Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

THE BIG LIE: OBAMA DID NOT CALL BENGHAZI ATTACK TERRORISM ON SEP. 12
Breitbart ^ | 14 Oct 2012 | JOEL B. POLLAK

Posted on 10/14/2012 1:43:47 PM PDT by Snuph

For several days, and again on this week's Sunday morning shows, President Barack Obama's spokespeople, both at the White House and at the Obama campaign, have claimed that he called the Benghazi attack "terrorism" from the outset, in his Sep. 12 address from the Rose Garden. The media have pushed back, noting that the White House rejected terrorism as an explanation in the days that followed. But there is an even simpler reason to reject the Obama camp's explanation: it is a demonstrable lie, as a reading of Obama's actual remarks instantly reveals. Obama mentioned the word "terror" once in his Sep. 12 statement: "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for." But the context of that statement suggests strongly that President Obama was referring to terror in general, not specifically to the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi or the violent demonstrations at the U.S. embassy in Cairo. Furthermore, Obama's reference to "terror" came near the end of his statement. His initial description of the attacks, at the start of his statement, portrayed them as an excessive response to the anti-Islam video upon which the Obama relied for days and weeks thereafter: "Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification for this type of senseless violence."

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: benghazi; bho44; demloes; impeachnow; libya; soshillary; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last
To: Snuph

There are more than two possible motives in relation to the false YouTube video story on Benghazi: 1) Political protection, 2) Irresponsible ignorance, and the third 3) Intentional provocation of the Muslim world.


21 posted on 10/14/2012 5:06:00 PM PDT by Bravada (Wherever I Stand, I Stand With Israel!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Snuph

My thought was that Obama set this up by removing security to make this into a kidnapping scenario to harvest activism and diversion from his other follies prior to the election.


22 posted on 10/14/2012 5:37:10 PM PDT by Eye of Unk (OPSEC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedBird
Does anyone know if Ambassador Stevens was gay. Just read something on another site.

There were several FR threads on that point shortly after his death. Apparently, he was quite openly gay -- not the kind of person who should have been assigned to an intensely gay-hating Muslim country.

23 posted on 10/14/2012 5:57:10 PM PDT by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Bob

Could Stevens being gay be part of the cover-up?


24 posted on 10/14/2012 6:05:04 PM PDT by FreedBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: WilliamofCarmichael

The answer to many of those questions may be found in his diary.


25 posted on 10/14/2012 6:24:33 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (ObamaCare is an assault on the unborn, infirmed and elderly. GOP, repeat this as necessary...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: gov_bean_ counter
RE: diary

Thanks. I'd forgotten.

As long as the Administration doesn't try to say Stevens lied to his diary.

They might it worked before. Democrat Josh Steiner -- at the time Treasury chief of staff told Senate Whitewater investigators he had lied to his diary about stuff that contradicted what President Clinton was saying.

I'll never forget the look on Democratic Senator Paul Sarbanes' face. Sarbanes was the ranking member of the Senate Whitewater Committee. It was like.. "Wait a minute.. what? ..no, I gotta accept what he says. But on the other hand this is nuts. Does he really think that I'll believe he lied to his diary? Oh well, Clinton is counting on us so I'll accept that the guy lied to his diary . . . ."

26 posted on 10/14/2012 8:13:12 PM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: All
RE: Ambassador Stevens' diary

From State department attacks CNN for doing basic journalism. Obama officials hide behind Ambassador Stevens' family to delegitimize reporting that reflects poorly on them "CNN found a seven-page handwritten journal [that stated] 'in the months leading up to his death, the late ambassador worried about what he called the security threats in Benghazi and a rise in Islamic extremism'. CNN also reported that Stevens 'mentioned his name was on an al Qaeda hit list'."

27 posted on 10/14/2012 8:33:29 PM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson