If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   American intelligence: "We altered Benghazi talking points to protect American spies." Republicans: "This is a poutrage. Surely Obama made you do it. He is all powerful, after all. Just like teh gheys and womans"   (foxnews.com) divider line 184
    More: Sad, Americans, GOP, obama, CIA Director David Petraeus, house intelligence committee, Libya, intelligence, spy  
•       •       •

2557 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Nov 2012 at 10:14 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



184 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-11-21 09:26:23 AM
And still, my mind boggles at trying to imagine the head-exploding outrage that would have happened had he actually discussed real operational intelligence in a press conference while keeping it secret was still valuable.
 
2012-11-21 09:31:25 AM
Also... when the current Republican leadership start showing some outrage for well-documented outright lies that were told intentionally and led directly to the deaths of 4500 Americans and god knows how many others, THEN they'll have a little credibility; until then they really ought to STFU and reflect on where they went so far off the rails.

/hint: Grover Norquist and Pat Robertson
 
2012-11-21 09:46:36 AM

unlikely: And still, my mind boggles at trying to imagine the head-exploding outrage that would have happened had he actually discussed real operational intelligence in a press conference while keeping it secret was still valuable.


Well, Republicans already leaked the location of the annex while on broadcast television
 
2012-11-21 09:49:59 AM
If this really were a crime, they'd be nationalizing FOX news and jailing most of its current management.
 
2012-11-21 10:02:12 AM

unlikely: Also... when the current Republican leadership start showing some outrage for well-documented outright lies that were told intentionally and led directly to the deaths of 4500 Americans and god knows how many others, THEN they'll have a little credibility; until then they really ought to STFU and reflect on where they went so far off the rails.

/hint: Grover Norquist and Pat Robertson


To use a party analogy:

S. Rice lied about the the desert she brought being homemade (because she was told it was)

C. Rice lied about whether not the punch was poisoned
 
2012-11-21 10:16:48 AM

mrshowrules: unlikely: Also... when the current Republican leadership start showing some outrage for well-documented outright lies that were told intentionally and led directly to the deaths of 4500 Americans and god knows how many others, THEN they'll have a little credibility; until then they really ought to STFU and reflect on where they went so far off the rails.

/hint: Grover Norquist and Pat Robertson

To use a party analogy:

S. Rice lied about the the desert she brought being homemade (because she was told it was)

C. Rice lied about whether not the punch was poisoned


Nice. Brilliant. Smart AND funny.

I will likely quote that to my derpiest friends on facebook...
 
2012-11-21 10:18:00 AM
This isn't even entertaining in a train-wreck kinda way any more. Now it's just sad.
 
2012-11-21 10:18:18 AM
Well, there you have it. Obama has enough dirt on the entire intelligence community that they'll cover his ass no matter what.

/This is what Republicans actually believe
 
2012-11-21 10:19:55 AM
Fox News was told by one source that Clapper, in a classified session on Thursday, was "unequivocal, and without hesitation insisted the changes were made outside the Intelligence community. He didn't know who but was emphatic he would find out."

who told clapper to lie?
 
2012-11-21 10:21:07 AM
So two months of explaining has them finally getting some of the facts right. But nothing will stop them from trying to make it into a scandal.
 
2012-11-21 10:21:42 AM
Protecting American spies? Republicans must be flummoxed.
 
2012-11-21 10:21:55 AM

colon_pow: Fox News was told by one source that Clapper, in a classified session on Thursday, was "unequivocal, and without hesitation insisted the changes were made outside the Intelligence community. He didn't know who but was emphatic he would find out."

who told clapper to lie?


More importantly, who leaked the proceedings of a classified meeting?
 
2012-11-21 10:21:56 AM
"...the talking points were amended to protect classified sources of information..."

What part of this don't the repubs understand? Don't they realize that by pursuing this faux scandal they are aiding and abetting the enemy? Just how much treasonous behavior are we obliged to accept from the repubs before they can be taken to task? At this point, "party before country" is putting it mildly.
 
2012-11-21 10:22:04 AM

PanicMan: This isn't even entertaining in a train-wreck kinda way any more. Now it's just sad.


Especially if you're said spy having his finger nails ripped out before being shot in the back of the head because of the GOP.
 
2012-11-21 10:23:29 AM
McCain looks like even more of an asshole now, it's like he invested in real-estate in September 2008
 
2012-11-21 10:24:51 AM

born_yesterday: colon_pow: Fox News was told by one source that Clapper, in a classified session on Thursday, was "unequivocal, and without hesitation insisted the changes were made outside the Intelligence community. He didn't know who but was emphatic he would find out."

who told clapper to lie?

More importantly, who leaked the proceedings of a classified meeting?


And since when does one unnamed source past scrutiny to the point that you can publish it as fact? Usually if you have one anonymous source you don't publish it, you use it as an angle to find corroborating evidence.
 
2012-11-21 10:25:09 AM
They really are going to follow Issa's lead and out American intelligence operatives in their quest to down Obama. They have turned treasonous.
 
2012-11-21 10:25:25 AM

colon_pow: Fox News was told by one source that Clapper, in a classified session on Thursday, was "unequivocal, and without hesitation insisted the changes were made outside the Intelligence community. He didn't know who but was emphatic he would find out."

who told clapper to lie?


Duh. Soros.

Think!
 
2012-11-21 10:25:56 AM

unlikely: Also... when the current Republican leadership start showing some outrage for well-documented outright lies that were told intentionally and led directly to the deaths of 4500 Americans and god knows how many others, THEN they'll have a little credibility; until then they really ought to STFU and reflect on where they went so far off the rails.

/hint: Grover Norquist and Pat Robertson


YEAH! And so stop asking inconvienient questions about why the Obama Administration sent its mouth piece to five morning news shows wioth a bald faced lie of a story, because IRAQ, or something.

Until then? STFU, you hear?

rolls eyes.
 
2012-11-21 10:27:43 AM

halfof33: unlikely: Also... when the current Republican leadership start showing some outrage for well-documented outright lies that were told intentionally and led directly to the deaths of 4500 Americans and god knows how many others, THEN they'll have a little credibility; until then they really ought to STFU and reflect on where they went so far off the rails.

/hint: Grover Norquist and Pat Robertson

YEAH! And so stop asking inconvienient questions about why the Obama Administration sent its mouth piece to five morning news shows wioth a bald faced lie of a story, because IRAQ, or something.

Until then? STFU, you hear?

rolls eyes.


1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-11-21 10:28:01 AM
So Republicans are all whiny, cowardly little biatches who would rather see the country burn than let a black man be president? Got it.

/How's that "taking back the country" thing working for you pussies?
 
2012-11-21 10:30:39 AM

unlikely: mrshowrules: unlikely: Also... when the current Republican leadership start showing some outrage for well-documented outright lies that were told intentionally and led directly to the deaths of 4500 Americans and god knows how many others, THEN they'll have a little credibility; until then they really ought to STFU and reflect on where they went so far off the rails.

/hint: Grover Norquist and Pat Robertson

To use a party analogy:

S. Rice lied about the the desert she brought being homemade (because she was told it was)

C. Rice lied about whether not the punch was poisoned

Nice. Brilliant. Smart AND funny.

I will likely quote that to my derpiest friends on facebook...


It might need some work. After all, Condi was actually in charge of the punch. Susan didn't even have to bring dessert.
 
2012-11-21 10:31:14 AM
I like openness and transparency, but when dealing with international security issues, it seems pretty obvious that you would hold some details back if the release of those details could compromise an ongoing search. It's like this is the first time anyone implied that the government might hide something if it's part of CIA operations abroad.
 
2012-11-21 10:33:28 AM

halfof33: unlikely: Also... when the current Republican leadership start showing some outrage for well-documented outright lies that were told intentionally and led directly to the deaths of 4500 Americans and god knows how many others, THEN they'll have a little credibility; until then they really ought to STFU and reflect on where they went so far off the rails.

/hint: Grover Norquist and Pat Robertson

YEAH! And so stop asking inconvienient questions about why the Obama Administration sent its mouth piece to five morning news shows wioth a bald faced lie of a story, because IRAQ, or something.

Until then? STFU, you hear?

rolls eyes.


This is as much of a scandal as Obama's birth certificate.
 
2012-11-21 10:34:00 AM
n'est pas une poutrage?


seattletimes.com
 
2012-11-21 10:34:29 AM

Bloody William: I like openness and transparency, but when dealing with international security issues, it seems pretty obvious that you would hold some details back if the release of those details could compromise an ongoing search. It's like this is the first time anyone implied that the government might hide something if it's part of CIA operations abroad.


At what point in the history of earth should Michelle Bachmann be given any secret that matters about anything.
 
2012-11-21 10:35:18 AM

cubic_spleen: So Republicans are all whiny, cowardly little biatches who would rather see the country burn than let a black man be president? Got it.

/How's that "taking back the country" thing working for you pussies?


Admiistration waterboy contradicts testimony? Well that ends that then!

www.jocaonstuff.com

Not even the bullshiat story about the web video? Oh.... especially not that!

Yes sir. Checks and balances? Forget it, Obama's black or something. I read it on Fark.
 
2012-11-21 10:35:56 AM

colon_pow: Fox News was told by one source that Clapper, in a classified session on Thursday, was "unequivocal, and without hesitation insisted the changes were made outside the Intelligence community. He didn't know who but was emphatic he would find out."

who told clapper to lie?


Who believes FoxNews' anonymous 'one source'? Idiots, that's who.
 
2012-11-21 10:36:50 AM
Wow. You farktards will believe *anything* the intelligence folks say if it's good for your Obamessiah. If it isn't, then they're evil.

It's farking obvious what happened. They didn't need "spies" to tell them it was a coordinated assault. They farking could see it on the drone feed. There are no spies to protect.

What you have here is the "modified limited hangout". They are making up lies to cover for their initial lie that it was a video that triggered the assault. IT WAS NOT. It was an Al Quada attack, it was obvious to everyone involved, but it was embarrassing to the Obamessiah to have a terrorist attack just before the election. And it reveals how they left our embassey guys out hanging in the breeze. For political expediency.
 
