It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by kittyfatale
reply to post by MsAphrodite
I'm with you sister. Remember right after it happened he referred to it as "a bump in the road"? He makes me sick.. In all seriousness, it would be OPTIMAL if his speech writers were shot!
Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Originally posted by kittyfatale
reply to post by MsAphrodite
I'm with you sister. Remember right after it happened he referred to it as "a bump in the road"? He makes me sick.. In all seriousness, it would be OPTIMAL if his speech writers were shot!
The word I wanted to use was,nonchalant, that is his attitude, his lack of passion about the matter,
Originally posted by KeliOnyx
reply to post by Valhall
Actually according to the article they have started giving her information about it. Look it sucks, but the fact is her son died she wants answers. And that is completely understandable, but due to his position and the nature of what happened, there are national security issues to contend with. It is not very likely that she or anyone other than a select few people will know everything there is to know about what happened. Hopefully she will get to know enough about it to satisfy that need to know.edit on 19-10-2012 by KeliOnyx because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Hawking
Well unfortunately FoxNews will always be a much bigger joke than anything else on cable, and yet conservative politicians use it to pander to their supporters.
And I believe it was Romney who politicized the Benghazi attacks five minutes after they happened. Because he's an arrogant fool who has little respect for those who died that day. He made that clear in the 2nd debate. Guess you didn't watch it.
Do your homework before you get offended by semantics
Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by MsAphrodite
To me he seems to be detached from reality, something just isn't right.
“Islamist extremists are able to attack the Red Cross with relative impunity,”
“Benghazi has moved from trepidation to euphoria and back as a series of violent incidents has dominated the political landscape…The individual incidents have been organized,” he added, a function of “the security vacuum that a diverse group of independent actors are exploiting for their own purposes.”
After the U.S. consulate in Benghazi had been damaged by an improvised explosive device, earlier that month, Stevens had reported to his superiors that an Islamist group had claimed credit for the attack, and in so doing, had “described the attack as ‘targeting the Christians supervising the management of the consulate.”
“Multiple warnings about security threats were contained in Ambassador Stevens’ own words in multiple cables sent to Washington, D.C., and were manifested by two prior bombings of the Benghazi compound and an assassination attempt on the British ambassador,” the congressmen wrote. “For this administration to assume that terrorists were not involved in the 9/11 anniversary attack would have required a willing suspension of disbelief.
Originally posted by Wide-Eyes
reply to post by Valhall
I guess I am feeling somewhat desensitized and detached to all this snit. A decade of wars, torture, drone strikes, hundreds of thousands of men, women and children killed. I am struggling to 'feel' much at all about four random Americans I never knew who were stationed in a recent warzone.
Sorry.