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.

 

Lies,Lies, and Damn lies: Obama blames Benghazi on Congress

page: 14
51
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Doesnt really matter nothing he has done reaches the level of an impeachable offense bottom line is he can lie andits perfectly legal.As far as the deaths in truth that's Hillary she's the only one that could have prevented them if she had upped security at the embassy.As far as the IRS matter if its proven President Obama told the IRS to target these groups that will be a crime i dont believe any such orders were given.They may have been implied and then he played the i dont see it game.But again unless he instructed them to do this he cant be impeached.The reality even if he is impeached unlikely he would be removed from office look at Clinton.




posted on May, 18 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


What you say is true. He can lie all day long, as long as he's not under oath. Question is, can you, or anyone, live under the rule of a leader that is a known habitual liar?

The IRS? My bet is that he DID imply that groups like these be deeply investigated. ( Remember his 'punishing our enemies' comment?) Democrats in Congress did more than imply.

Again, not an impeachable offense. But again, a question. Can you live under the rule of a man that targets, even through implication, political 'enemies'?



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2ndthought
It's odd that someone who lambasts others for partisan politics, is so very partisan.

It also seems that you may be one of those terrorists that are 'laughing out loud', or at least someone who has something to personally lose if the truth comes out.

Interesting.


That is a very serious and incrimination allegation you made, not only to me, but to fellow members and ATS.

Calling someone insidiously as a 'terrorist' without any shred of evidence is tantamount to slander. Or is an attempt to silence me, more so when you had NOT respond to my post, which means you acknowledge the truth and reality of what I had wrote, but had to RESORT to attacking me with libellous terms so as to silence me and strike fear into others so that they may not speak out for fear of being labelled?

Tell you what:- I accept your challenge on the claims that I am a terrorist. Copy and past my my post on an emial to DHS, and let them investigate me. I hereby fully authorise ATS owners to reveal my IPS which can be traced to who I am and be subjected to the inconveniences of being questioned in detail and searched, if they deem necessary and ATS which BTW would comply anyway with or without my authorization.

What is that which the insignificant nobody me have to go through compared to what the President have to go through, being smear, tarred and feathered with all kinds of baseless BS every single day? More so one whom had been freely elected by the majority - both electoral college and popular vote, to administer to the needs of the american people and yet dragged by petty issues fueled and drummed up as mountainous claims which are all only further partisan BS, when there are MORE critical issues to americans such as the economy?

At the same time, I want your name and identification to be recorded with DHS when they find me not as what you claimed, and know what kind of attitude and mental state you have, on record.

I had thought to ignore your senseless post as I often do to the mentally challenged, but on 2nd thought, I decided to make an example of trolls like you that attack the messenger instead of the message, to smear and strike fear into others so that they dare not speak up. This is NOT how ATS operates and become attracted to so many humans around the world.

Go ahead. Make my day. I await your call to DHS. There will be more of us whom will not fear, for USA is ruled by law, and even if not, our progress and evolution had been made by fearless human, and I am only a minor reflection of the role modelship and courage they had shown in the face of imposed upon fear by another equal human.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96

Originally posted by cholo
reply to post by neo96
 


Seems to be pretty convienent that the GOP cuts funding to security and then uses a lack of security as a reason to hammer Obama.

That sounds like they designed the entire strategy.


Sad that some believe that nonsense.

FACT:

What happened in Benghazi WAS NOT ABOUT MONEY


They believe it because it is the only way they can defend the current administration. They need to listen to Charlotte Lamb's testimony. At some point the scales will fall off their eyes. Denial only works for so long in light of the facts. You know that facts are stubborn things....



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 02:49 PM
link   
When all else fails…

Blame Bush!

Blame Republicans!

Blame racism!

Blame G-d (oops forgot, most liberals don’t believe in G-d)!

Blame the military!

Blame Fox News!

Blame global warming (climate change)!

Blame Wall Street!

Blame white people!

Blame Nascar!

Blame the constitution!

Blame EVERYONE but OBAMA!

Just like Obama, none of you Obama folk will EVER admit Obama was wrong! There could be 100% proof, and still, you all will stand by your almighty dictator!

All the way to the grave..!






edit on 18-5-2013 by Propulsion because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Propulsion
 


Don't forget sometimes you can blame ATMs and hurricanes!



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   
Lol, he even tried blaming Republicans for his own sequester.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by HauntWok
Is it Al Qaeda or Ansar al-Sharia? You all do get those two groups confused. They are completely different groups.


Are they??? Please research AaS a little more, there is cross-over. Both are Militant Islamic Terror Groups. They are an AQ inspired group. There are many other AQ inspired groups around the Muslim world. Do you deny that AaS is a terror group similar to AQ??? They are both ducks in my book.


Oh
there were protests in the middle east? OMFG! That's unprecedented! Alert the news media!
There are demonstrations and protests in middle eastern countries nearly every day.


So there wasn't an uptick in protests and demonstrations against American and Western interests in the Muslim world prior to the attacks??? Knowing that there was an increase in Protests (at least 4 other counties other than Libya) and that the Egyptian Embassy was overrun and the American Flag burned during a protest there, you wouldn't increase security elsewhere???? LAUGHABLE.


Shoulda, coulda, woulda. Hindsight is 20/20


It wasn't hindsight, don't be obtuse. First we have the protests that were occurring, then add on top of it the 9/11 time-frame. How is it hindsight when you know that AQ and other AQ inspired groups have tried in the past to attack targets on 9/11 as a day to launch attacks? Hindsight implies you knew nothing of an event till afterwards. For many years, we have elevated security around the 9/11 timeframe. That is NOT HINDSIGHT, that is taking appropriate precautions. There was a historical precedence that AQ liked to try to attack on or near that date.


I don't know, seems to me that the video sparked protests. Maybe it did, maybe it didn't. I don't know. Without all the facts (and god knows Conservatives cant be trusted with reliable facts, for gods sake most of you still think that Obama was born in Kenya, is the anti-christ, is simultaneously fascist and socialist somehow, and is secretly a Muslim.) There's a number of things that could and maybe should have went differently.


That is just babbling..... trying to deflect again. You really think that it was a spontaneous protest, not a planned attack? You are correct in at least one statement there.......We NEED ALL THE FACTS. Has the Obama Administration been totally transparent with the release of info regarding Benghazi????


You still didn't answer my real question I posted previously..... please stay focused. Here it is so you don't have to look:


Please tell me if you think we took adequate security arrangements for our Ambassador in Benghazi? I get the distinct impression that you think we could not have prevented the deaths of 4 US citizens that day. Tell me what prudent security measures the Obama Administration took to ensure the safety of our Ambassador? We aren't glad that AQ attacked, I think we ALL KNOW that they are going to attack us. If you had to pick a specific day and date when AQ would attack the U.S., what date and month would it be? We are mad that we did squat to bolster our security and PREVENT the attack from over-running a Diplomatic post and KILLING OUR AMBASSADOR. There were tons of steps that could have been done that would have prevented/deterred an attack from over-running our Diplomatic post. Again, tell me what specific steps we took to ensure the safety our our Ambassador there on Sept. 11th....



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil



You still didn't answer my real question I posted previously..... please stay focused. Here it is so you don't have to look:


Please tell me if you think we took adequate security arrangements for our Ambassador in Benghazi? I get the distinct impression that you think we could not have prevented the deaths of 4 US citizens that day. Tell me what prudent security measures the Obama Administration took to ensure the safety of our Ambassador? We aren't glad that AQ attacked, I think we ALL KNOW that they are going to attack us. If you had to pick a specific day and date when AQ would attack the U.S., what date and month would it be? We are mad that we did squat to bolster our security and PREVENT the attack from over-running a Diplomatic post and KILLING OUR AMBASSADOR. There were tons of steps that could have been done that would have prevented/deterred an attack from over-running our Diplomatic post. Again, tell me what specific steps we took to ensure the safety our our Ambassador there on Sept. 11th....