2012-11-21 10:36:51 AM

HulkHands: unlikely: And still, my mind boggles at trying to imagine the head-exploding outrage that would have happened had he actually discussed real operational intelligence in a press conference while keeping it secret was still valuable.

Well, Republicans already leaked the location of the annex while on broadcast television


The annex was attacked as well as the consulate on September 11th.
 
2012-11-21 10:38:30 AM
Well now they'll pivot to outing the spies themselves, they've done it before.
 
2012-11-21 10:40:04 AM
You lost the election, assholes, get over it.
 
2012-11-21 10:40:19 AM
 
2012-11-21 10:41:40 AM
I thought giving someone althered "facts" to present to the U.N. and the American people would be the #1 qualification for a person to be Secretary of State by Republican standards.
www.phantomreport.com
farm3.staticflickr.com
 
2012-11-21 10:42:30 AM

halfof33: cubic_spleen: So Republicans are all whiny, cowardly little biatches who would rather see the country burn than let a black man be president? Got it.

/How's that "taking back the country" thing working for you pussies?

Admiistration waterboy contradicts testimony? Well that ends that then!

[www.jocaonstuff.com image 225x300]

Not even the bullshiat story about the web video? Oh.... especially not that!

Yes sir. Checks and balances? Forget it, Obama's black or something. I read it on Fark.


2003 called--it wants its feigned patriotism back.
 
2012-11-21 10:42:40 AM

mark12A: Wow. You farktards will believe *anything* the intelligence folks say if it's good for your Obamessiah. If it isn't, then they're evil.

It's farking obvious what happened. They didn't need "spies" to tell them it was a coordinated assault. They farking could see it on the drone feed. There are no spies to protect.

What you have here is the "modified limited hangout". They are making up lies to cover for their initial lie that it was a video that triggered the assault. IT WAS NOT. It was an Al Quada attack, it was obvious to everyone involved, but it was embarrassing to the Obamessiah to have a terrorist attack just before the election. And it reveals how they left our embassey guys out hanging in the breeze. For political expediency.


You'll believe anything, including conspiracy theories, so long as it supports your fantasy that Obama is incompetent.
 
2012-11-21 10:42:51 AM

TFerWannaBe: halfof33: unlikely: Also... when the current Republican leadership start showing some outrage for well-documented outright lies that were told intentionally and led directly to the deaths of 4500 Americans and god knows how many others, THEN they'll have a little credibility; until then they really ought to STFU and reflect on where they went so far off the rails.

/hint: Grover Norquist and Pat Robertson

YEAH! And so stop asking inconvienient questions about why the Obama Administration sent its mouth piece to five morning news shows wioth a bald faced lie of a story, because IRAQ, or something.

Until then? STFU, you hear?

rolls eyes.

This is as much of a scandal as Obama's birth certificate.


You know what was a bigger scandal, when Obama didn't wear a tie in the Oval Office because at least this was something that actually happened.
 
2012-11-21 10:43:14 AM

mark12A: ies" to tell them it was a coordinated assault. They farking could see it on the drone feed. There are no spies to protect.

What you have here is the "modified limited hangout".


Using "spy lingo" is cruise control for credibility. i always trust random internet dudes when it comes to whats in the best interest of our national security.
 
2012-11-21 10:43:56 AM
3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-11-21 10:44:38 AM
Can we stop the links to FOX, please?
/Thank you.
 
2012-11-21 10:44:45 AM
Obamessiah

Wow, you are a real toolbeat.
 
2012-11-21 10:45:38 AM
"I did not let them 4 die" Obama

I went to bed for the 8 hrs they were attacked
 
2012-11-21 10:46:17 AM

mark12A: It's farking obvious what happened. They didn't need "spies" to tell them it was a coordinated assault. They farking could see it on the drone feed. There are no spies to protect.


They need spies to ID and find the attackers. No scandal. Not for you.
 
2012-11-21 10:46:25 AM
Hey, so why is Benghazi impeachment-worthy and the various attacks on US embassies between 2002-08 not?
 
2012-11-21 10:47:07 AM

wongway: "I did not let them 4 die" Obama

I went to bed for the 8 hrs they were attacked


1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-11-21 10:47:13 AM

Raharu: halfof33: 

[imageshack.us image 300x300]


You get the from 4chan, sport shirt?

But remember it was the VIDEO that caused it, that is the story.

The fact that an adminstration mouth piece got on TV and lent the story credibility in no way had any impact at all.

NONE
 
2012-11-21 10:48:48 AM

mark12A:

What you have here is the "modified limited hangout". They are making up lies to cover for their initial lie that it was a video that triggered the assault. IT WAS NOT. It was an Al Quada attack, it was obvious to everyone involved, but it was embarrassing to the Obamessiah to have a terrorist attack just before the election. And it reveals how they left our embassey guys out hanging in the breeze. For political expediency.


Yeah, because having a consulate overrun and an ambassador murdered by a disorganized mob of random twats is much less embarrassing.

With insight like that, you should be at Langley.
 
2012-11-21 10:49:04 AM
And conservatives continue to furiously jerk their micropenises about the death of four Americans.
 
2012-11-21 10:49:45 AM

stpickrell: Hey, so why is Benghazi impeachment-worthy and the various attacks on US embassies between 2002-08 not?


Pick a reason: the President is a Democrat who otherwise has been strong on national defense, or the President is black.
 
2012-11-21 10:49:54 AM

halfof33:

Admiistration waterboy contradicts testimony?
Well that ends that then!
Not even the bullshiat story about the web video?
Oh.... especially not that!


Burma-Shave!

Yes sir. Checks and balances?
Forget it, Obama's black or something.
I read it on Fark.


Burma-Shave!

/outrage poetry.....
 
2012-11-21 10:50:16 AM

unlikely: mrshowrules: unlikely: Also... when the current Republican leadership start showing some outrage for well-documented outright lies that were told intentionally and led directly to the deaths of 4500 Americans and god knows how many others, THEN they'll have a little credibility; until then they really ought to STFU and reflect on where they went so far off the rails.

/hint: Grover Norquist and Pat Robertson

To use a party analogy:

S. Rice lied about the the desert she brought being homemade (because she was told it was)

C. Rice lied about whether not the punch was poisoned

Nice. Brilliant. Smart AND funny.

I will likely quote that to my derpiest friends on facebook...


spell dessert correctly when you do. Because I was wondering where the sand came into play.

Remember kids: "Dessert has two S-es because you always want seconds."
 
2012-11-21 10:50:29 AM

stpickrell: Hey, so why is Benghazi impeachment-worthy and the various attacks on US embassies between 2002-08 not?


Bush = Jesus Christ
 
2012-11-21 10:51:20 AM

Jackson Herring: And conservatives continue to furiously jerk their micropenises about the death of four Americans.


Photographic proof....

4.bp.blogspot.com

Do not shake Romney's right hand.
 
2012-11-21 10:52:35 AM
They are trying to hype this up to counter the wreckage of their 'democrats are weak on defense' meme the GOP has pushed for decades.

This is why this is a major scandal, but all the attacks under Bush were not.
 
2012-11-21 10:53:31 AM

neenerist: /outrage poetry.....


Baa baa baa
baaa baa Obama.

Beach Boys Fan Boy Music.

Can we please stop talking about this yet? LOLZ!
 
2012-11-21 10:54:38 AM

mrshowrules: It might need some work. After all, Condi was actually in charge of the punch. Susan didn't even have to bring dessert.


S. Rice told everyone her sister's pie was homemade, because her sister said it was.

C. Rice lied about whether the punch was poisoned.

I don't know. I'll probably tweak it to fit the freeper cousin or uncle. Either way, high five and kudos to you.
 
2012-11-21 10:56:43 AM

Jake Havechek: stpickrell: Hey, so why is Benghazi impeachment-worthy and the various attacks on US embassies between 2002-08 not?

Bush = Jesus Christ


I guess then Carter, Clinton = Jesus Christ? Right, Little Bo Peep?
 
2012-11-21 10:56:59 AM

halfof33: neenerist: /outrage poetry.....

Baa baa baa
baaa baa Obama.

Beach Boys Fan Boy Music.

Can we please stop talking about this yet? LOLZ!


It is amusing that the right continuously confusing people mocking them as calls for and end to the 'discussion'.

By all means, keep it up.
 
2012-11-21 10:59:13 AM

amiable: This thread is worth it only for the amusement I am getting laughing at your posts. Please proceed.


You are laughing at a link to a summary of protests at US Embassies?

OH, OK then. Super post!

/I get that there are Obama fanboys here, but this thread is filled with liberal morans.
 
2012-11-21 11:00:02 AM

theknuckler_33: It is amusing that the right continuously confusing people mocking them as calls for and end to the 'discussion'.


Their advantage is never stooping to content. Olympian laughter; it's how they roll.
 
2012-11-21 11:00:48 AM

mark12A: Wow. It was an Al Quada attack, it was obvious to everyone involved, but it was embarrassing to the Obamessiah to have a terrorist attack just before the election. And it reveals how they left our embassey guys out hanging in the breeze. For political expediency.


...is that you, couchgnome?
 
2012-11-21 11:01:19 AM

HotWingConspiracy: mark12A: It's farking obvious what happened. They didn't need "spies" to tell them it was a coordinated assault. They farking could see it on the drone feed. There are no spies to protect.

They need spies to ID and find the attackers. No scandal. Not for you.


You've obviously not seen the part of the video where all of the terrorists raised their ID cards to the drone cameras. It was like doing "the wave" at a stadium. We already knew who they were. There was no need for spies, or for their protection.
 
2012-11-21 11:01:47 AM

halfof33: amiable: This thread is worth it only for the amusement I am getting laughing at your posts. Please proceed.

You are laughing at a link to a summary of protests at US Embassies?

OH, OK then. Super post!

/I get that there are Obama fanboys here, but this thread is filled with liberal morans.


Could you please explain why this is a scandal? I mean it, talk to me as if I were a child (because I'm a liberal and dumb so haha) and walk me through the logic that makes the Benghazi attacks and the administration's initial confusion as to the details during the attacks and eventual assertion of an independent terrorist attack something over which I should be outraged.

