Duck and cover, new lie same as the old lie, spin the top, ...
When I want to clear the record the NYT is the last place I’ll go.
ny slimes lying... it is all that they can do... satan is the lord of the lie and nyt is his newspaper.
I think a chart with these columns would be helpful:
date/speaker/oblique reference to terror/ terror/ stupid film
NYT: “Obama applied the terror label to the attack in his first public statement.”
I’ve been re-reading 1984 lately. When I read it as a kid, the part about re-writing history seemed a bit bizarre. Now days I see it happening right in front of me, and what is worse, I see that in short order people forget what they saw and accept what the press tells them they saw.
Since historians typically start with press accounts, you know that history is going to get it wrong. We are watching history altered right before our very eyes.
Mr. Obama applied the terror label to the attack in his first public statement on the events in Benghazi, delivered in the Rose Garden at the White House at 10:43 a.m. on Sept. 12, though the reference was indirect.
Sorry Scott, but no he did not apply the "terror" label to the attack. He said "no acts of terror" will shake our resolve, etc. in the context of the American people remembering what had happened on that day 11 years ago. That comment was not addressing this attack. THEN he started talking about this attack and he used words like "murder" and "reprehensible" and "terrible act". But he called the perpetrators "murderers" rather than "terrorists" and he vowed to "bring them to justice". He also condemned those who insult other religions but then said that is no excuse for this act, thereby carrying water for the BS line from the islamists that the acts which just happeneded to occur on the anniversary of 9/11 were some kind of reaction to a youtube video posted months ago.
New York Times - providing quality kitty box liner for over 100 years!
So I guess Obama didn’t think the terrorist explanation wasn’t credible enough to have his mouthpieces go on the talking heads shows and not mention it once??? The neglect of Obama not to specifically tie the terrorist comment to the murders of four American citizens is deporable when he or his henchmen attempt to hide behind the comment that was so general it could have meant 9/11/01. Obama is a fraud, pure and simple. The most dangerous fraud this country has ever seen. I would rather the Mafia operate the government than Obama. At least you knew where you stood. Obama is a closet Muslim and I will never be convinced otherwise. His actions from the second he took the oath to now have been in support of that opinion. The Quaran directs Muslims to lie in order to defeat your enemy. Isn’t that enough to convince you of his true beliefs. He’s an expert at lying and the media loves it. They think he has a great gift of gab.
Oh, thank God for the New York Slimes coming around to set the record straight. LOL.
Give it up, assclowns.
I read the transcript, watched the video, and disagree... but, even if he did, then why did he send Susan Rice out the following Sunday, 4 days later, on all the Sunday talk shows, and blame the entire event on a public demonstration that got out of hand based on that stupid video? Had her do the same thing at the U.N.? Broadcast the same thing all over Pakistan, fomenting public demonstrations there? What was his motive for that? Did he not have a handle on what his underlings were saying? Did he not brief them? Where was he?
Oh, yeah, he was in Las Vegas at a fundraiser; didn't have time to lead the country. I forget his absences in both the Illinois Senate and the U.S. Senate - not wanting to get blamed for his voting record.
B. Obama at LV campaign rally the day after Amb Stevens assassination.
You're right, Barry, it IS all about you.
The new York times is now on record as aiding and abetting the coverup concerning Benghazi. I wonder if advertisers will turn a blind eye to the new York times if the time’s unwillingness to investigate the Benghazi coverup results in a terrorist attack? I know I wouldn’t support any company that would advertise in the new York times if that happened. That would be putting blood on my hands. There must be lots of soap and paper towels at the new York times because they evidently don’t care how much blood gets on their hands.
Shameless. I can only hope with Romney is president he recalls the Crowleys,The NY Times and the Crissy Matthews of the world and grants them access accordingly. They need to be frozen out and marginalized for their behavior.
This is a blatant lie. The two paragraphs prior to the terror reference clearly show the president was referrencing the original 9/11 as a terror attack. There was no reference at that point, direct, indirect or imagined to the Benghazi attack.
Interesting - Somehow the NY Times forgot to mention that Obama mentioned and blamed the attack on a protest boiled over, when there was NO PROTEST at all in Benghazi.
They also left out the most memorable statement, for me, from his rose garden address, “the future does not belong to those who insult the prophet mohammad.”
IOWs 0bunghole lacks any conviction whatsoever to actually lead when the enemy is at the gates.
From the Rose Garden speech...
"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."
In that very speech he bragged about last night he tells the lie about the "video."
Though the reference is indirect.