Quiet Pavil.

Children are deflecting.




posted on May, 19 2013 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


So you think yourself intelligent and matured by labelling others in a discussion forum as 'children' and 'deflecting' to shut them up will work, after so much ignorances, time wasting and BS had been spewed by those who are hell bent on picking on the President and the govt to divide the people by partisan politics?

Think again. I would rather let the audience decide on whom are the children and what was being deflected.

To Pavil.
I cannot comprehend the lack of brains in your head, for I hold firm in the belief that all man are created equal, but you certainly proved me wrong.

1. In this world, there is not just ONE american embassy, which is in Benghazi.

American embassies are spread out amongst more than 170 nations on Earth. Embassies are sacred hallowed grounds that are protected by the host nations and not by the country that places an embassy in a foreign land.


2. Even if america has the right to provide its own security, which will have to be reciprocated the same to other nations in USA, HOW MANY troops were to be needed? 1 military division, or 1 military battalion, 1 or team of spec ops, etc?

Can you professionally answer that? I doubt you can, or would, so I shall spare all the frustration awaiting your reply that would never come except in the form of more BS and deflection.


3. Can anyone predict correctly HOW MANY insurgents will attack an embassy?

Can you 'metaphysically' answer that? I doubt you dare or would, so I shall spare all the frustration awaiting your reply that would never come except in the form of more BS and deflection.


4. How many attacks upon embassies occured after 911 AND on the anniversary of 911 whereby ambassadors die? None. The one in Afghanistan was way before 911.

AND YET, you and the author are claiming that you both knew WHEN, WHERE & the AMOUNT of insurgents will attack on the anniversary of 911, and would kill the ambassador, and thus blame the authorities for not listening to your predictions, or should say at this stage - 20/20 vision hindsight?


Amazing! Do please tell me the next winning numbers for the powerball draw. Such gifts as yours should not be wasted, when the economy should be getting more focus than being deflected by the republicans using this Benghazi tragedy.

And please, not the past winning numbers. I prefer the new ones for the next draw. Gotta make it clear, cos you both have perfect 20/20 vision hindsight and will try to palm me off with the past ones, dashing all hopes for a big donation to the victim families and the many social enterprises I intend to fund when I have that huge amount of money.
edit on 19-5-2013 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 09:29 AM
link   
They were trying to find out where Obama was when this was happening and the WH spokesman essentially clammed up and said it " was irrelevant." It would be interesting if it came out he was with that Love guy pal of his or was involved in something even more scandalous than even this.
Or maybe he was just being debriefed by his superiors, still not good.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
reply to post by sonnny1
 


So you think yourself intelligent and matured by labelling others in a discussion forum as 'children' and 'deflecting' to shut them up will work, after so much ignorances, time wasting and BS had been spewed by those who are hell bent on picking on the President and the govt to divide the people by partisan politics?

Think again. I would rather let the audience decide on whom are the children and what was being deflected.

To Pavil.
I cannot comprehend the lack of brains in your head, for I hold firm in the belief that all man are created equal, but you certainly proved me wrong.



Shame on you SeekerofTruth........Please read what you just wrote to me... Talk about pot calling the kettle black. You just invalidated any point you were trying to make with me with that attitude and remark. If you can't debate civilly then don't debate.

Shame.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dutchowl
They were trying to find out where Obama was when this was happening and the WH spokesman essentially clammed up and said it " was irrelevant." It would be interesting if it came out he was with that Love guy pal of his or was involved in something even more scandalous than even this.
Or maybe he was just being debriefed by his superiors, still not good.


Most people couldn't give a # about anything important so perhaps another monica lewinsky job might solve everything. Better yet if its a boy friend. Then get him to lie about it under oath and bingo....impeachment!

The world be dammed!



