It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'If four Americans get killed, it's not OPTIMAL': Obama's extraordinary response to Comedy Centr

page: 9
26
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitruvian
 

He didn't say anything disrespectful, and the last person I'd be asking is a grieving mother. Because grieving mothers say and do a great many irrational things with the grief glasses on. Her son died, a tragedy to be sure and she rightly blames the administration for it. The President admits a failure happened, and in this segment he did not just refer to the response to the incident, which is where the question was directed but the events leading to it as being a failure. There is nothing on this subject, not a single thing that the President or anyone in this administration can possibly say that will not upset her. So no her opinion on this has no real weight, beyond her being a grieving mother.

The real tragedy is the right wing trying to politicize this for their piss poor choice as a presidential candidate. When it comes down to it the one thing you can be certain of with Obama is the fact that his Administration will find the men responsible for this and probably execute them on the spot. And not ignore it to fight a war somewhere else. You know you are doing something right when the leader of the organization you are hunting down, writes in his diary that he wishes the guy who was running against you won.

It is long past time the American people realized that we will never be 100% safe. We will never stop the well planned, well executed terrorist attack. It doesn't matter what freedoms we give up or what principles we abandon you will never stop a dedicated patriot/terrorist absolutely convinced and dedicated to the belief of his cause even at the cost of his own life. It isn't a matter of if another successful attack happens, it is only a matter of when.
edit on 19-10-2012 by KeliOnyx because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


Apparently Obama agrees with you. He hasn't gotten back with her like he promised, so I guess she's the last person he's going to consider in this deal as well.
edit on 10-19-2012 by Valhall because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by kittyfatale
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 


I'm with you sister. Remember right after it happened he referred to it as "a bump in the road"? He makes me sick.. In all seriousness, it would be OPTIMAL if his speech writers were shot!


The word I wanted to use was,nonchalant, that is his attitude, his lack of passion about the matter,



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


Actually according to the article they have started giving her information about it. Look it sucks, but the fact is her son died she wants answers. And that is completely understandable, but due to his position and the nature of what happened, there are national security issues to contend with. It is not very likely that she or anyone other than a select few people will know everything there is to know about what happened. Hopefully she will get to know enough about it to satisfy that need to know.
edit on 19-10-2012 by KeliOnyx because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Funny how my eyes rolled when I clicked the link and it took me to the Daily Mail website...



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Wide-Eyes
 


It's available elsewhere if that will make you feel better. It's a transcript for Pete's sake.



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Originally posted by kittyfatale
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 


I'm with you sister. Remember right after it happened he referred to it as "a bump in the road"? He makes me sick.. In all seriousness, it would be OPTIMAL if his speech writers were shot!


The word I wanted to use was,nonchalant, that is his attitude, his lack of passion about the matter,


Did you expect him to burst into tears and have a breakdown on national television?



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by KeliOnyx
reply to post by Valhall
 


Actually according to the article they have started giving her information about it. Look it sucks, but the fact is her son died she wants answers. And that is completely understandable, but due to his position and the nature of what happened, there are national security issues to contend with. It is not very likely that she or anyone other than a select few people will know everything there is to know about what happened. Hopefully she will get to know enough about it to satisfy that need to know.
edit on 19-10-2012 by KeliOnyx because: (no reason given)


And that, my friends, is what is wrong in this country. "National Security" has become a blanket that no one dares question. Not even when it is what caused suspicious deaths.



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hawking
Well unfortunately FoxNews will always be a much bigger joke than anything else on cable, and yet conservative politicians use it to pander to their supporters.


And I believe it was Romney who politicized the Benghazi attacks five minutes after they happened. Because he's an arrogant fool who has little respect for those who died that day. He made that clear in the 2nd debate. Guess you didn't watch it.


Do your homework before you get offended by semantics


Are you kidding me. What point are you trying to make right now? If Romney Bush or any conservative would go on the John Stewart show and do the same thing they would be crucified. Yet in your defense of Obama you compare what Romney said during the debate and his "publicizing" of the attacks. Come on man you are scraping the bottom of the barrel here.



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


I was just stating a fact... My eyes rolled when I saw the Daily Mail pop up in my browser. These tabloids love stuff like this. I notice the video had been edited so that you don't see what Jon Stewart actually asked him so there is no context.

Don't get me wrong, the article could have been a lot more biased but fortunately, the Daily Mail is a UK paper and they just like to laugh at American politics. If one of our politicians had said something like that then they would have been 'lynch mob' biased depending on who said what...



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Wide-Eyes
 


Rather hyperbolic alternative you're giving there. No, I don't believe she did, and I KNOW I didn't. I expect him to treat the situation with the dignity, respect, solemnity and humbleness that the tragedy warrants. Not just asks for...WARRANTS.

You know, if you really want to ask silly questions and get people's opinions, ask me about what I think about Obama spending his time on various comedic talk shows while his country is in the crapper and he's getting his ass handed to him in the polls.

