Candy Crowley Admits Romney Was Correct About Libya Attack But Simply Couldn’t Stop Herself

reply to post by PvtHudson


in the rose garden speach, Øbama did in fact note the event at Benghazi was a 'act of terror'
but he meant that in the same sense as the event was 'a horrendous act'...

the ego-in-chief is playing on the word 'terror' to imply something he did not mean at all---
because the Øbama intention was to remain the apologist to Islam & Muslims in general even if they are militant/salifists/wahhabi intent on warring against the West...

for another 12 days, including a speech before the UN...Øbama continued to blame the orchestrated 911 attack on the Embassy on a 12 minute video on YT that depicted the Prophet Mohammad as a bad/selacious character


Øbama needs to be investigated by congress/peers




www.forbes.com...
~Romney v. Obama Was a Nauseating Draw, and Both Deserve to Lose~

For the life of me I don't get why this is important at all. Seems manufactured outrage to me and people are arguing over phraseology (is that a word?) and forgetting there are people out there that will attack the US interests no matter what.

I think the people that do not support the President, especially in the type of war we are in, are anti-American as hell. Instead of giving support to a President they side with the same mentality that drove the attacks.

Illuminating. Instead of actually pulling behind the POTUS because Americans were killed, these unpatriotic vermin decide to attack instead of providing a unified front against aggressors of our nation. I bet those aggressors are rubbing their hands with glee knowing they have people on their side in our own country.

Arguing over something as simple as what a POTUS says while people died when his statement wasn't really that bad to begin with. Pretty much a stock response in these times.

Some of you guys have no shame... and probably the VERY SAME kinds that called me, a veteran, unpatriotic for not supporting Iraq II.

Originally posted by HostileApostle
I will never get tired of posting this and throwing it in the Right Wingers face.

www.whitehouse.gov...

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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

It's right there, in plain english.

No spin away little conservative tornadoes.

I could go murder someone and it would be an act of terror
that does not make it a terrorist act by terrorist like what happen in benghazi they then went to blame the dumb movie and protests that was out of control.. Clinton even went out for damage control the night before the debate...

OK. Look at Candy... Now look at a bottle of Gin.....Match made in heaven..enough said.

SHould have gotten allister crowley lol jk

Originally posted by 3chainz
Obama called the attacks an act of terror.

End of story.

He said those words....Mitt Romney was wrong.

This thread title is misleading and should be changed, it violates the T/C.

edit on 17-10-2012 by 3chainz because: (no reason given)

An "act of terror" is not the same thing as a concerted terrorist attack by Al Quida. If the attack was the result of a violent protest due to a video that too could be considered an act of terror. But there is a world of difference between the two. Obama knew exactly what he was doing. He and his administration willfully misled the American people. I am no supporter of Romney, but what Obama, Hillary and Rice did was indefensible.

How would you like to be the producer or actor in that stupid video and have the President blame the death of an Ambassador and 3 other Americans on you when he knew you were not responsible?

LOL.

Yes, the HUGE uproar over this! An uproar found on Newsmax - one of the worst and most propaganda filled sites on the web - and the corners of ATS inhabited by adults in tri-corner hats.

Waaaaaaaaa waaaaaa

Romney had to debate but it's Candy's fault he lost waaaaaaaa

Yes lets widen the gap between the average citizen to prove to ourselves that we have a better understanding of semantics than the next guy. What exactly did any of you think was going to happen when you put a corporate pirate and a lawyer are put in the same room together. If 2% of what was said by either of them was 90% honest we'd be doing pretty good. The system is broken.... it's not Obama's fault, it's not Bush's fault, it's not Clinton's fault. We are living in a corrupt and subversive plutocracy, why don't we focus our energies on fixing that...not semantics on what Gordon Gecko or Karl Marx had to say.

Days upon days upon days of news, bickering, and spewing hate and propaganda at each other over a semantics issue. Unbelievable.

Edit: Didn't read the thread first, others have expressed similar disgust.