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
.

To Pavil.
I cannot comprehend the lack of brains in your head, for I hold firm in the belief that all man are created equal, but you certainly proved me wrong.

1. In this world, there is not just ONE american embassy, which is in Benghazi.

American embassies are spread out amongst more than 170 nations on Earth. Embassies are sacred hallowed grounds that are protected by the host nations and not by the country that places an embassy in a foreign land.


First off, it wasn't an Embassy, even the Obama Admin has made a point of saying that. Ambassadors in lawless regions of countries should have adequate security details. All embassies proper have Security details, usually Marines if memory serves me right.



2. Even if america has the right to provide its own security, which will have to be reciprocated the same to other nations in USA, HOW MANY troops were to be needed? 1 military division, or 1 military battalion, 1 or team of spec ops, etc?

Can you professionally answer that? I doubt you can, or would, so I shall spare all the frustration awaiting your reply that would never come except in the form of more BS and deflection.


If we have embassy personal in dangerous places, obviously you need to increase the security for said people. Is that not common sense? To you I guess not. I would venture that our Ambassador should have had the equivalent of at least a squad or two of security. Also I would have had a MEU somewhere close by,like other posters have mentioned. Libya wasn't your normal everyday peaceful country, added security measures were needed or do you dispute that, even given the hindsight of events. When I go into a bad part of my City, I take extra precautions, I would expect our government would do the same for our Ambassadors.





3. Can anyone predict correctly HOW MANY insurgents will attack an embassy?

Can you 'metaphysically' answer that? I doubt you dare or would, so I shall spare all the frustration awaiting your reply that would never come except in the form of more BS and deflection.


No one can predict the amount of terrorists that will attack, you are right. Given that, you need to have a detterent force around that will cause them to think twice about attack a diplomatic compound.


4. How many attacks upon embassies occured after 911 AND on the anniversary of 911 whereby ambassadors die? None. The one in Afghanistan was way before 911.


AQ and other related groups use certain dates when attempting attacks. Obviously one of them is the Sept 11th anniversary. We, as a nation have raised security during that time frame and the only time we went to RED as a terror threat level was.....


evere (Red) [edit] The threat level has been raised to Severe only once, which applied only to flights coming from the United Kingdom: August 10–September 14, 2006, in response to British law enforcement announcing it had disrupted a major terror plot to blow up an aircraft, DHS raised the threat level for commercial flights from the United Kingdom to the United States to Severe.[27] The alert was extended into mid-September 2006 to coincide with the 5th Anniversary of the September 11 Attacks.


What was the timeframe we did that again?


AND YET, you and the author are claiming that you both knew WHEN, WHERE & the AMOUNT of insurgents will attack on the anniversary of 911, and would kill the ambassador, and thus blame the authorities for not listening to your predictions, or should say at this stage - 20/20 vision hindsight?
I'm not a Nostradamus, however I can look at the events that were happening, the intel that was available and the current security measures and make a VERY valid observation that the security there wan't adequete to ensure the safety of my Ambassador in Benghazi. He should have moved back to the Embassy proper as soon as things were heating up.

Lets wait to see all the details of why it was so important to have the Ambassador there in Benghazi, I think there is more embarrassing news to come out with that.

And again, your tone throughout your whole post is and was deplorable.

Thank You,



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 


No need to thank me for waking you up to your own BS. Just stop twisting and turning. You had been answered in full and yet you call it deplorable even as you thank me. I guess there's no end to your continued rants against the president.

Can't you guys just lay it aside, more so when you clowns have NO evidences except unsubtaintiated and armchair insanities as reasons enough to drag Congress through this episode?

Haven't all that republicans whom are in the pay of the rich elites feigned anger over this issue to fool the american moasses, SO MUCH that any compromises on the stalling of the enconomy, which the deadline for sorting out the budget is today, and was NOT even discussed and debated, with the economy now on a tailspin?