Please, show me what makes this so bad and what they did so wrong.
 
2012-11-21 11:04:25 AM
The good part about this scandal is that you can ignore pretty much anyone that brings it up as a crackpot nutter.

"Did you hear about the solyndra-acorn-benghazi-dijon-conspiracy? "
 
2012-11-21 11:05:39 AM
halfof33:
imageshack.us


If the GOP had ANYTHING.

ANYTHING. They would start impeachment.

They don't. So they just keep chugging along with the fake outrage machine.
 
2012-11-21 11:06:32 AM

Headso: The good part about this scandal is that you can ignore pretty much anyone that brings it up as a crackpot nutter.

"Did you hear about the solyndra-acorn-benghazi-dijon-conspiracy? "


you forgot arugula
 
2012-11-21 11:07:12 AM
Why do Republicans hate America?
 
2012-11-21 11:07:38 AM

More_Like_A_Stain: HotWingConspiracy: mark12A: It's farking obvious what happened. They didn't need "spies" to tell them it was a coordinated assault. They farking could see it on the drone feed. There are no spies to protect.

They need spies to ID and find the attackers. No scandal. Not for you.

You've obviously not seen the part of the video where all of the terrorists raised their ID cards to the drone cameras. It was like doing "the wave" at a stadium. We already knew who they were. There was no need for spies, or for their protection.


You're also missing the part where we have surveillance drones patrolling every street corner of the world at any given moment, WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!!
 
2012-11-21 11:11:19 AM
Let's make this fun:

What do you guys think the next phony scandal is going to be?
 
2012-11-21 11:11:33 AM
FOX News Channel just had a NEWS ALERT! because Lindsay Graham(R- whiny crybaby) sent a letter to Obama demanding the "facts on Benghazi".

Bret Baier is such a smarmy dick.
 
2012-11-21 11:11:46 AM

mark12A: Wow. You farktards will believe *anything* the intelligence folks say if it's good for your Obamessiah. If it isn't, then they're evil.

It's farking obvious what happened. They didn't need "spies" to tell them it was a coordinated assault. They farking could see it on the drone feed. There are no spies to protect.

What you have here is the "modified limited hangout". They are making up lies to cover for their initial lie that it was a video that triggered the assault. IT WAS NOT. It was an Al Quada attack, it was obvious to everyone involved, but it was embarrassing to the Obamessiah to have a terrorist attack just before the election. And it reveals how they left our embassey guys out hanging in the breeze. For political expediency.


lol whoa. And Obama won. What are you Contards gonna do now??
 
2012-11-21 11:12:15 AM

halfof33: Remember folks, posting actual links and facts (like the fact that Rice flasely claimed that the attacks were the result of an anti-Islamic video which served to inflame anti-American sentiment in Muslim countries) is trolling.


So explain to us why we should be outraged and why Obama should be impeached over it.

/I'm waiting...
 
2012-11-21 11:12:27 AM

Mrtraveler01: Let's make this fun:

What do you guys think the next phony scandal is going to be?


Obama destroyed Twinkies because he's a seekrit muslin.
 
2012-11-21 11:12:39 AM
The new 9/11 Truthers are just as crazy as the old Truthers.
 
2012-11-21 11:12:41 AM
 
2012-11-21 11:13:59 AM

wongway: "I did not let them 4 die" Obama

I went to bed for the 8 hrs they were attacked


Forever???
 
2012-11-21 11:14:12 AM

Fart_Machine: The new 9/11 Truthers are just as crazy as the old Truthers.


They're a little worse.

Old 9/11 Truthers: Crazy conspiracy theory AND THE ADMINISTRATION IS GOING TO WAR OVER IT!

New 9/11 Truthers: Crazy conspiracy theory AND THE ADMINISTRATION ISN'T GOING TO WAR OVER IT!
 
2012-11-21 11:14:57 AM
Whitewater 2: Electric Boogaloo


by the way, no crime was committed in the Whitewater debacle
 
2012-11-21 11:14:59 AM

Mrtraveler01: Let's make this fun:

What do you guys think the next phony scandal is going to be?


I'm keeping an eye on Gaza.
 
2012-11-21 11:15:24 AM

halfof33: Remember folks, posting actual links and facts (like the fact that Rice flasely claimed that the attacks were the result of an anti-Islamic video which served to inflame anti-American sentiment in Muslim countries) is trolling.


What is trolling is claiming the parenthetical statement is a fact. She did her job and gave the statements she was authorized to make. Period.
 
2012-11-21 11:15:32 AM
Even in the assumption that the White House was "lying" about the circumstances behind Benghazi, what farking difference does it make?
 
2012-11-21 11:16:03 AM
I say they suggest an improper relationship between obama and that hot asian prime minister. I'll be in my bunk.
 
2012-11-21 11:16:49 AM

halfof33: Remember folks, posting actual links and facts (like the fact that Rice our intelligence community, in order to protect assests flasely claimed that the attacks were the result of an anti-Islamic video which served to inflame anti-American sentiment in Muslim countries) is trolling


Fixed. No scandal. Not for you.
 
2012-11-21 11:16:58 AM
Sad to say, even the Right-Winged Loons (A common sub-species here in Alberta) have their panties in a bunch over this 'scandal'. Recently made a comment on the local rag site and got jumped by Fox News herp, derp and potato. In that order.
 
2012-11-21 11:18:07 AM

Mrtraveler01: So explain to us why we should be outraged and why Obama should be impeached over it.

/I'm waiting...


This is the part of the thread where you post the proof where I said he ought to be impeached over it.

"I'm Waiting."

/I get it, people don't care that administration let a grossly inaccurate story get published, which served to further inflame the situation. Stop asking questions people, the Obama will make it all better.
//farking sheep
 
2012-11-21 11:19:20 AM

halfof33: /I get it, people don't care that administration let a grossly inaccurate story get published, which served to further inflame the situation. Stop asking questions people, the Obama will make it all better.


Bloody William: Could you please explain why this is a scandal? I mean it, talk to me as if I were a child (because I'm a liberal and dumb so haha) and walk me through the logic that makes the Benghazi attacks and the administration's initial confusion as to the details during the attacks and eventual assertion of an independent terrorist attack something over which I should be outraged.

Please, show me what makes this so bad and what they did so wrong.


Come on. Walk me through it. This isn't obvious to my tiny liberal mind, so you need to explain it to me slowly.
 
2012-11-21 11:19:30 AM
Let me explain this one more time:

Individuals and groups affiliated with al Qaeda publicly took credit for the attack in the immediate aftermath. Any eleven year old with internet access could find out this super-private state secret; so spare us the spook spin on this clusterfark.

Even if we were to accept your James Bond story, tell us whose bright idea it was to use some poor schmuck and his youtube video as the scapegoat for your tard-handed opus. I'm sure he takes pride in being an unwilling patriot and martyr for your deep-cover operatives who cleverly deduced what the rest of the world already knew.
 
2012-11-21 11:20:34 AM

halfof33: Mrtraveler01: So explain to us why we should be outraged and why Obama should be impeached over it.

/I'm waiting...

This is the part of the thread where you post the proof where I said he ought to be impeached over it.

"I'm Waiting."

/I get it, people don't care that administration let a grossly inaccurate story get published, which served to further inflame the situation. Stop asking questions people, the Obama will make it all better.
//farking sheep


It further inflamed the situation in what way? What further incidents can be directly linked to Rice's statement?
 
2012-11-21 11:21:36 AM

wongway: "I did not let them 4 die" Obama

I went to bed for the 8 hrs they were attacked


Went to bed? Not even close. He ate Iranian caviar from Reggie Love's butthole while MOOOOOChele said (and I totes believe this is her exact pattern of speech), "there be 4 fewer honkeys in the muthaland, y'all biatch asses!"

It is known.
 
2012-11-21 11:22:19 AM

Jake Havechek: FOX News Channel just had a NEWS ALERT! because Lindsay Graham(R- whiny crybaby) sent a letter to Obama demanding the "facts on Benghazi".

Bret Baier is such a smarmy dick.


There are questions to be answered here. Which terminal and what Word Processing software was used to soften the language in the initial Intelligence talking points to protect classified operations?

Why was the White House not consulted on these particular changes? Why wasn't the GOP warned that they were farking a chicken and would look like complete idiots if they kept trying to make this a scandal?

We need answers.
 
2012-11-21 11:23:04 AM

theknuckler_33: What is trolling is claiming the parenthetical statement is a fact. She did her job and gave the statements she was authorized to make. Period.


And I'm pretty sure I pointed out that she was just the administrations mouthpiece, right? And that the adminstration had more than enough information before she was sent on her little errands to stop her from repeating it.

You think this is about RICE????? Mind Boggles.

/Ignore... (just kidding, I'm not a complete pussy)
 
2012-11-21 11:23:18 AM

Polly Ester: Let me explain this one more time:

Individuals and groups affiliated with al Qaeda publicly took credit for the attack in the immediate aftermath. Any eleven year old with internet access could find out this super-private state secret; so spare us the spook spin on this clusterfark.

Even if we were to accept your James Bond story, tell us whose bright idea it was to use some poor schmuck and his youtube video as the scapegoat for your tard-handed opus. I'm sure he takes pride in being an unwilling patriot and martyr for your deep-cover operatives who cleverly deduced what the rest of the world already knew.


And there are those that wonder why the GOP loses the educated votes.
 
2012-11-21 11:23:30 AM

mark12A: Obamessiah


*chug*
 
2012-11-21 11:24:16 AM

halfof33: theknuckler_33: What is trolling is claiming the parenthetical statement is a fact. She did her job and gave the statements she was authorized to make. Period.

And I'm pretty sure I pointed out that she was just the administrations mouthpiece, right? And that the adminstration had more than enough information before she was sent on her little errands to stop her from repeating it.

You think this is about RICE????? Mind Boggles.

/Ignore... (just kidding, I'm not a complete pussy)


She had the same information congress had, which makes their outrage hilarious. Maybe they should skip more briefings so they can hold more angry press conferences about how there aren't enough briefings.
 
2012-11-21 11:24:26 AM

Mrtraveler01: Let's make this fun:

What do you guys think the next phony scandal is going to be?