I am actually a little surprised at all of the angst regarding this and the debate..... I really just see the debate as an excercise in listening to liars lying about liars and the lies they tell. At the end of the day in this truly insane place we have landed as a country the winning side (yeah I know regardless the winning side is always the "inside") will be the side that tells the most effective lies that distort the truth just enough to win. Stated as fact but really just my opinion.

OP, can't think of anything I care less about right now.

Red herring at its finest.

reply to post by St Udio

in the rose garden speach, Øbama did in fact note the event at Benghazi was a 'act of terror'
but he meant that in the same sense as the event was 'a horrendous act'

I love how many mind readers we have here.


I love how you just KNOW what Obama really meant.

The Rights progression of excuses over this
- He never said it
- He said it, but was talking about 9/11
- He said "acts of terror" but never said "terrorist attack"
- He never said "terrorists" commited this "act of terror"
- He said "Acts", with an "s", not "Act", he was talking about all terrorists attacks.
- And now finally, Ok he said it, but we know what he really meant.


Seriously guys, it's pathetic and it's getting really sad.

Originally posted by texasgirl
Candy Crowley should've stayed out of the fray and let the two hammer it out. The only thing she should have done is said 'time's up, next question'. The fact-checking begins AFTER the debate.

I like Candy Crowley and watch CNN but she was in the wrong.

Lmao, are you trying to make up the rules as you go along also? xP

It is the moderator's right to answer a direct question. It seems another case of republicanus memorylossis; if you can not recall, the Rombot addressed her directly, asking her to make sure it was "on the record" as he grinned his shark smile thinking he was circling in for the kill, only a moment later to realize what an unprepared buffoon he was.

Epic fail, get over it.

Originally posted by HostileApostle
I will never get tired of posting this and throwing it in the Right Wingers face.


No spin away little conservative tornadoes.

I always wonder why wimpy liberals like you have tough looking avatars? Change it, it doesn't suit you!

Originally posted by popcornmafia

Originally posted by HostileApostle
I will never get tired of posting this and throwing it in the Right Wingers face.

www.whitehouse.gov...

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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

It's right there, in plain english.

No spin away little conservative tornadoes.

I could go murder someone and it would be an act of terror
that does not make it a terrorist act by terrorist like what happen in benghazi they then went to blame the dumb movie and protests that was out of control.. Clinton even went out for damage control the night before the debate...

edit on 18-10-2012 by popcornmafia because: (no reason given)

Oh, so "terrorist act" != "act of terror" ????? Nice try Mr. semanticist, but that be one EPIC FAIL on your part. EPIC!

So a "no confidence vote" is not the same thing as a "vote of no confidence"? You do realize that in English there is more than one way to say the same thing, don't you?

Folks, this is the level of word twisting that the right-wing fellow travelers have to resort to, just to convince themselves of what they think. Clearly they are not going to convince anyone else with such pathetic attempts at misdirection and obfuscation.

Originally posted by HostileApostle
I will never get tired of posting this and throwing it in the Right Wingers face.

www.whitehouse.gov...

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. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

It's right there, in plain english.

No spin away little conservative tornadoes.

Just like "no spin" can ever turn an "act of terror" into a "planned terrorist attack" no matter how hard you try.

Listen, the intelligence community didn't have it wrong, Obama did.

The video of Al Qaeda's al-Zawahri calling for Libyans to kill the "crusaders of drone attacks" was posted on the internet on 9/10 and I saw and read about it for myself by 2:00 pm on 9/12.

The President had no excuse. He's been caught red handed trying to cover up the truth by using the Muslim video and it failed.

reply to post by Deetermined


I love your semantics games, it just screams desperation.

And Romney was wrong, Obama did call it an act of terror and that is what the whole conversation was about during the debate.

Now you desperate Romney supporters are coming out playing the semantic game claiming an act of terrror isn't the same thing as a terrorist attack.

That's like saying an act of kindness isn't a kind act, it's just silly.

Romney supporters are actually upset that fact checking was done in real time.

We should just let them lie uninterrupted for the enitre debate I guess. Nothing is about substance with some people I guess.

Bottom line is that when you're whining about the moderator, the refs, the umpire, the traffic cop, the judge etc..........you are wrong and you're scapegoating your loss because you can't handle being on the losing side.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com