Obama's deception about Libya

1. 93

   habeeposted 11 years ago

   From the Daily Beast and CNBC:
   
   http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 … ative.html
   
   http://www.cnbc.com/id/49110439
   
   It's on FOX, too, but I know the libs wouldn't trust that source. lol

   replyreport
   1. 0

      HowardBThinameposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I just heard that too. One paper said the deception was to cover the fact that Obama had missed a number of briefings recently and that the Consulate said three days prior that they were in trouble.
      
      What a strange situation.

      replyreport
      1. 93

         habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Missed the briefings?? Was he too busy campaigning?

         replyreport
   2. 60

      larryprice5372posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I have read both articles and shared them through my Facebook and Twitter accounts.  None of it surprised me though.

      replyreport
   3. 93

      MarleneBposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Well I guess it is time I took my head out of the sand.
      
      So... the attack was going to happen whether the film was made or not. The film was just a tool to have as an excuse to use in case people needed something upon which to blame the attack.
      
      I'm not sure I'm getting all this straight, but it seems to me that since the original 911 attack, our security systems have been on such high alert that something like this should not have been a surprise. I mean, it seems like our security measures should have been able to stop the attack before it happened. Did someone fall asleep? What happened? I know I will never know because the lies will just keep piling up, one after another, cohesive at first, but sooner or later the truth will come out. And, really all we little citizens can do is wait and see.
      
      Sometimes, I feel helpless, ashamed, and sad. The ambassador was not just an ambassador. And those other people were not just other people. They had families and people who loved them.
      
      And, I know the president didn't cause this to happen, but I have a feeling that if he were not so busy trying to run for re-election, he might have attended more meetings and been more in tune to it all.
      
      I vote for no more re-elections. One term, that's it. This way, attention can be focused on the job at hand and time not spent away from the responsibility of running and protecting the country.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         larryprice5372posted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Your theory sounds plausable and I feel your pain.  If this 'film as tool ' idea proved out, it would be a sad day for Americans.  Obama would lose his place as the fourteenth best President?? (This is real presently)
         
         We need to have a look at our CIA operations because Leon Pinetta created a Facebook/Twitter/Google blitz that made the people of Lybia think that the overthrowing of Gaddafi was a popular uprising and went to the streets. This in turn created a situation for Militant Islam to make a play for power.

         replyreport
   4. 67

      Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The incident might have been handled better by the Obama administration, but "deception" is too strong a word.
      
      Wrt your sources Larry Kudlow is nearly as bad a source for comments about Obama as Fox or Rush Limbaugh. The Daily Beast is more objective and sympathetic to Obama, but it's article didn't attribute deception to Obama.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Deception wouldn't be too strong a word if it were a Conservative in the White House now would it?

         replyreport
         1. 61

            KFlippinposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            ROFL . . . well said!

            replyreport
      2. 93

         habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         You're right, Ralph. The DB didn't use the word "deception." They described Obama's story as "faulty," "a skaky narrative," and "falling apart." You're mincing words.

         replyreport
2. 82

   Wayne Brownposted 11 years ago

   So the best solution was to just lie and tell the American people that all of it happened because of some YouTube video.  Now...there's a bunch that I want out front leading me.....NOT!  Maybe it is time to start working on the next set of lies when that bunch shows up here and pulls another 9-11 events based solely of the judgements they make of our recent reactions.  These are not people who have any respect for weakness and humility except to severe its head and drag it through the street. This is not a one-man cast of fibbers....the whole bunch is in on it and figures the American people for a bunch of chumps in the process.  Wow....some of us are playing that role really well.  ~ WB

   replyreport
3. 77

   carol7777posted 11 years ago

   What I am always amazed about is that people don't seem to care about these things and brush them off.  When does this stop?  I feel we need to pull together and make sure we are safe..And how do we do that..Not sure.

   replyreport
4. 60

   JSChamsposted 11 years ago

   The popular mythology is that having Barack Obama as President would calm the nerves and lower the blood pressure of the whole world about us.
   So much for that idea huh? But they can't have you thinking otherwise right before October so........

   replyreport
5. 85

   rebekahELLEposted 11 years ago

   I never believed it was the YouTube video that set it off.  It happened on 9-11.  Obviously it was planned to coincide with the date.  That was the media jumping to conclusions to make a nice story about the video.  I don't know about the President and what he knew.  They're all told what to say, everyone of them..

   replyreport
   1. 60

      larryprice5372posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, you are right.  It happened on 911 and that is why I indicated below that I've always suspected the official White House version.
      