Is there any way to merge Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Solyndra and the bust of Churchill into some sort of crazy ass Voltron?
 
2012-11-21 11:24:26 AM

halfof33: which served to further inflame the situation.


That's a weak conclusion. The existence of the video was already widely known and there is literally nothing to suggest that Rice's TV appearances led to or exacerbated other protests.
 
2012-11-21 11:24:37 AM

halfof33: Remember folks, posting actual links and facts (like the fact that Rice flasely claimed that the attacks were the result of an anti-Islamic video which served to inflame anti-American sentiment in Muslim countries) is trolling.


Nice work McGruff, this new find should blow the case wide open.
 
2012-11-21 11:24:52 AM

Polly Ester: Let me explain this one more time:

Individuals and groups affiliated with al Qaeda publicly took credit for the attack in the immediate aftermath. Any eleven year old with internet access could find out this super-private state secret; so spare us the spook spin on this clusterfark.

Even if we were to accept your James Bond story, tell us whose bright idea it was to use some poor schmuck and his youtube video as the scapegoat for your tard-handed opus. I'm sure he takes pride in being an unwilling patriot and martyr for your deep-cover operatives who cleverly deduced what the rest of the world already knew.


Protip: Not everybody who claims responsibility for terrorist attacks are actually behind those terrorist attacks.
 
2012-11-21 11:25:07 AM

YoungSwedishBlonde: More_Like_A_Stain: HotWingConspiracy: mark12A: It's farking obvious what happened. They didn't need "spies" to tell them it was a coordinated assault. They farking could see it on the drone feed. There are no spies to protect.

They need spies to ID and find the attackers. No scandal. Not for you.

You've obviously not seen the part of the video where all of the terrorists raised their ID cards to the drone cameras. It was like doing "the wave" at a stadium. We already knew who they were. There was no need for spies, or for their protection.

You're also missing the part where we have surveillance drones patrolling every street corner of the world at any given moment, WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!!


imgs.xkcd.com 
Obligatory
 
2012-11-21 11:25:25 AM

Polly Ester: Let me explain this one more time:

Individuals and groups affiliated with al Qaeda publicly took credit for the attack in the immediate aftermath. Any eleven year old with internet access could find out this super-private state secret; so spare us the spook spin on this clusterfark.

Even if we were to accept your James Bond story, tell us whose bright idea it was to use some poor schmuck and his youtube video as the scapegoat for your tard-handed opus. I'm sure he takes pride in being an unwilling patriot and martyr for your deep-cover operatives who cleverly deduced what the rest of the world already knew.


So we should take their word for it and stop investigating how it was planned and what groups they were working with within the country. Gotcha. Polly Ester believes al Qaeda are infallible bearers of truth
 
2012-11-21 11:26:51 AM

Polly Ester: Let me explain this one more time:

Individuals and groups affiliated with al Qaeda publicly took credit for the attack in the immediate aftermath. Any eleven year old with internet access could find out this super-private state secret; so spare us the spook spin on this clusterfark.

Even if we were to accept your James Bond story, tell us whose bright idea it was to use some poor schmuck and his youtube video as the scapegoat for your tard-handed opus. I'm sure he takes pride in being an unwilling patriot and martyr for your deep-cover operatives who cleverly deduced what the rest of the world already knew.


Fun fact: A Palestinian liberation group was the first group to take responsibility for 9/11/01. Taking credit for actions doesn't mean shiat until vetted by intelligence there, Chief Chucklef*ck.

And the terrorists who were captured by Libya in the aftermath did confess to using the other existing protests in San'aa and Cairo over the video as a cover for their attack.
 
2012-11-21 11:30:01 AM
The true believers are still trying to squeeze a scandal out of this. Hilariously pitiful.
 
2012-11-21 11:30:51 AM

Polly Ester: Even if we were to accept your James Bond story, tell us whose bright idea it was to use some poor schmuck and his youtube video as the scapegoat for your tard-handed opus. I'm sure he takes pride in being an unwilling patriot and martyr for your deep-cover operatives who cleverly deduced what the rest of the world already knew.


I do enjoy this part of the conspiracy theory.

You see, the Obama administration (maybe Obama himself?) scoured youtube for anti-Islamic media and settled on this film as the cover for their nefarious plot.
 
2012-11-21 11:31:39 AM

halfof33: theknuckler_33: What is trolling is claiming the parenthetical statement is a fact. She did her job and gave the statements she was authorized to make. Period.

And I'm pretty sure I pointed out that she was just the administrations mouthpiece, right? And that the adminstration had more than enough information before she was sent on her little errands to stop her from repeating it.

You think this is about RICE????? Mind Boggles.

/Ignore... (just kidding, I'm not a complete pussy)


You aren't making a very cogent argument about what this is 'about'. Somehow an attack on our consulate killing 4 Americans is much more damaging for Obama politically if it resulted from an organized al-queada terrorist attack than if it were the result of a spontaneous riot, therefore this is why the Obama admin pushed Rice into making those statements? That's a highly strained premise is the reason why people are mocking you. Where do you get this notion that the American people went "oh, 4 americans killed by angry mob... ok. Sad, but whaddya gonna do" but would have gone "4 americans killed by organized al-queda terrorist attack! DAMN YOU FARTBONGO!!!!".

Dude, that doesn't make a farking lick of sense. Most people are upset about 4 americans dead. Not the method by which that happened. So, you invented this premise that Obama's motive for *supposedly* changing the Rice talking points (which is disputed anyway) was to limit the political damage from a terrorist attack rather than a mob attack when there is literally nothing to indicate that a mob attack would have been any less damaging than the terrorist attack. You took what happened and invented a premise that allowed you to give an ulterior motive to something you think Obama did. That's pretty outrageously tenuous.
 
2012-11-21 11:32:29 AM
Governor William J. Le Petomane: [pointing to a member of his cabinet] I didn't get a "harrumph" out of that guy!
Hedley Lamarr: Give the Governor harrumph!
Politician: Harrumph!
Governor William J. Le Petomane: You watch your ass.
 
2012-11-21 11:35:03 AM

HulkHands: Polly Ester: Let me explain this one more time:

Individuals and groups affiliated with al Qaeda publicly took credit for the attack in the immediate aftermath. Any eleven year old with internet access could find out this super-private state secret; so spare us the spook spin on this clusterfark.

Even if we were to accept your James Bond story, tell us whose bright idea it was to use some poor schmuck and his youtube video as the scapegoat for your tard-handed opus. I'm sure he takes pride in being an unwilling patriot and martyr for your deep-cover operatives who cleverly deduced what the rest of the world already knew.

So we should take their word for it and stop investigating how it was planned and what groups they were working with within the country. Gotcha. Polly Ester believes al Qaeda are infallible bearers of truth


Polly's also a firm believer in violating the terms of probation without repercussion.
 
2012-11-21 11:36:41 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: Jackson Herring: And conservatives continue to furiously jerk their micropenises about the death of four Americans.

Photographic proof....

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 300x400]

Do not shake Romney's right hand.



His Mormon Magic UnderwearTM was binding up in the nether regions.
 
2012-11-21 11:37:08 AM
Hey, all you reich-wing pieces of sh*t infesting this thread: prove that you're not just "performance-artist" trolls dragging down what used to be one of the top 100 websites in the world. If you really have something substantive, get the wastes of skin who represent you in Congress to start impeachment proceedings. It's so simple, even you fundamentally damaged individuals can understand that.

DO IT, MAGGOTS!
 
2012-11-21 11:37:22 AM
Was arresting the producer of that wacky movie trailer also part of the spy's cover story?
 
2012-11-21 11:42:20 AM
With FOX getting so much mileage, here's a picture of what rioters taking over government buildings look like.


i188.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-21 11:45:00 AM
Good luck with this GOP. This "scandal" you have created out of whole cloth is too complicated for your base to comprehend. You should hear the Limbots out here trying to push this line of crap, they can't keep it straight or make any solid point. Boil this down by a few degrees and push it again, this is a loser.

Or, just stick with "Obama is black", that is one your base can wrap its intellect around.
 
2012-11-21 11:47:07 AM

mark12A: Obamessiah


Drink!
 
2012-11-21 11:49:27 AM

mark12A: Wow. You farktards will believe *anything* the intelligence folks say if it's good for your Obamessiah. If it isn't, then they're evil.

It's farking obvious what happened. They didn't need "spies" to tell them it was a coordinated assault. They farking could see it on the drone feed. There are no spies to protect.

What you have here is the "modified limited hangout". They are making up lies to cover for their initial lie that it was a video that triggered the assault. IT WAS NOT. It was an Al Quada attack, it was obvious to everyone involved, but it was embarrassing to the Obamessiah to have a terrorist attack just before the election. And it reveals how they left our embassey guys out hanging in the breeze. For political expediency.


I gave up a long time ago trying to figure out who are the trolls and who are the genuine morons. Because what's the difference?
 
2012-11-21 11:51:38 AM

unexplained bacon: The true believers are still trying to squeeze a scandal out of this. Hilariously pitiful.


They have NOTHING else.

This is it for them so far...

This is the closest thing (Even though its fake outrage) that they have to the president doing anything remotely wrong.

It seems that we will be drinking fresh republican tears for months to come.
 
2012-11-21 12:02:29 PM

Polly Ester: al Qaeda publicly took credit


always reliable...

Polly Ester: unwilling patriot and martyr


who was in violation of his probation...

img.yaboon.com
 
2012-11-21 12:06:47 PM

Mugato: I gave up a long time ago trying to figure out who are the trolls and who are the genuine morons. Because what's the difference?


The trolls are smart enough to know what they're saying is bullshiat.

But stupid enough to say it anyway.
 
2012-11-21 12:11:31 PM
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2012-11-21 12:13:34 PM
The only scandal here is the lengths to which the conservatives will go to manufacture a scandal. The longer it goes, the more of a joke punch line it is.

Benghazi is already closing in on potato.
 
2012-11-21 12:15:51 PM
Latest: Fiona Apple's dying dog is a cover for the media not to cover Benghazi.

