Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
To a certain point, I agree. However, if all are not on board for diplomacy, it will prove to be a waste of time. For example, I am one who believes Iran is gaming us because I do not believe they are interested in diplomacy....so six months from now we will be 6 months behind in stopping their nuclear aspirations and they will be six months ahead...
But putting that aside....
No, extra security would not have prevented the attack. Another 10 guards would have meant another 20 militants engaging in the attack and likely another 5 dead Americans.
However, when the dialogue was all about an AMERICAN exercising his right to free speech as the cause for the attack and thus the cause of the murders it gave more fuel to the fire.
They HATE our constitution. They hate our way of life. They hate the fact that we can express ourselves openly.
And our government blamed exactly that. THEY PUT THE BLAME ON OUR WAY OF LIFE.......most certainly in they eyes of the radical Islamic community.
Sure, the President talked about bringing the murderers to justice.....BUT THE INTERNATIONAL STORY WAS ALL ABOUT THE PRESIDENT BLAMING THE VIDEO...AND THE ENSUING CONTOVERSY.
The President blew this one Boo.....
The GOP Candidate blew it. President Obama clearly states that "Today, we must declare that this violence and intolerance has no place among our United Nations. "
He doesn't say publishing offensive video has no place, but intolerance and violent reaction to such things.
He spoke of the video in the Rose Garden Boo. He THEN said violence and intolerance has no place.
His speech in the Rose Garden was in response to the attack. Mentioning the video was not necessary as he knew it had nothing to do with Benghazi.
He gave all listening reason to believe he was blaming the video on the attack.
It would be like Bush talking about the Iran Hostage Crisis while addressing the nation on 9-11-01
The GOP Candidate blew it. President Obama clearly states that "Today, we must declare that this violence and intolerance has no place among our United Nations. "
He doesn't say publishing offensive video has no place, but intolerance and violent reaction to such things.
He spoke of the video in the Rose Garden Boo. He THEN said violence and intolerance has no place.
His speech in the Rose Garden was in response to the attack. Mentioning the video was not necessary as he knew it had nothing to do with Benghazi.
He gave all listening reason to believe he was blaming the video on the attack.
It would be like Bush talking about the Iran Hostage Crisis while addressing the nation on 9-11-01
??? That would be a 22 year gap. The reaction to the video-trailer was currently unfolding when he spoke the next morning. So your analogy doesn't apply at all.
Stupid Islamaphobic YouTube Video Sparks Stupid Riots In Middle East: Gothamist
The 9-11 Commission also deem the attacks that day in 2001 were preventable. Who was held accountable then?
no one tried to cover up 911
That didn't take long.
The report UNEQUIVOCALLY states that the WH was in no way guilty of trying to alter the "talking points" in any way that can be considered a cover up.
There was no cover up.
He spoke of the video in the Rose Garden Boo. He THEN said violence and intolerance has no place.
His speech in the Rose Garden was in response to the attack. Mentioning the video was not necessary as he knew it had nothing to do with Benghazi.
He gave all listening reason to believe he was blaming the video on the attack.
It would be like Bush talking about the Iran Hostage Crisis while addressing the nation on 9-11-01
??? That would be a 22 year gap. The reaction to the video-trailer was currently unfolding when he spoke the next morning. So your analogy doesn't apply at all.
Stupid Islamaphobic YouTube Video Sparks Stupid Riots In Middle East: Gothamist
True...poor analogy.
But you are bright enough to understand the reason for an analogy.
How about this...
It would be like Bush Jr. talking about the Bush/Gore election controversy on 9-11-01 and then saying "those who did this will be brought to justice"...
It would give reason for people to believe he was blaming those who believed he stole the election as the cause for the attack.
??? That would be a 22 year gap. The reaction to the video-trailer was currently unfolding when he spoke the next morning. So your analogy doesn't apply at all.
Stupid Islamaphobic YouTube Video Sparks Stupid Riots In Middle East: Gothamist
True...poor analogy.
But you are bright enough to understand the reason for an analogy.
How about this...
It would be like Bush Jr. talking about the Bush/Gore election controversy on 9-11-01 and then saying "those who did this will be brought to justice"...
It would give reason for people to believe he was blaming those who believed he stole the election as the cause for the attack.
The riots were still happening when he gave the Rose Garden speech. I think a better analogy would be when President Bush would talk about Iraq, al Qaeda and the threat of nuclear attack on an American city. Never actually linking the Iraq and al Qaeda, but giving some the impression that Iraq supported al Qaeda and was going to give them an atomic weapon to smuggle into the US for an attack.
You must not have gotten the memo that the cover up has been exposed. You can stop trying to blame a video that had nothing to do with the situation.
As I've posted many times, that video caused deadly riots all over the world. Stop being dense. You know how Muslims get when their religion is mocked. They did just what right wingers hoped they would do.
