Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie
crockett are you pretending to be ignorant.
Okay, since you are the only person on Planet Earth who was unaware of The Pres. and his entire staff spreading the lie of the attack being caused by a "video"...here you go:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3V7Oqe1q-g |
Is this really why you are going on and on.. Honestly? Really I thought there was something more.
Obama clearly said in the that video that the extremist/terrorist used the video as an excuse.
From the Benghazi time line of event over on wikipeda..
Quote:
|
The area outside the compound before the assault was quiet; one Libyan guard who was wounded in the attack was quoted as saying "there wasn't a single ant outside."[55] The attackers stated they were acting in response to the movie.[60]
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Be...n the Compound
Now if you click the [60] on the wiki page for it's source, ironically it goes to mediamaters.org Fox News biggest foe..
From the media matters page..
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/05...d-the-b/194073
Quote:
Much of the media's criticism has been based on a false premise. They claim that rather than accurately identify the attacks as terrorism, the administration chose to attribute them to the film. But in addition to ignoring the fact that President Obama referred to the attacks as an "act of terror" at least twice in the days after September 11, this line of logic is a false dichotomy: it ignores the possibility that the attackers may have been terrorists, but their reason for engaging in that particular act of terror was because they were enraged by the film.
That is the conclusion that the CIA's Office of Terrorism Analysis came to in the initial draft of the much-ballyhooed talking points on the attack: They reported that the attacks had been "spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo" -- protests triggered by the video -- and committed by "Islamic militants with ties to al Qa'ida." The latter point was removed from later drafts in order to avoid interfering with the ongoing investigation into the perpetrators, but every version of the talking points stated that the attacks had been "inspired by the protests," and thus the video. In fact, CIA director David Petraeus criticized the final version of the talking points for not doing enough to link the attacks to the protests.
|
Honestly, I don't watch much news on TV it's very very rare. I read news on the internet so I'm exposed to very little of the talking heads from the various news shows. I tend to pull my opinion biased on a range of sources.
While I'm not to fond of the Republican hoorah I assumed there had to be at least "something" to the story that gave it some sort of "reasonable" credibility that would give reason to you guys constantly going on and on about Bengazi.
I look at this and I don't care if it was George Bush that was president at the time. I see nothing out of line. You and your Conservibros can't seem to put 2+2 together and figure out that yes they were terrorists and they probably decided to attack at that time due to the movie. In fact this is EXACTLY what the CIA said.
Seriously if this is what you are so up in arms about it's just grasping at straws and just more proof that no matter what you will find an excuse to bitch and moan about Obama now and probably Hillary in a few years.
Now had there been a real chance that the Military could have affected the out come and were told to stand down, then sure that could be cause for alarm and investigation. However I've already proven in this topic that that didn't happen and that the military couldn't have affected the out come in the time they had to respond.
You are just grasping at straws because you wont admit that all the claims you guys have been making based on Fox Facts, have been wrong or over exaggerated.