I wish I were kidding.

i.imgur.com
 
2012-11-21 12:24:48 PM

ImpendingCynic: Protecting American spies? Republicans must be flummoxed.


THIS.

/I might not like military hero-worship, but FFS you do not get people killed to score points you farkwits.
 
2012-11-21 12:26:50 PM
The GOP has never let the well being of our national security get in the way of a their political hackery.
 
2012-11-21 12:37:40 PM

PsiChick: ImpendingCynic: Protecting American spies? Republicans must be flummoxed.

THIS.

/I might not like military hero-worship, but FFS you do not get people killed to score points you farkwits.


B-b-b-bu-bu-bu-but Bush.
 
2012-11-21 12:38:43 PM

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: The GOP has never let the well being of our national security get in the way of a their political hackery.


I'm starting to think the real conspiracy is a massive training exercise for our intelligence community to deeply ingrain one lesson: NEVER TRUST REPUBLICANS, NOT IN CONGRESS, NOT IN THE MEDIA, WITH CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. They're a bunch of craven, cowardly traitors.
 
2012-11-21 12:39:01 PM

mark12A: Obamessiah


www.trilobite.org
Whatever you say, dimwit.
 
2012-11-21 12:39:26 PM

mark12A: Wow. You farktards will believe *anything* the intelligence folks say if it's good for your Obamessiah. If it isn't, then they're evil.

It's farking obvious what happened. They didn't need "spies" to tell them it was a coordinated assault. They farking could see it on the drone feed. There are no spies to protect.

What you have here is the "modified limited hangout". They are making up lies to cover for their initial lie that it was a video that triggered the assault. IT WAS NOT. It was an Al Quada attack, it was obvious to everyone involved, but it was embarrassing to the Obamessiah to have a terrorist attack just before the election. And it reveals how they left our embassey guys out hanging in the breeze. For political expediency.


Except for everything you just said is wrong. It was no al Qaida, it was a group called Ansar al Shariah. I know they both have vaguely muslimy/araby names, but that doesn't mean they are interchangeable.

And yes, by all accounts, they mounted the attack in response to the video.
 
2012-11-21 12:46:17 PM

Mugato: I gave up a long time ago trying to figure out who are the trolls and who are the genuine morons. Because what's the difference?


blogs.suntimes.com

Give 'em up to the Almighty
 
2012-11-21 12:49:25 PM

Bloody William: Come on. Walk me through it. This isn't obvious to my tiny liberal mind, so you need to explain it to me slowly.


It's very simple.

Obama is black.
And a Democrat.
He is willing to let Bush's billionaire tax cuts expire.
He is also, horror of horrors, a bit of an environmentalist.
And rather popular with the general public.
And he did the unthinkable: got Bin Laden.
He is a living, breathing affront to the right wing information bubble, and the derp-wingers who thrive there.
His very existence puts the lie to everything they stand for.
So, Republicans wasted a lot of time, energy and money trying to stop him from being re-elected.
They spent the weeks before the election declaring themselves the winners, in spite of all evidence to the contrary..
Their loss was epic.
Their humiliation was televised.
And now their butthurt can be seen from orbit.

And that's what Benghazi is all about, Charlie Brown.
 
2012-11-21 12:59:10 PM
when she described the attack as spontaneous violence that grew out of protests of an anti-Islam film.

NO


SHE


DIDN'T


No, she didn't. Not at all. Not even in the slightest. If that's what you got from her statement, then your comprehension skills absolutely suck, and you need to have some serious talks not just with your schoolteachers, but your farking parents as well.

She said that there was a "spontaneous protest" that was "hijacked" by "extremists" who turned it into an "attack". These terrorists saw an opportunity and took advantage of it. By the end, it WASN'T a "protest" any more, but a terrorist attack. Unfortunately for you morons, it DID start out as a protest, and she said this from the beginning. SHe never said that the "protest" just turned into an attack, she pointed to the extremist element and specifically said that they hijacked it.

God, I didn't think that I could have any less respect for the entire political Right after their last 4 years, but now not only are they sleazy assholes, they are apparently too stupid to leave out in the rain unattended, you never know if they suddenly look up, forget to look back down, and drown in the street.
 
2012-11-21 01:04:27 PM

Ed Grubermann: mark12A: Obamessiah

[www.trilobite.org image 224x296]
Whatever you say, dimwit.


Projection. It's not just for IMAX anymore. It's all the Republicans do.
 
2012-11-21 01:10:35 PM

wongway: "I did not let them 4 die" Obama

I went to bed for the 8 hrs they were attacked


Best Part?

FOREVER
 
2012-11-21 01:10:51 PM

Mikey1969: when she described the attack as spontaneous violence that grew out of protests of an anti-Islam film.

NO


SHE


DIDN'T

No, she didn't. Not at all. Not even in the slightest. If that's what you got from her statement, then your comprehension skills absolutely suck, and you need to have some serious talks not just with your schoolteachers, but your farking parents as well.

She said that there was a "spontaneous protest" that was "hijacked" by "extremists" who turned it into an "attack". These terrorists saw an opportunity and took advantage of it. By the end, it WASN'T a "protest" any more, but a terrorist attack. Unfortunately for you morons, it DID start out as a protest, and she said this from the beginning. SHe never said that the "protest" just turned into an attack, she pointed to the extremist element and specifically said that they hijacked it.

God, I didn't think that I could have any less respect for the entire political Right after their last 4 years, but now not only are they sleazy assholes, they are apparently too stupid to leave out in the rain unattended, you never know if they suddenly look up, forget to look back down, and drown in the street.


The facts are out now and it's apparent that this isn't the scandal the RW wishes it was. You and I can see that but most GOP farkers only hear news coming from within the FOX reality.
RW farkers won't realize this scandal never happened and never will until that news has filtered through FOX et al. I'm sure they'll blame someone else for their massive flop.
 
2012-11-21 01:13:35 PM

HulkHands: MFAWG: The annex was attacked as well as the consulate on September 11th.

Yes, but it was still a secret "Other Government Agency" facility until the Republicans revealed it.


Yes, Republicans really are this stupid. This is the end result of years of anti-intellectualism and party sanctioned conspiracy theories. You now have Republican congressmen aiding and abetting the terrorists because they think our President is a bigger threat to America than the people who scaled the walls and killed our people.
 
2012-11-21 01:37:04 PM

stpickrell: Hey, so why is Benghazi impeachment-worthy and the various attacks on US embassies between 2002-08 not?


Because the president is a ni-BONG
 
2012-11-21 01:47:44 PM
So, if the CIA changed Rice's talking points to protect American spies... a-okay. If Obama changed Rice's talking points to protect American spies... BAD EVIL IMPEACH!

America hating Derpublicans....
 
2012-11-21 01:49:56 PM

HotWingConspiracy: Polly Ester: Even if we were to accept your James Bond story, tell us whose bright idea it was to use some poor schmuck and his youtube video as the scapegoat for your tard-handed opus. I'm sure he takes pride in being an unwilling patriot and martyr for your deep-cover operatives who cleverly deduced what the rest of the world already knew.

I do enjoy this part of the conspiracy theory.

You see, the Obama administration (maybe Obama himself?) scoured youtube for anti-Islamic media and settled on this film as the cover for their nefarious plot.


Furthermore Obama also used false flag operations for the video to cause riots all over the Middle East to cover up for this one.
 
2012-11-21 01:54:01 PM

Mikey1969: when she described the attack as spontaneous violence that grew out of protests of an anti-Islam film.

NO


SHE


DIDN'T

No, she didn't. Not at all. Not even in the slightest. If that's what you got from her statement, then your comprehension skills absolutely suck, and you need to have some serious talks not just with your schoolteachers, but your farking parents as well.

She said that there was a "spontaneous protest" that was "hijacked" by "extremists" who turned it into an "attack". These terrorists saw an opportunity and took advantage of it. By the end, it WASN'T a "protest" any more, but a terrorist attack. Unfortunately for you morons, it DID start out as a protest, and she said this from the beginning. SHe never said that the "protest" just turned into an attack, she pointed to the extremist element and specifically said that they hijacked it.

God, I didn't think that I could have any less respect for the entire political Right after their last 4 years, but now not only are they sleazy assholes, they are apparently too stupid to leave out in the rain unattended, you never know if they suddenly look up, forget to look back down, and drown in the street.


"This is a response to a hateful and offensive video that was widely disseminated throughout the Arab and Muslim world," Rice said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "Obviously our view is that there is absolutely no excuse for violence and what has happened is condemnable. But this is a spontaneous reaction to a video and it's not dissimilar but perhaps on a slightly larger scale than what we have seen in the past with the [Salman Rushdie's novel] 'Satanic Verses', with the [2006 Danish newspaper] cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad."
 
2012-11-21 02:00:08 PM

halfof33: "This is a response to a hateful and offensive video that was widely disseminated throughout the Arab and Muslim world," Rice said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "Obviously our view is that there is absolutely no excuse for violence and what has happened is condemnable. But this is a spontaneous reaction to a video and it's not dissimilar but perhaps on a slightly larger scale than what we have seen in the past with the [Salman Rushdie's novel] 'Satanic Verses', with the [2006 Danish newspaper] cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad."


GREGORY: The images as you well know are jarring to Americans watching all of this play out this week, and we'll share the map of all of this turmoil with our viewers to show the scale of it across not just the Arab world, but the entire Islamic world and flashpoints as well. In Egypt, of course, the protests outside the U.S. embassy there that Egyptian officials were slow to put down. This weekend in Pakistan, protests as well there. More anti-American rage. Also protests against the drone strikes. In Yemen, you also had arrests and some deaths outside of our U.S. embassy there. How much longer can Americans expect to see these troubling images and these protests go forward?

MS. RICE: Well, David, we can't predict with any certainty. But let's remember what has transpired over the last several days. This is a response to a hateful and offensive video that was widely disseminated throughout the Arab and Muslim world. Obviously, our view is that there is absolutely no excuse for violence and that-- what has happened is condemnable, but this is a-- a spontaneous reaction to a video, and it's not dissimilar but, perhaps, on a slightly larger scale than what we have seen in the past with The Satanic Verses with the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.

Gee, funny what a little context does...
 