      The Media does share blame, but the DIMocratic Party pulls them around by a nose ring.  The average talking head was indoctrinated by progressive thinkers while in school and college.
      
      SAD THINGS GOING ON.

      replyreport
6. 60

   knolyourselfposted 11 years ago

   I have a novel theory. Obama won't give Netanyahoo his holocaust on Iran, so Bibbi is trying to sway the election to his buddy Romney, who is too dumb to know that a war with Iran might be catastrophic. The Jewish funded video was meant to embarrass Obama and tilt the election.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      larryprice5372posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      First I've heard the Isrealies provided funding.
      What planet are you from if you believe this Illuminati junk.  The great Jewish Cabal does not exist.  At least, not as it may be portrayed in that stupid book.

      replyreport
   2. 62

      Hollie Thomasposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The Israeli video, many Jews and Israelis for that matter, are completely opposed to war with Iran. In fact, Bibi funded video would be more appropriate.

      replyreport
7. 60

   larryprice5372posted 11 years ago

   This does not surprise me at all.  In fact, I suspected the Obuma Administration was creating a deception over this Lybian attack.  I felt it was the Arab Brotherhood group which has ties with Al Queda.  It seemed funny that this administration indicated the Lybian Government would investigate and bring the perpetrators to justice.  We should be doing the investigation, as we now have decided.  Obuma jumped the gun hoping to create a comfortable feeling that extremists were not involved.
   
   This all reminds me of how William Jefferson Clinton handled the Embassy Bombings in Kenya, South Africa and elsewere.  He wanted to treat it not as terrorism or a terrorist organization, but as a criminal matter best handled by Interpol.  Al Queda then grew and trained resulting in 911.  Wake up OBUMA and smell the bloody coffee.
   
   I say throw the BUM out!

   replyreport
8. 82

   Wayne Brownposted 11 years ago

   I believe it is more a case of Mr. Netanyahoo dropping by on a courtesy call to advise Mr. Obama of Israel's intent to take action on Iran and soon.  Obama does not want to hear it so he can claim ignorance and lack of awareness when the deed goes down.  Believe me, when Isreal decides to kick ass, they don't ask the likes of Obama or any others for permission.  These are a people who understand that their survival is totally dependent on their willingness to act when the threat becomes too great.  Obama is doing nothing of significance with regard to Iran...the clock is running out on Israel.  Maybe Obama can blame that one on some YouTube movie as well.  ~WB

   replyreport
9. 77

   Reality Bytesposted 11 years ago

   Oh the lies, the deception, the desire to cover his own ass over that of being truthful to his constituents.  What a lying piece of crap!  An Ambassador of our great nation lost his life and the President of the United States is more concerned about maintaining his power over that of being truthful to the people from which said power is derived.

   replyreport
10. 60

    knolyourselfposted 11 years ago

    Are millionaires and billionaires progressive?

    replyreport
    1. 60

       larryprice5372posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Yes, they very progressively create jobs and wealth for all of us.  That would include our great country.

       replyreport
11. 60

    knolyourselfposted 11 years ago

    You are right the video funding may be still obscure but I will wait on that if it should ever be unearthed. I have worked for millionaires. They have the money I have none.

    replyreport
12. 79

    Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

    Another consider the source situation.
    Peter R. King, R-NY.
    Same Peter R. King who, when confronted by Soledad O"Brien with the truth about the WH non-apology on Libya when it first happened “I don’t care what FactCheck[.org] says!” King exclaimed.
    
    A cursory review of Rep. King's history shows him on the frontlines of anti-Muslim hysteria. Letter to Janet Napolitano, investigations into Muslims in governmnent, or how about his oldie but goodie about building a mosque at Ground Zero being the equivalent of putting a convent near Auschwitz.
    
    //capitaltonightny.ynn.com/2010/07/king … auschwitz/
    
    I'm not saying the WH did or did not know about the Libya attack in advance.
    But someone more credible than Peter King needs to break that story.

    replyreport
    1. 93

       habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       King isn't mentioned in the Daily Beast article. Hillary and McCain both said it was a terrorist act, and that's good enough for me.

       replyreport
       1. 79

          Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Saying they now are characterizing it as a terrorist attack is not quite the same as "lying" about it.
          Given the ongoing uproar about the offensive video -- including 19 deaths today in Pakistan, it does seem a bit odd that every other Muslim country's violence is about the video, but Libya's is totally not.
          Somebody's covering something up here.
          Could well be Obama administration -- but what do they have to gain by it?
          But who would have something political to gain?
          Hmmm.