How long does the republican party and supporters like you wish to cotinue to fool and screw the american people? Remember, what you do to them, they will do back to you if you got a republican as a president or the democrats won a majority in both houses in Congress, which is very likely with the childish and idiotic senseless gameplaying by you folks. which in the end, SERVES NO ONE.

When, when, will this partisan stupidity and insanity end?



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


I am thinking the republican supporters want revenge for the attempted gun laws that democrats pushed, but that is just my opinion. I was personally against a renewed "assault weapons" ban but got over it once the legislation failed.

Yes Obama has made bad decisions during his 5 year tenure, but I think republicans are pushing the wrong issues forward, simply for partisan reasons. They want to win the congressional elections and then get a republican president 3.5 years from now.

I am neither democrat nor republican so my eye-sight is as close to 20-20 as one can hope for!



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


My, my. A bit touchy. Also, methinks thou protests to much. Another sign of guilt, perhaps unconscious, perhaps not.

You say my remarks are meant to silence you? Let me list the many remarks you've made meant to silence others, using insulting rhetoric, innuendo, lies, and hatred.

"The Tea party are extremists and are only idiots"
"Do we need the extremist petty Tea Party to DICTATE on what american PEOPLE should think?"
"If not satisfied - the airport is opened 24/7."
"YOu may hope that your foolish kind grows, but there are MORE americans whom are a heck lot more discerning, and have a wider perspective over events than the narrow ones that your kind possess."
"How more stupid do you want to be?"
"Cheers and continue with your foolish ranting and feign righteousness over the dead americans in blaming the administration while your enemies the terrorists are laughing behind your back at your kind's stupidity and harbor hopes that your kind continues to be stupid as they seek out more americans to slaughter."
"Start talking sense, will ya? I can understand if you have no military experience, or any military experience is through the lens of your own gunsight, however, there is a bigger picture out there, which even a village idiot can see"
"I cannot comprehend the lack of brains in your head, for I hold firm in the belief that all man are created equal, but you certainly proved me wrong."

Terrorist? You're being a verbal terrorist attempting to silence others with your remarks. And i sense even more strongly now you have something to personally lose if the truth comes out. Afraid your dear leader will be impeached? If that happens, and considering your preoccupation with social programs, perhaps you think the 'Santa Claus' giveaway freebies end for you.

I learned long ago to fight fire with fire, when needed. You're upset that your own flames have turned back to burn you.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


I am thinking the republican supporters want revenge for the attempted gun laws that democrats pushed, but that is just my opinion. I was personally against a renewed "assault weapons" ban but got over it once the legislation failed.

Yes Obama has made bad decisions during his 5 year tenure, but I think republicans are pushing the wrong issues forward, simply for partisan reasons. They want to win the congressional elections and then get a republican president 3.5 years from now.

I am neither democrat nor republican so my eye-sight is as close to 20-20 as one can hope for!


Are you seriously stating that with a straight face? As a 2A supporting NRA member, the attack on the 2nd was the farthest thing from my mind when these issues came to light.

The DOJ had to, by law, release the facts of their phone record subpoena. They were late, but they released that info. The IRS 'leaked' their own scandal, via a preplanned and planted question at a law conference last week. Two scandals, brought to light by the very Dept's that instigated the scandal to begin with.

My question is... Why now? Why were these two issues brought to light at this time. First of all, the IRS issue wasn't a secret. Even I, as a nobody American citizen, heard about the overreaching investigations last year. How Obama can say he only heard about it last week is beyond me. He's sits in the middle of Washington, and is in the middle of the 'all seeing eye'.

IMO, these two scandals were brought out to draw attention away from something else. Benghazi? Is there something there that they don't want us to find out about? How better to draw American citizens attention away from something than to put their attention on the IRS. Their (our) money, so to speak. How better to draw the attention of the press away than to place their attention on an issue that directly affects them and the ability to do their job.