How many deaths were there in other riots? Do you know?
As I've posted many times, that video caused deadly riots all over the world. Stop being dense. You know how Muslims get when their religion is mocked. They did just what right wingers hoped they would do.
How many deaths were there in other riots? Do you know?
I do. What's your point?
??? That would be a 22 year gap. The reaction to the video-trailer was currently unfolding when he spoke the next morning. So your analogy doesn't apply at all.
Stupid Islamaphobic YouTube Video Sparks Stupid Riots In Middle East: Gothamist
True...poor analogy.
But you are bright enough to understand the reason for an analogy.
How about this...
It would be like Bush Jr. talking about the Bush/Gore election controversy on 9-11-01 and then saying "those who did this will be brought to justice"...
It would give reason for people to believe he was blaming those who believed he stole the election as the cause for the attack.
The riots were still happening when he gave the Rose Garden speech. I think a better analogy would be when President Bush would talk about Iraq, al Qaeda and the threat of nuclear attack on an American city. Never actually linking the Iraq and al Qaeda, but giving some the impression that Iraq supported al Qaeda and was going to give them an atomic weapon to smuggle into the US for an attack.
How many deaths were there in other riots? Do you know?
I do. What's your point?
He asked how many.
You, as you usually do, don't answer and ask a question.
You are a farce. You don't debate. You bait. Nothing more.
Shoo, child.
No. It was not. It was a valid question in response to your position.I do. What's your point?
He asked how many.
You, as you usually do, don't answer and ask a question.
You are a farce. You don't debate. You bait. Nothing more.
Shoo, child.
His question was rhetorical.
FYI:
our free speech does not apply to idiots overseas.
why are libs so ignorant and so willing to defend murderers and terrorists?
True...poor analogy.
But you are bright enough to understand the reason for an analogy.
How about this...
It would be like Bush Jr. talking about the Bush/Gore election controversy on 9-11-01 and then saying "those who did this will be brought to justice"...
It would give reason for people to believe he was blaming those who believed he stole the election as the cause for the attack.
The riots were still happening when he gave the Rose Garden speech. I think a better analogy would be when President Bush would talk about Iraq, al Qaeda and the threat of nuclear attack on an American city. Never actually linking the Iraq and al Qaeda, but giving some the impression that Iraq supported al Qaeda and was going to give them an atomic weapon to smuggle into the US for an attack.
I don't remember Bush ever saying anything like that. I would believe quote from him in a link. I did hear a lot of leading Democrats talking about WMD's and nuclear weapons before they voted FOR the Iraq war. And I have furnished the quotes with links several times on USMB.
The riots were still happening when he gave the Rose Garden speech. I think a better analogy would be when President Bush would talk about Iraq, al Qaeda and the threat of nuclear attack on an American city. Never actually linking the Iraq and al Qaeda, but giving some the impression that Iraq supported al Qaeda and was going to give them an atomic weapon to smuggle into the US for an attack.
I don't remember Bush ever saying anything like that. I would believe quote from him in a link. I did hear a lot of leading Democrats talking about WMD's and nuclear weapons before they voted FOR the Iraq war. And I have furnished the quotes with links several times on USMB.
Detailed Analysis of October 7, 2002 Speech by Bush on Iraq | Accuracy.Org
Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq | Mother Jones
FYI:
our free speech does not apply to idiots overseas.
why are libs so ignorant and so willing to defend murderers and terrorists?
Considering the video had nothing to do with why they attacked, it doesnt seem like a good defense for them anyway.
FYI:
our free speech does not apply to idiots overseas.
why are libs so ignorant and so willing to defend murderers and terrorists?
Considering the video had nothing to do with why they attacked, it doesnt seem like a good defense for them anyway.
Right right. Except that fact that it did.......
There should be a Senate report that concludes that the Iraq war was preventable.
The 9-11 Commission also deem the attacks that day in 2001 were preventable. Who was held accountable then?
no one tried to cover up 911
That didn't take long.
The report UNEQUIVOCALLY states that the WH was in no way guilty of trying to alter the "talking points" in any way that can be considered a cover up.
There was no cover up.
Everyone knows obama and hitlery lied, Avatar, even morons like laughingalone. They'll just never admit it, ever. When libtards circle the wagons, they lie until the last man is down, even when everyone already knows they're finished.no one tried to cover up 911
That didn't take long.
The report UNEQUIVOCALLY states that the WH was in no way guilty of trying to alter the "talking points" in any way that can be considered a cover up.
There was no cover up.
Sure. So we had a month of the White house blaming Benghazi on a video when they knew otherwise because they weren't trying to cover up a terrorist attack and gun running a month before Obama's reelection?
Some of us actually look at the evidence rather than just quoting what someone else says about the evidence. When it looks like a duck, smells like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it sure as heck isn't a coyote.