2012-11-21 02:01:25 PM

halfof33: "This is a response to a hateful and offensive video that was widely disseminated throughout the Arab and Muslim world," Rice said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "Obviously our view is that there is absolutely no excuse for violence and what has happened is condemnable. But this is a spontaneous reaction to a video and it's not dissimilar but perhaps on a slightly larger scale than what we have seen in the past with the [Salman Rushdie's novel] 'Satanic Verses', with the [2006 Danish newspaper] cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad."


Where's the rest of it? She was only talking about the protest here, not the attack.
 
2012-11-21 02:25:08 PM
Alas, poor chicken...
 
2012-11-21 02:25:13 PM
looks like halfof33 = potato
 
2012-11-21 02:32:38 PM

Headso: looks like halfof33 = potato


halfof33 = POTAOWNED
 
2012-11-21 02:33:49 PM

emotion_lotion: Headso: looks like halfof33 = potato

halfof33 = POTAOWNED


halfof33 = POTATOWNED

/dammit forgot to carry the "t"
 
2012-11-21 03:24:46 PM

halfof33: Mikey1969: when she described the attack as spontaneous violence that grew out of protests of an anti-Islam film.

NO


SHE


DIDN'T

No, she didn't. Not at all. Not even in the slightest. If that's what you got from her statement, then your comprehension skills absolutely suck, and you need to have some serious talks not just with your schoolteachers, but your farking parents as well.

She said that there was a "spontaneous protest" that was "hijacked" by "extremists" who turned it into an "attack". These terrorists saw an opportunity and took advantage of it. By the end, it WASN'T a "protest" any more, but a terrorist attack. Unfortunately for you morons, it DID start out as a protest, and she said this from the beginning. SHe never said that the "protest" just turned into an attack, she pointed to the extremist element and specifically said that they hijacked it.

God, I didn't think that I could have any less respect for the entire political Right after their last 4 years, but now not only are they sleazy assholes, they are apparently too stupid to leave out in the rain unattended, you never know if they suddenly look up, forget to look back down, and drown in the street.

"This is a response to a hateful and offensive video that was widely disseminated throughout the Arab and Muslim world," Rice said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "Obviously our view is that there is absolutely no excuse for violence and what has happened is condemnable. But this is a spontaneous reaction to a video and it's not dissimilar but perhaps on a slightly larger scale than what we have seen in the past with the [Salman Rushdie's novel] 'Satanic Verses', with the [2006 Danish newspaper] cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad."


niice...like the way you snipped that quote to make your point.
too bad it didn't work.

honest question, did you snip that yourself? if so does it make you feel better to lie in order to prove a falsehood?
maybe you grabbed that snipped quote from a RW site, if so how does it make you feel that you've been handed a tactfully snipped quote to make you believe something that isn't so.


/oh wait...are you one of those trolls who will be back in the next thread of this topic trying the same exact line you just got busted for?
 
2012-11-21 03:50:05 PM
Bloody William
I like openness and transparency, but when dealing with international security issues, it seems pretty obvious that you would hold some details back if the release of those details could compromise an ongoing search. It's like this is the first time anyone implied that the government might hide something if it's part of CIA operations abroad.

Whenever someone says "security reasons" all I hear is "I'm on some real bullshiat right now".
 
2012-11-21 04:02:43 PM
I lost count exactly... This is excuse number what?

Um, yeah, it totally compromises the spies to tell the simple truth of 'This was a terrorist attack against', you need to do something like tell an easily detectable lie, then proceed on and on and on making one excuse after another while everyone finds out that the security situation was deteriorating, everyone knew it, the ambassador was begging for more security and was denied then we made the "gutsy" call as we sat around for seven hours knowing precisely what was going on...

Yes, it was totally to "protect spies" that we lied and had nothing at all to do with the fact that the whole situation made Obama look grossly incompetent right before the election. I believe that about as much as a liberal would believe it if the situation involved the Bush administration.
 
2012-11-21 04:03:15 PM

halfof33: Mikey1969: when she described the attack as spontaneous violence that grew out of protests of an anti-Islam film.

NO


SHE


DIDN'T

No, she didn't. Not at all. Not even in the slightest. If that's what you got from her statement, then your comprehension skills absolutely suck, and you need to have some serious talks not just with your schoolteachers, but your farking parents as well.

She said that there was a "spontaneous protest" that was "hijacked" by "extremists" who turned it into an "attack". These terrorists saw an opportunity and took advantage of it. By the end, it WASN'T a "protest" any more, but a terrorist attack. Unfortunately for you morons, it DID start out as a protest, and she said this from the beginning. SHe never said that the "protest" just turned into an attack, she pointed to the extremist element and specifically said that they hijacked it.

God, I didn't think that I could have any less respect for the entire political Right after their last 4 years, but now not only are they sleazy assholes, they are apparently too stupid to leave out in the rain unattended, you never know if they suddenly look up, forget to look back down, and drown in the street.

"This is a response to a hateful and offensive video that was widely disseminated throughout the Arab and Muslim world," Rice said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "Obviously our view is that there is absolutely no excuse for violence and what has happened is condemnable. But this is a spontaneous reaction to a video and it's not dissimilar but perhaps on a slightly larger scale than what we have seen in the past with the [Salman Rushdie's novel] 'Satanic Verses', with the [2006 Danish newspaper] cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad."


How does it feel to be so demonstratably stupid? Do you feel shame when you realize you've been lied to and your preconceived notions are nothing more than a falsehood?

Nah, you'll just use cognitive dissonance to make yourself believe you're still somehow not entirely wrong.

Technically wrong, the best kind of wrong. Get off the computer Sean Hannity.
 
2012-11-21 04:09:05 PM

randomjsa: Um, yeah, it totally compromises the spies to tell the simple truth of 'This was a terrorist attack against'


Please proceed, governor.
 
2012-11-21 04:12:55 PM

cameroncrazy1984: randomjsa: Um, yeah, it totally compromises the spies to tell the simple truth of 'This was a terrorist attack against'

Please proceed, governor.


They don't even care that they're both lying and stupid while not actually making an argument for any sort of scandal, do they?
 
2012-11-21 04:16:26 PM

halfof33: Mikey1969: when she described the attack as spontaneous violence that grew out of protests of an anti-Islam film.

NO


SHE


DIDN'T

No, she didn't. Not at all. Not even in the slightest. If that's what you got from her statement, then your comprehension skills absolutely suck, and you need to have some serious talks not just with your schoolteachers, but your farking parents as well.

She said that there was a "spontaneous protest" that was "hijacked" by "extremists" who turned it into an "attack". These terrorists saw an opportunity and took advantage of it. By the end, it WASN'T a "protest" any more, but a terrorist attack. Unfortunately for you morons, it DID start out as a protest, and she said this from the beginning. SHe never said that the "protest" just turned into an attack, she pointed to the extremist element and specifically said that they hijacked it.

God, I didn't think that I could have any less respect for the entire political Right after their last 4 years, but now not only are they sleazy assholes, they are apparently too stupid to leave out in the rain unattended, you never know if they suddenly look up, forget to look back down, and drown in the street.

"This is a response to a hateful and offensive video that was widely disseminated throughout the Arab and Muslim world," Rice said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "Obviously our view is that there is absolutely no excuse for violence and what has happened is condemnable. But this is a spontaneous reaction to a video and it's not dissimilar but perhaps on a slightly larger scale than what we have seen in the past with the [Salman Rushdie's novel] 'Satanic Verses', with the [2006 Danish newspaper] cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad."


Unfortunately for you, that's not the quote that McCain and his band of political opportunists point to,they keep pointing to the one on the 15th where she said exactly what I posted. She pointed to the demonstration, the terrorists, and the fact that they are who launched the attack. The articles about this cite the same statement as well.
 
2012-11-21 04:17:49 PM

Bloody William: cameroncrazy1984: randomjsa: Um, yeah, it totally compromises the spies to tell the simple truth of 'This was a terrorist attack against'

Please proceed, governor.

They don't even care that they're both lying and stupid while not actually making an argument for any sort of scandal, do they?


No, definitely they don't. All they care about is that their media bubble tells them what they want to hear. Even after learning on Nov. 6 that their media bubble is anti-reality.
 
2012-11-21 04:35:13 PM

randomjsa: I lost count exactly... This is excuse number what?


About one per false accusation, depending on your definition of 'excuse'.
 
2012-11-21 05:14:54 PM

Mikey1969: halfof33:

Unfortunately for you, that's not the quote that McCain and his band of political opportunists point to,they keep pointing to the one on the 15th where she said exactly what I posted. She pointed to the demonstration, the terrorists, and the fact that they are wh ...


Forget which alt you were on?
 
2012-11-21 05:15:36 PM

amiable: Mikey1969: halfof33:

Unfortunately for you, that's not the quote that McCain and his band of political opportunists point to,they keep pointing to the one on the 15th where she said exactly what I posted. She pointed to the demonstration, the terrorists, and the fact that they are wh ...

Forget which alt you were on?


Ooops nevermind, misread.
 
2012-11-21 05:16:04 PM

MFAWG: HulkHands: unlikely: And still, my mind boggles at trying to imagine the head-exploding outrage that would have happened had he actually discussed real operational intelligence in a press conference while keeping it secret was still valuable.

Well, Republicans already leaked the location of the annex while on broadcast television

The annex was attacked as well as the consulate on September 11th.


The terrorists attacked the covert CIA annex. Cover is kind of blown at that point. The press is free to report it.

This stuff about protecting sources is just more bs. The American public don't want to know all the secrets, such as what the CIA was doing in Benghazi. They are just not used to being blatantly lied to yet.
 
2012-11-21 05:20:06 PM

badhatharry: This stuff about protecting sources is just more bs. The American public don't want to know all the secrets, such as what the CIA was doing in Benghazi. They are just not used to being blatantly lied to yet


So, where was the blatant lie?
 
2012-11-21 05:34:04 PM

cameroncrazy1984: badhatharry: This stuff about protecting sources is just more bs. The American public don't want to know all the secrets, such as what the CIA was doing in Benghazi. They are just not used to being blatantly lied to yet

So, where was the blatant lie?


