|
Arturas -> RE: Why would Obama and Clinton lie to U.S.? (9/27/2012 12:09:12 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Politesub53
quote:
ORIGINAL: Arturas
Greetings this morning.
It is confirmed the Obama administration knew this attack was an organized and well planned 9/11 assault on the consulate "within 24 hours of the attack" and to put it bluntly, lied to America. Naturally, Foxnews is headlining this and is just putting out the facts but as of 10am cst the other two are working up their spin on this still.
But what we need to know before rushing to judgement is why would Obama and Clinton lie to us?
Be well.
The irony of "Before rushing to judgement"......... Can you back your claim that they "knew" because it was thoroughly debunked on another thread.
Greetings,
How could it (the attack was the work of a terrorist organization) be "thoroughly debunked" when it is true. That has been credibly proven for days now and the difference here are U.S. government sources within the Administration that say the Obama Admin. knew on the first day they were lying to us.
Here is the current foxnews headline now indicating "Senior U.S. Officials now admit the Obama administration new much earlier than indicated before, within 24 hours, that it was not a random act of violence triggered by a video.
quote:
Two senior U.S. officials said that the Obama administration internally labeled the attack terrorism from the first day in order to unlock and mobilize certain resources to respond, and that officials were looking for one specific suspect. The officials said the intelligence community knew by Sept. 12 that the militant Ansar al-Shariah and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb were likely behind the strike.
Further, an official said, "No one ... believed that the mortars, indirect and direct fire, and the RPGs were just the work of a mob -- no one."
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/27/us-officials-knew-libya-attack-was-terrorism-within-24-hours-sources-confirm/#ixzz27hJKR5Wu
This means the Obama White House was lying to U.S.
and of course there are plenty of references now that prove Romney was right about it being an attack and that the video statement released by the Administration was a weak response to the news of the video and was too weak to prevent the attack, the sacking and burning of Amercian property on American soil and the brutal murder of American citizens by terrorist armed forces ...
quote:
The White House, after insisting for eight days that the deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was a "spontaneous" act, conceded Thursday that it was "self evident" that it was an act of terror.
"It is, I think, self evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack," White House Spokesman Jay Carney said. "Our embassy was attacked violently and the result was four deaths of American officials. That is self evident."
Fox News reported the news Thursday in its website's main headline, noting that earlier in the week, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland declined to label the attack terrorism.
Carney's statement to reporters comes after the director of the National Counterterrorism Center testified at a Senate hearing Wednesday that the strike was indeed a "terrorist attack." Matt Olsen, director of the NCTC, said: "Yes, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy."
Olsen said, however that U.S. officials have no specific intelligence about "significant advanced planning or coordination" for the attack.
"The administration is still sticking by its claim that they don't have evidence the assault was pre-planned. But Carney for the first time Thursday called it terrorism -- while downplaying the fact that he was doing so," wrote Fox News.
So, perhaps the "debunkers" were spinning. Speaking of spinning, the other two cable news networds are still figuring out how to spin this.
Well wishes,
Arturas
|
|
|
|
