No wonder Obama was confused

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by essence

You've made that assertion before, I have asked you for evidence for this assertion, nd you have provided none.

Another fantasy lie by the (fill in the blanks) gang of 5 (IBH, JDB, W, JB, a n other).

"Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed." Odumbo.

[essence]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

"Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed." Odumbo.

I know. He was acknowledging the anniversary of 9/11.

But the fact that he was referring to something else at some prior point in his speech is absolutely no evidence that when he was referring to acts of terror he was solely referring to the original twin towers.

You are making one and one add up to a conspiracy of silence.

You may get a hint from the fact that he used the plural - actS of terror.

Is this nonsense the basis of the republican campaign?

Geez.

I don't think Obama is the best president ever, but these republican idiots scare me, given what I know that the majority of US citizens I meet are educated, wise and thoughtful.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by essence

I know. He was acknowledging the anniversary of 9/11.

But the fact that he was referring to something else at some prior point in his speech is absolutely no evidence that when he was referring to acts of terror he was solely referring to the original twin towers.

You are making one and one add up to a conspiracy of silence.

You may get a hint from the fact that he used the plural - actS of terror.

Is this nonsense the basis of the republican campaign?

Geez.

I don't think Obama is the best president ever, but these republican idiots scare me, given what I know that the majority of US citizens I meet are educated, wise and thoughtful.

There were four separate attacks on 9/11 2001 -- that constitutes four separate acts of terror -- not to mention the would-be underwear bomber, the would-be shoe bomber, the two would-be New York bombers, the would-be Dallas bomber and the Liberty City Seven would-be bombers arrested in Florida. Subsequent to the 9/11 2012 Benghazi attack, Odumbo, and his administration, insisted the Benghazi attack was a spontaneous riot ignited by a blasphemous video. Odumbo is being fallacious when claims he called it a planned, organized "act of terror" while simultaneously insisting it was a spontaneous, misguided riot: it can't and never could be both.

[JD Barleycorn]

IB you forgot Fort Hood, Texas even if they don't acknowledge it as a terrorist attack.

[i'va biggen]

Why don't you pile on the shootings of our troops by (friends in training) in Afghanistan?

[essence]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

There were four separate attacks on 9/11 2001 -- that constitutes four separate acts of terror -- not to mention the would-be underwear bomber, the would-be shoe bomber, the two would-be New York bombers, the would-be Dallas bomber and the Liberty City Seven would-be bombers arrested in Florida. Subsequent to the 9/11 2012 Benghazi attack, Odumbo, and his administration, insisted the Benghazi attack was a spontaneous riot ignited by a blasphemous video. Odumbo is being fallacious when claims he called it a planned, organized "act of terror" while simultaneously insisting it was a spontaneous, misguided riot: it can't and never could be both.

Thank you for explaining that, it is now very clear.

When, in 2012, Obama referred to acts of terror, in the days after the Bhengazi terrorist attack, he was referring solely to the multiplicity of acts of terror in 2001, and did not include, when he used the term 'acts of terror', the most recent act of terror.

It's very clear now, I understand the full situation, and who the crazy ones are.

I'm out.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by essence

Thank you for explaining that, it is now very clear.

When, in 2012, Obama referred to acts of terror, in the days after the Bhengazi terrorist attack, he was referring solely to the multiplicity of acts of terror in 2001, and did not include, when he used the term 'acts of terror', the most recent act of terror.

It's very clear now, I understand the full situation, and who the crazy ones are.

I'm out.

Yeah, the crazy ones -- the ones who lied -- are Odumbo, et al, who tried to pass off the terrorist attack against the consulate in Benghazi as an ordinary civil disturbance event ignited by a blasphemous video that "just happened" to occur on the anniversary of 9/11 2001. Yeah, essence, you can just gobble down as much of Odumbo's bullshit as you want to, but most Americans are smarter than that.

[JD Barleycorn]

If it wasn't the video that set off this "spontaneous" demonstration then what was it?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by essence

You've made that assertion before, I have asked you for evidence for this assertion, nd you have provided none.

Another fantasy lie by the (fill in the blanks) gang of 5 (IBH, JDB, W, JB, a n other).

Originally Posted by essence

I know. He was acknowledging the anniversary of 9/11.

But the fact that he was referring to something else at some prior point in his speech is absolutely no evidence that when he was referring to acts of terror he was solely referring to the original twin towers.

You are making one and one add up to a conspiracy of silence.

You may get a hint from the fact that he used the plural - actS of terror.

Is this nonsense the basis of the republican campaign?

Geez.

I don't think Obama is the best president ever, but these republican idiots scare me, given what I know that the majority of US citizens I meet are educated, wise and thoughtful.

Originally Posted by essence

Thank you for explaining that, it is now very clear.

When, in 2012, Obama referred to acts of terror, in the days after the Bhengazi terrorist attack, he was referring solely to the multiplicity of acts of terror in 2001, and did not include, when he used the term 'acts of terror', the most recent act of terror.

It's very clear now, I understand the full situation, and who the crazy ones are.

I'm out.

Kroft: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya attack. Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?

Obama: Well it's too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...ttack/1684503/

Eat Crow-ley and choke, essence!

[I B Hankering]

As Peter Sellers' Inspector Clouseau would say, “boomp!”

[ChoomCzar]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

As Peter Sellers' Inspector Clouseau would say, “boomp!”

You've been busy serving up shit-sandwiches....I think essence choked on that one....