You haven't yet, so I'll refrain.



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 


To me he seems to be detached from reality, something just isn't right.



He gets mesmerized by the studio lights and free Green Room refreshments far too easily... Not a good choice of words for this softball interview. Pretty simple. Just look how this tragedy is still playing out as the top agencies involved are still pointing fingers as fast as possible.

No one is politicizing the deaths of these 4 Americans. Demanding our president to act with dignity and respect should be the norm. Sadly its not in this case. 4 years of chucking proper protocol out the window. Just like his form letters sent to the families of fallen Navy SEALS. He's been using the same form letter since 2009.
He simply does NOT care. His flippant comments and behavior speak volumes.

www.dailymail.co.uk...



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   
This is not a laughing matter,

These are newly released documents on the pleas made by the ambassador and how they were denied for days.

On September 11 – the day Stevens and three other Americans were killed – the ambassador signed a three-page cable, labeled “sensitive,” in which he noted “growing problems with security” in Benghazi and “growing frustration” on the part of local residents with Libyan police and security forces. These forces the ambassador characterized as “too weak to keep the country secure.”

“Islamist extremists are able to attack the Red Cross with relative impunity,”

“Benghazi has moved from trepidation to euphoria and back as a series of violent incidents has dominated the political landscape…The individual incidents have been organized,” he added, a function of “the security vacuum that a diverse group of independent actors are exploiting for their own purposes.”

After the U.S. consulate in Benghazi had been damaged by an improvised explosive device, earlier that month, Stevens had reported to his superiors that an Islamist group had claimed credit for the attack, and in so doing, had “described the attack as ‘targeting the Christians supervising the management of the consulate.”
“Multiple warnings about security threats were contained in Ambassador Stevens’ own words in multiple cables sent to Washington, D.C., and were manifested by two prior bombings of the Benghazi compound and an assassination attempt on the British ambassador,” the congressmen wrote. “For this administration to assume that terrorists were not involved in the 9/11 anniversary attack would have required a willing suspension of disbelief.


Read more: www.foxnews.com... lrwS6O4

Take a look at the documents
www.scribd.com...



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


While in many areas "National Security" is often misused, and our public officials are of dubious material. There are times where it is appropriate. This in my view probably falls in that category, as much as I and many others would like to know more. The fact is this is an unstable region, and a hotbed of covert activities occurring on a daily basis. Too much released information very well could jeopardize not only American lives in the region but also those working with those agents.

I find few things more disturbing than people who run around saying "Bush planned and staged 9-11" or "Obama planned to kill our Ambassador to Libya". There are policies both of them have and had that I detest a great deal. They both have a myriad of character flaws that I find disagreeable. But never in my lifetime would I think that anyone could believe that either one was so thoroughly evil that they would not only want these things to happen, but actively plan them. Inept and dismissive? A case could be made, but to declare someone that evil and corrupt it makes me afraid for the world.

edit on 19-10-2012 by KeliOnyx because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


I guess I am feeling somewhat desensitized and detached to all this snit. A decade of wars, torture, drone strikes, hundreds of thousands of men, women and children killed. I am struggling to 'feel' much at all about four random Americans I never knew who were stationed in a recent warzone.

Sorry.



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


Agreed. Conspiracy theories such as that are ways for people to avoid accepting that there are really bad people who do really bad things and WE, as the common everyday person, can't prevent the existence of really bad people or them doing really bad things. I believe that creating a conspiracy theory that you think you can "out"...a theory that is focused on the "evil driving forces" (be it the Illuminati, Bilderberger, US Government, whatever), is an escape mechanism because when you focus on those types of conspiracies....you think you've got a fighting chance of "exposing them"...you don't feel as helpless.

When it comes to hate-filled people doing hate-filled acts of violence, we're helpless to eliminate it happening. Bush didn't "commit" 9/11. Obama didn't "commit" Benghazi.


edit on 10-19-2012 by Valhall because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wide-Eyes
reply to post by Valhall
 


I guess I am feeling somewhat desensitized and detached to all this snit. A decade of wars, torture, drone strikes, hundreds of thousands of men, women and children killed. I am struggling to 'feel' much at all about four random Americans I never knew who were stationed in a recent warzone.

Sorry.


That happens, the desensitization, but one look at our deceased ambassador being drug though the streets after being brutalized, might snap you back into reality.

I still avoid that picture.



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


What do you think about Obama spending his time on various comedic talk shows while his country is in the crapper and he's getting his ass handed to him in the polls?
edit on 19-10-2012 by Wide-Eyes because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Wide-Eyes
 


Tickles me pink. I hope he keeps it up.

That and he's delusional.

Bottom line is....we're straight on his priorities. And they aren't where they are supposed to be.

Thanks for asking.


edit on 10-19-2012 by Valhall because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 



Yes, something is missing, I caught a bit of one of his speeches today and he seemed off




top topics



 
26
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join