There was no protest in Benghazi. It was a planned and coordinated attack by terrorists. The idea that the CIA didn't know what was going on is pretty funny though. Right up there with Baghdad Bob. We got Benghazi Rice.
 
2012-11-21 05:34:50 PM
Is there really any confusion about what Rice said? She had disclaimers about an ongoing investigation then launched into the same explanation involving a spontaneous attack spurred on by anger over an anti-Muslim video.

She said it on television five farking times in one day. Yet, some insist we did not hear what we heard.

We can argue about why she said what she said but she obviously said it. Unbelievable.
 
2012-11-21 05:38:33 PM

badhatharry: There was no protest in Benghazi. It was a planned and coordinated attack by terrorists. The idea that the CIA didn't know what was going on is pretty funny though.


Yet another idiot who didn't actually watch/listen/read what Rice said on those shows...
 
2012-11-21 05:38:43 PM

badhatharry: There was no protest in Benghazi. It was a planned and coordinated attack by terrorists


That's not what the CIA said. Additionally, that's not what witnesses say.

So, where was the lie? Who do you believe more? The CIA or Fox News?
 
2012-11-21 05:39:51 PM

Cletus C.: Is there really any confusion about what Rice said? She had disclaimers about an ongoing investigation then launched into the same explanation involving a spontaneous attack spurred on by anger over an anti-Muslim video


Apparently you're confused because that's not what she was referring to. See above for the full context of her remarks.
 
2012-11-21 05:40:33 PM

Cletus C.: Is there really any confusion about what Rice said? She had disclaimers about an ongoing investigation then launched into the same explanation involving a spontaneous attack spurred on by anger over an anti-Muslim video.

She said it on television five farking times in one day. Yet, some insist we did not hear what we heard.

We can argue about why she said what she said but she obviously said it. Unbelievable.


Just because you're laser focused on trying to put Obama at Benghazi, mortar in hand doesn't mean that those television interviews weren't discussing the PROTESTS IN GENERAL.
 
2012-11-21 05:41:19 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Cletus C.: Is there really any confusion about what Rice said? She had disclaimers about an ongoing investigation then launched into the same explanation involving a spontaneous attack spurred on by anger over an anti-Muslim video

Apparently you're confused because that's not what she was referring to. See above for the full context of her remarks.


Good day, sir. Enjoy your pineapple.
 
2012-11-21 05:44:48 PM

Cletus C.: cameroncrazy1984: Cletus C.: Is there really any confusion about what Rice said? She had disclaimers about an ongoing investigation then launched into the same explanation involving a spontaneous attack spurred on by anger over an anti-Muslim video

Apparently you're confused because that's not what she was referring to. See above for the full context of her remarks.

Good day, sir. Enjoy your pineapple.


Just couldn't handle your own cognitive dissonance anymore, eh? Well, I suppose it happens to every Republican once in awhile. Reality starts creeping in and your brain starts hurting.
 
2012-11-21 05:50:02 PM

emotion_lotion: emotion_lotion: Headso: looks like halfof33 = potato

halfof33 = POTAOWNED

halfof33 = POTATOWNED

/dammit forgot to carry the "t"


LOLZ! because of the poor grade of liberal troll we had here, It never occured to me that the nimrods here were actually doubting the fact that the adminsistration was blaiming it on the video.

Lets double down:

press secretary Jay Carney explained the attack to reporters: "I'm saying that based on information that we -- our initial information, and that includes all information -- we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack; that we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video. And that is what we know thus far based on the evidence, concrete evidence."[
 
2012-11-21 05:51:14 PM

halfof33: adminsistration ... blaiming


Ha! So many typos! My bad
 
2012-11-21 05:53:14 PM

cameroncrazy1984: badhatharry: There was no protest in Benghazi. It was a planned and coordinated attack by terrorists

That's not what the CIA said. Additionally, that's not what witnesses say.

So, where was the lie? Who do you believe more? The CIA or Fox News?


I believe President Mohammad Magarief. Link
 
2012-11-21 05:56:13 PM

badhatharry: cameroncrazy1984: badhatharry: There was no protest in Benghazi. It was a planned and coordinated attack by terrorists

That's not what the CIA said. Additionally, that's not what witnesses say.

So, where was the lie? Who do you believe more? The CIA or Fox News?

I believe President Mohammad Magarief. Link


So what you are saying is you expect the president and the CIA to see into the future to find what evidence will eventually come to light saying that it was a pre-planned act.

You literally think Obama has a time machine. Brilliant.
 
2012-11-21 06:10:17 PM

cameroncrazy1984: badhatharry: cameroncrazy1984: badhatharry: There was no protest in Benghazi. It was a planned and coordinated attack by terrorists

That's not what the CIA said. Additionally, that's not what witnesses say.

So, where was the lie? Who do you believe more? The CIA or Fox News?

I believe President Mohammad Magarief. Link

So what you are saying is you expect the president and the CIA to see into the future to find what evidence will eventually come to light saying that it was a pre-planned act.

You literally think Obama has a time machine. Brilliant.


They didn't need a time machine or even an investigation. It was a goddamned CIA office. What do you think they do there? They probably already had a list of the guys attcking them.
 
2012-11-21 06:15:38 PM

badhatharry: They didn't need a time machine or even an investigation. It was a goddamned CIA office. What do you think they do there? They probably already had a list of the guys attcking them


So, you have no evidence that they knew this. You only have "probably" because "they had a CIA office there"

Great work, Sherlock.
 
2012-11-21 06:24:13 PM

cameroncrazy1984: badhatharry: They didn't need a time machine or even an investigation. It was a goddamned CIA office. What do you think they do there? They probably already had a list of the guys attcking them

So, you have no evidence that they knew this. You only have "probably" because "they had a CIA office there"

Great work, Sherlock.


facepalm

The first clue was when the Libyan security disappeared. The second clue was the bullets and rockets and mortars.
 
2012-11-21 07:57:45 PM

halfof33: emotion_lotion: emotion_lotion: Headso: looks like halfof33 = potato

halfof33 = POTAOWNED

halfof33 = POTATOWNED

/dammit forgot to carry the "t"

LOLZ! because of the poor grade of liberal troll we had here, It never occured to me that the nimrods here were actually doubting the fact that the adminsistration was blaiming it on the video.

Lets double down:

press secretary Jay Carney explained the attack to reporters: "I'm saying that based on information that we -- our initial information, and that includes all information -- we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack; that we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video. And that is what we know thus far based on the evidence, concrete evidence."[


What is it like to be not only wrong, but proved wrong at least 5 or 6 times in this thread? You lost. You are wrong. You are either a liar, or a really bad story teller.
 
2012-11-21 08:03:10 PM

Cletus C.: Is there really any confusion about what Rice said? She had disclaimers about an ongoing investigation then launched into the same explanation involving a spontaneous attack spurred on by anger over an anti-Muslim video.

She said it on television five farking times in one day. Yet, some insist we did not hear what we heard.

We can argue about why she said what she said but she obviously said it. Unbelievable.


She DID say "it". She said THIS "it", actually:

But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what - it began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo, where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy sparked by this hateful video.
But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that effort with heavy weapons
of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.


See how that works yet? There, she lays it out, from Sept 15, the "day in question". It started as a protest, some asshole terrorists from down the block see an opportunity and exploit it. After that, the terrorists rule the day. It shouldn't be that hard to figure out, even for you.

Link
 
2012-11-21 08:46:27 PM

bloobeary: Bloody William: Come on. Walk me through it. This isn't obvious to my tiny liberal mind, so you need to explain it to me slowly.

It's very simple.

Obama is black.
And a Democrat.
He is willing to let Bush's billionaire tax cuts expire.
He is also, horror of horrors, a bit of an environmentalist.
And rather popular with the general public.
And he did the unthinkable: got Bin Laden.
He is a living, breathing affront to the right wing information bubble, and the derp-wingers who thrive there.
His very existence puts the lie to everything they stand for.
So, Republicans wasted a lot of time, energy and money trying to stop him from being re-elected.
They spent the weeks before the election declaring themselves the winners, in spite of all evidence to the contrary..
Their loss was epic.
Their humiliation was televised.
And now their butthurt can be seen from orbit.

And that's what Benghazi is all about, Charlie Brown.


So, let me get this straight. Their assholes.

/well done BTW
 
2012-11-21 08:47:07 PM

mrshowrules: bloobeary: Bloody William: Come on. Walk me through it. This isn't obvious to my tiny liberal mind, so you need to explain it to me slowly.

It's very simple.

Obama is black.
And a Democrat.
He is willing to let Bush's billionaire tax cuts expire.
He is also, horror of horrors, a bit of an environmentalist.
And rather popular with the general public.
And he did the unthinkable: got Bin Laden.
He is a living, breathing affront to the right wing information bubble, and the derp-wingers who thrive there.
His very existence puts the lie to everything they stand for.
So, Republicans wasted a lot of time, energy and money trying to stop him from being re-elected.
They spent the weeks before the election declaring themselves the winners, in spite of all evidence to the contrary..
Their loss was epic.
Their humiliation was televised.
And now their butthurt can be seen from orbit.

And that's what Benghazi is all about, Charlie Brown.

So, let me get this straight. Their assholes.

/well done BTW


They're. LOL.
 
2012-11-21 11:26:38 PM

Zeppelininthesky: halfof33: emotion_lotion: emotion_lotion: Headso: looks like halfof33 = potato

halfof33 = POTAOWNED

halfof33 = POTATOWNED

/dammit forgot to carry the "t"

LOLZ! because of the poor grade of liberal troll we had here, It never occured to me that the nimrods here were actually doubting the fact that the adminsistration was blaiming it on the video.

Lets double down:

press secretary Jay Carney explained the attack to reporters: "I'm saying that based on information that we -- our initial information, and that includes all information -- we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack; that we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video. And that is what we know thus far based on the evidence, concrete evidence."[

What is it like to be not only wrong, but proved wrong at least 5 or 6 times in this thread? You lost. You are wrong. You are either a liar, or a really bad story teller.


It is funny, I quoted obama's press secretary, and yet I am "wrong."