          replyreport
13. 66

    Faybe Bayposted 11 years ago

    Okay, for the record, MSNBC reported the film was not the reason for the protests on day one. AL-Qaeda had scheduled the attacks. That's why, even though a few protesters were screaming about the film, there were terrorists in the crowd with heavy weapons. The furor over the film was a cover for the attack.That being said this is all old news to me. The new News is that the Libyans in Benghazi have taken it upon themselves to roust the terrorist militia, and burn their stronghold. Reports on MSNBC claim the militia actually fled when their threatening shots went unheeded. They left with their guns and their vehicles and the crowd actually set one of the fleeing vehicles on fire. I expect this will be the beginning and other communities will rise up against the terrorists in their midst as well.

    replyreport
14. 79

    Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

    Okay, Habee.
    Now I also smell something fishy here.
    When McCain turns on Hill... there's gotta be something there.
    Hmmm.
    
    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 … n-answers/

    replyreport
    1. 93

       habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Wow. (Oops! I meant to say "SMI.") But I was proud of Hil coming out and saying it was a terrorist attack, even when Obama wouldn't. After her statement, and after more info leaked out, the Prez started doing some backpeddling. I felt like Hil was being more honest and more forthcoming than the White House was. As for the briefing, Obama had prolly warned Hil not to say too much. I'm sorry, but I don't think all of this would be going on if Hil OR McCain were POTUS. But...who knows? That part of the world has been a boiling pot for centuries. I find it all very disturbing, yet we're all arguing over Romney's taxes and Obama's wealth redistribution plan. And yes - I'm guilty there, too.

       replyreport
    2. 60

       larryprice5372posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Mc Cain Is flimsy to say the least.  Nor real surprised he never got elected.  In my opinion, Mitt is a fasionable moderate who cannot be trusted.  I'll vote for him regardless, but only because of Paul Ryan.  Hope Paul can give him the same help Bush had with his Vice President.

       replyreport
       1. 93

          habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Cheney?? Ugh. We don't need that kind of help. lol

          replyreport
          1. 60

             larryprice5372posted 11 years agoin reply to this

             Well, there must of been a deeper intellect involved.  Bush was good at choosing people to join his cabinet who were helpful.

             replyreport
15. 77

    Reality Bytesposted 11 years ago

    How long has Barack Hussein Obama been misleading the United States concerning Libya?
    
    
    
    Human Rights Watch data shows Libya forces not targeting civilians
    
    
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NarDHUj … ure=relmfu
    
    
    
    Obama's Lie - Libya - - Humanitarian act, NATO Crimes In Libya
    
    
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4kZKIES … ure=relmfu

    replyreport
    1. 79

       Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       vsmrk? Who is this? Any idea?
       
       5 views for one video and 30 for the other.
       Well, I looked at both.

       replyreport
       1. 77

          Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          I do not know who it is, but if you look at the videos published under that account, there is strong documentation of NATO caused atrocities in Libya.  Hundreds of them!  NATO is quite the terrorist organization. I guess that is OK, cuz they are our terrorists?

          replyreport
16. 79

    Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

    So what do we all make of the latest in Libya? The counter-uprising of the people against the insurgents who killed the ambassador?
    Seems like something good is coming out of something bad (?)

    replyreport
    1. 66

       Faybe Bayposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I'm excited about it. My son had said from the start (paraphrasing here) "If the Libyans feel so strongly for the US Ambassador why don't they just chase the terrorists away? There's enough of them to do it. If they turn on the terrorists the terrorists will run, I guarantee it. Terrorists are just bullies with ammunition, and bullies are cowards."

       replyreport
       1. 60

          larryprice5372posted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Well said.  I agree wholly.  I just hope the Libyan people can keep their country from the hands of Islamic Extremists.

          replyreport
    2. 93

       habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Looks good to me!

       replyreport
       1. 79

          Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Hi there.
          Your guy's on 60 Minutes right now!

          replyreport
          1. 66

             Faybe Bayposted 11 years agoin reply to this

             What channel, I can't find it. I'm on the East coast, where are you?

             replyreport
             1. 79

                Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                It probably already aired on the East Coast. 60 Minutes is on CBS.
                The interviews -- they did both Romney and Obama -- should be viewable on the CBS website.

                replyreport
          2. 93

             habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

             Nope. "My guy" is watching TV in his man cave with his Basset hound.

             replyreport
             1. 79

                Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                
                I hope he at least shares the remote with the Basset hound!
                

                replyreport
                1. 93

                   habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                   We tried that. Sparky ATE the last remote. Seriously!

                   replyreport