state that the U.S. government rejected the message of the Internet video. "We find it disgusting and reprehensible. But there is absolutely no justification at all for responding to this movie with violence," the email stated.
I only quoted a part of the e-mail but you ignored the portion that didn't fit your agenda. The full quote was included in the link.
Sorry, I read the email. There is nothing nefarious in it, just prepping for questions that may be asked. It's a normal thing.
There is absolutely nothing damaging to Hillary Clinton or President Obama in Benghazi, IRS, Fast and Furious or any of the other phoney scandals.
I will reiterate, you quoted Tom Fitton, look at the quotation marks in your post:
"The goal of the White House was to do one thing primarily, which was to make the president look good. Blame it on the video and not [the] president's policies," Those are Fitton's words.
There is absolutely nothing damaging to Hillary Clinton or President Obama in Benghazi, IRS, Fast and Furious or any of the other phoney scandals.
I will reiterate, you quoted Tom Fitton, look at the quotation marks in your post:
"The goal of the White House was to do one thing primarily, which was to make the president look good. Blame it on the video and not [the] president's policies," Those are Fitton's words.
Similar threads