Lolz, you guys are forking sheep. Absolutely worthless sheep

You quoted someone? You lie!

Morans.
 
2012-11-21 11:29:38 PM

mrshowrules: mrshowrules: bloobeary: Bloody William: Come on. Walk me through it. This isn't obvious to my tiny liberal mind, so you need to explain it to me slowly.

It's very simple.

Obama is black.
And a Democrat.
He is willing to let Bush's billionaire tax cuts expire.
He is also, horror of horrors, a bit of an environmentalist.
And rather popular with the general public.
And he did the unthinkable: got Bin Laden.
He is a living, breathing affront to the right wing information bubble, and the derp-wingers who thrive there.
His very existence puts the lie to everything they stand for.
So, Republicans wasted a lot of time, energy and money trying to stop him from being re-elected.
They spent the weeks before the election declaring themselves the winners, in spite of all evidence to the contrary..
Their loss was epic.
Their humiliation was televised.
And now their butthurt can be seen from orbit.

And that's what Benghazi is all about, Charlie Brown.

So, let me get this straight. Their assholes.

/well done BTW

They're. LOL.


No, their. Benghazi is all about massive butthurt. Their assholes.
 
2012-11-21 11:38:13 PM

halfof33: Zeppelininthesky: halfof33: emotion_lotion: emotion_lotion: Headso: looks like halfof33 = potato

halfof33 = POTAOWNED

halfof33 = POTATOWNED

/dammit forgot to carry the "t"

LOLZ! because of the poor grade of liberal troll we had here, It never occured to me that the nimrods here were actually doubting the fact that the adminsistration was blaiming it on the video.

Lets double down:

press secretary Jay Carney explained the attack to reporters: "I'm saying that based on information that we -- our initial information, and that includes all information -- we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack; that we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video. And that is what we know thus far based on the evidence, concrete evidence."[

What is it like to be not only wrong, but proved wrong at least 5 or 6 times in this thread? You lost. You are wrong. You are either a liar, or a really bad story teller.

It is funny, I quoted obama's press secretary, and yet I am "wrong."

Lolz, you guys are forking sheep. Absolutely worthless sheep

You quoted someone? You lie!

Morans.


You quoted someone who was talking about other violent protests in the region, and deliberately took the quote out of context to imply she was saying the Benghazi attacks were caused by the video.

You are a liar, and, for that matter, a dumbass, particularly if you thought nobody would catch your lie, or if you didn't catch YoungSwedishBlonde:'s dismantling of your lie.
 
2012-11-22 01:09:22 AM

LordJiro: halfof33: Zeppelininthesky: halfof33: emotion_lotion: emotion_lotion: Headso: looks like halfof33 = potato

halfof33 = POTAOWNED

halfof33 = POTATOWNED

/dammit forgot to carry the "t"

LOLZ! because of the poor grade of liberal troll we had here, It never occured to me that the nimrods here were actually doubting the fact that the adminsistration was blaiming it on the video.

Lets double down:

press secretary Jay Carney explained the attack to reporters: "I'm saying that based on information that we -- our initial information, and that includes all information -- we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack; that we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video. And that is what we know thus far based on the evidence, concrete evidence."[

What is it like to be not only wrong, but proved wrong at least 5 or 6 times in this thread? You lost. You are wrong. You are either a liar, or a really bad story teller.

It is funny, I quoted obama's press secretary, and yet I am "wrong."

Lolz, you guys are forking sheep. Absolutely worthless sheep

You quoted someone? You lie!

Morans.

You quoted someone who was talking about other violent protests in the region, and deliberately took the quote out of context to imply she was saying the Benghazi attacks were caused by the video.

You are a liar, and, for that matter, a dumbass, particularly if you thought nobody would catch your lie, or if you didn't catch YoungSwedishBlonde:'s dismantling of your lie.


And that included the attack in Benghazi, unless you are really trying to get people to believe that she was excluding the very attack that she was sent to the talk show to discuss. That when she mentioned violence at the embassies she was excluding it, really? The same farking explanation the Obama's press secretary gave, that I quoted?

Cripes, his thread is filled with blithering idiots. It was sparked by the reaction to the video, that is what Carney said, and you want us to believe that she was talking about some other attacks and excluding Benghazi.

Unbelievable, truly unbelievable. But let say that idiotic interpretation is correct: Explain Carney's statement.
 
2012-11-22 08:13:08 AM

halfof33: LordJiro: halfof33: Zeppelininthesky: halfof33: emotion_lotion: emotion_lotion: Headso: looks like halfof33 = potato

halfof33 = POTAOWNED

halfof33 = POTATOWNED

/dammit forgot to carry the "t"

LOLZ! because of the poor grade of liberal troll we had here, It never occured to me that the nimrods here were actually doubting the fact that the adminsistration was blaiming it on the video.

Lets double down:

press secretary Jay Carney explained the attack to reporters: "I'm saying that based on information that we -- our initial information, and that includes all information -- we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack; that we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video. And that is what we know thus far based on the evidence, concrete evidence."[

What is it like to be not only wrong, but proved wrong at least 5 or 6 times in this thread? You lost. You are wrong. You are either a liar, or a really bad story teller.

It is funny, I quoted obama's press secretary, and yet I am "wrong."

Lolz, you guys are forking sheep. Absolutely worthless sheep

You quoted someone? You lie!

Morans.

You quoted someone who was talking about other violent protests in the region, and deliberately took the quote out of context to imply she was saying the Benghazi attacks were caused by the video.

You are a liar, and, for that matter, a dumbass, particularly if you thought nobody would catch your lie, or if you didn't catch YoungSwedishBlonde:'s dismantling of your lie.

And that included the attack in Benghazi, unless you are really trying to get people to believe that she was excluding the very attack that she was sent to the talk show to discuss. That when she mentioned violence at the embassies she was excluding it, really? The same farking explanation the Obama's press secretary gave, that I quoted?

Cripes, his thread is filled with blithering idiots. It was sparked by the reaction to the video, that is wha ...


I have heard this one also. It's so frustrating. They are like,"Oh, you mean the one where the people got killed. I was talking about the other one."
 
2012-11-23 06:37:09 PM

mark12A:
They are making up lies to cover for their initial lie that it was a video that triggered the assault. IT WAS NOT. It was an Al Quada attack, it was obvious to everyone involved, but it was embarrassing to the Obamessiah to have a terrorist attack just before the election. And it reveals how they left our embassey guys out hanging in the breeze. For political expediency.


Obviously it wasn't embarrassing for the administration to admit it was an act of terror - because that's exactly what Obama did. On September 13th, the president spoke in the Rose Garden; he spoke about 9-11; he then spoke about Benghazi; and then he said "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation."

Acts. Plural.
9-11. Benghazi.
One for each.

The next day, Sept. 14th, in both Golden, Colorado, and right here in Las Vegas, Nevada... the president also spoke about Benghazi - and in both speeches - he called it an act of terror.

I would submit that intelligent, reasonable people view a "terrorist attack" and an "act of terror" as the same thing.

And where's your source for the administration "leaving our embassy guys out hanging in the breeze."

/And Fox News doesn't count.
//People who don't watch any news at all are more informed than those who watch Fox.
 
2012-11-23 10:27:25 PM

halfof33: Mrtraveler01: So explain to us why we should be outraged and why Obama should be impeached over it.

/I'm waiting...

This is the part of the thread where you post the proof where I said he ought to be impeached over it.

"I'm Waiting."

/I get it, people don't care that administration let a grossly inaccurate story get published, which served to further inflame the situation. Stop asking questions people, the Obama will make it all better.
//farking sheep


The ONLY place it "further inflamed the situation" was inside the fringe, right wing, monster media bubble and echo chamber. And I don't think "grossly inaccurate" means what you think it means.
 
2012-11-23 10:45:35 PM

theknuckler_33: halfof33: which served to further inflame the situation.

That's a weak conclusion lie. The existence of the video was already widely known and there is literally nothing to suggest that Rice's TV appearances led to or exacerbated other protests.


FTFY
 
2012-11-23 11:24:43 PM

theknuckler_33: halfof33: theknuckler_33: What is trolling is claiming the parenthetical statement is a fact. She did her job and gave the statements she was authorized to make. Period.

And I'm pretty sure I pointed out that she was just the administrations mouthpiece, right? And that the adminstration had more than enough information before she was sent on her little errands to stop her from repeating it.

You think this is about RICE????? Mind Boggles.

/Ignore... (just kidding, I'm not a complete pussy)

You aren't making a very cogent argument about what this is 'about'. Somehow an attack on our consulate killing 4 Americans is much more damaging for Obama politically if it resulted from an organized al-queada terrorist attack than if it were the result of a spontaneous riot, therefore this is why the Obama admin pushed Rice into making those statements? That's a highly strained premise is the reason why people are mocking you. Where do you get this notion that the American people went "oh, 4 americans killed by angry mob... ok. Sad, but whaddya gonna do" but would have gone "4 americans killed by organized al-queda terrorist attack! DAMN YOU FARTBONGO!!!!".

Dude, that doesn't make a farking lick of sense. Most people are upset about 4 americans dead. Not the method by which that happened. So, you invented this premise that Obama's motive for *supposedly* changing the Rice talking points (which is disputed anyway) was to limit the political damage from a terrorist attack rather than a mob attack when there is literally nothing to indicate that a mob attack would have been any less damaging than the terrorist attack. You took what happened and invented a premise that allowed you to give an ulterior motive to something you think Obama did. That's pretty outrageously tenuous.


Incredibly well said. +10 internets to you, sir.

/ Irrefutable logic - which the right will now try and refute - as they apparently do not understand the concept of either irrefutable or logic.
 
2012-11-24 11:17:32 AM

basham: Incredibly well said. +10 internets to you, sir.

/ Irrefutable logic - which the right will now try and refute - as they apparently do not understand the concept of either irrefutable or logic.


LOLZ! It is a straw man wrapped up in a begging the question logical fallacy.

First he says that I don't say what this is "about" and then goes on and layers in the straw. It is utterly fallacious.

But I'm not so sure that someone like you, a true believer, could understand that.

Sad.
 
Displayed 184 of 184 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report