I don't see this as a partisan issue. I see this as an issue that could very well affect every single one of us. Some just refuse to consider that their dear leader would do anything against the citizens of this country. It's my contention that under all the layers, he doesn't give one small damn about us.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
reply to post by sonnny1
 


So you think yourself intelligent and matured by labelling others in a discussion forum as 'children' and 'deflecting' to shut them up will work, after so much ignorances, time wasting and BS had been spewed by those who are hell bent on picking on the President and the govt to divide the people by partisan politics?

Think again. I would rather let the audience decide on whom are the children and what was being deflected.

To Pavil.
I cannot comprehend the lack of brains in your head, for I hold firm in the belief that all man are created equal, but you certainly proved me wrong.

1. In this world, there is not just ONE american embassy, which is in Benghazi.

American embassies are spread out amongst more than 170 nations on Earth. Embassies are sacred hallowed grounds that are protected by the host nations and not by the country that places an embassy in a foreign land.


2. Even if america has the right to provide its own security, which will have to be reciprocated the same to other nations in USA, HOW MANY troops were to be needed? 1 military division, or 1 military battalion, 1 or team of spec ops, etc?

Can you professionally answer that? I doubt you can, or would, so I shall spare all the frustration awaiting your reply that would never come except in the form of more BS and deflection.


3. Can anyone predict correctly HOW MANY insurgents will attack an embassy?

Can you 'metaphysically' answer that? I doubt you dare or would, so I shall spare all the frustration awaiting your reply that would never come except in the form of more BS and deflection.


4. How many attacks upon embassies occured after 911 AND on the anniversary of 911 whereby ambassadors die? None. The one in Afghanistan was way before 911.

AND YET, you and the author are claiming that you both knew WHEN, WHERE & the AMOUNT of insurgents will attack on the anniversary of 911, and would kill the ambassador, and thus blame the authorities for not listening to your predictions, or should say at this stage - 20/20 vision hindsight?


Amazing! Do please tell me the next winning numbers for the powerball draw. Such gifts as yours should not be wasted, when the economy should be getting more focus than being deflected by the republicans using this Benghazi tragedy.

And please, not the past winning numbers. I prefer the new ones for the next draw. Gotta make it clear, cos you both have perfect 20/20 vision hindsight and will try to palm me off with the past ones, dashing all hopes for a big donation to the victim families and the many social enterprises I intend to fund when I have that huge amount of money.
edit on 19-5-2013 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)



I wonder why you keep lambasting others about knowing military capabilities and tactics when you obviously have no knowledge of them yourself.

The embassy was attackef by an estimated 100 fighters. That is an under strength company: just shy of two platoons. No armor. No heavy weapons. A few regular infantry squads could have held them off. Remember that, when attacking a position, the attackers need superiority in numbers. Add in the CAS they could have gotten, they could have turned away the attackers. The embassy staff in Saigon turned away many more with much less.

It didn't take a crystal ball to see that the embassy was in high threatcon. The signs were all there and the people in charge of reading those signs asked for more help- repeatedly.

The entire reason for manning up the QRF in Italy was for this exact contingency. This is what they trained for and thus is what they wanted to do but they were told to stand down. Not once but twice.
edit on 19-5-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by 2ndthought
 


Why the turnaround from the deadly serious charge of calling me a terrorist then, but when I challenge you to call DHS, your cowardly backtracking to labelling me instead as a 'verbal terrorist', -whatever BS that means.

So if I disagree with your views with facts and logic, I am to be labelled a terrorist, and an attempt to scare others that others whom dares to challenge your views would be similarly labelled as such?

Cut the BS. I don't even know why you bothered to reply, except perhaps to justify your cowardice now? Please, stick to the topic instead of attempting to scare others to voicing their opinions. Just as you are taught to bully others, so too am I taught to stand up to bullies.

You are free to derail the thread and scare others. Just know that others may not be as patient as me when you clearly broke T&C rules. I don't complain to moderators. I prefer to let you dig your own grave deeper.




top topics



 
51
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join