Comments about ‘New questions posed on Libya attack’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Oct. 24 2012 10:27 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
worf
Mcallen, TX

Hillary once said, she was under gun fire in Bosnia,when she wasn't.

Can't trust her to be truthful.

JWB
Kaysville, UT

Ever since Hillary's husband was running for President in the 1992 Primary she showed that she would do anything for power.

Now that she has some very strong diplomatic power, she is under the all powerful Obama but still under pressure from her husband who makes $200,000 a speech plus benefits.

It is still amazing that she would jeopardize her career with this 3 a.m. in the morning type of call and she blew it. Then to advertise on Pakistani television for $70,000 that it was the anti-Islamist video that caused the attack while her boss was off in some self-agrandizement place.

This does almost rate similar to her husband's definition of is, statement. However, in his case, no one was killed, physically, even though he did his victim in emotionally, psychologically, etc.

Power can take down a person and any good she might have done in the past 4-years, Senator years, First Lady years when her husband was governor and President does not cover for this time for any of the families of the deceased.

When you see an e-mail above blacked out, it is a security type classified message

JWB
Kaysville, UT

With this kind of involvement, Hillary Clinton's board should not be run by her. She needs to be answering the Congress' questions, not concluding an investigation herself. The President says he wants to get down to what happened. He is the President and he should have known immediately but better yet, he should have done something before the attack. I guess he did do something and that is not to do something about our dedicated servants of our country. He didn't elevate the security and protection for any of the embassies.

If you look at the situation room when Osama Bin Laden was taken down by this President, he didn't look like a Commander-in-Chief even in that room where he has all power. He was along for the ride. He was concerned it would go awry and that it would make him look bad for re-election.

Hillary Clinton has always been second fiddle in the State Department as the President took over those reigns when he went to all those countries as our President to "apologize" for all of the U.S. actions over the past 200 years. He knew what he was doing.

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

Unbelievable accusations, JWB sure likes to speculate a lot, and what a short memory WMD? 911? Mission Accomplished?
You don't like the way he worded that terrorist attacked us or or that we were attacked in an act of terrorism.
Pathetic attempt to blame the president and act as though he pulled the trigger, because of wording?

Keep trying to detract from the fact the mitt doesn't even know where syria and Iran are?

KDave
Moab, UT

Hillary said a Face Book posting is not proof of anything. However, a U-tube posting was all the proof they needed to spin the events on Sept. 11th. Cherry picking anyone?

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

Spin 911? Watch Bush sit there reading "my pet goat" while the planes continued, leadership?

Seriously "It was an act of terrorism." or "it was an act by terrorists." real deal breaker in who's world?
I think trump has some "New Info" too.

athought
Salt Lake City, UT

@Happy Valley

Never mind how the statement from Obama was worded -- That's not the issue -- the issue is Obama and his people knew what was going on, did nothing about it, then lied for how many weeks about it.

I'm not for war, but you brought it up -- let me ask what you would do. Are you sure there wasn't WMD's? Heussein wouldn't let inspectors in to see. If he didn't have anything to hide, why? 3,000 people then lost their lives in 9/11. As I recall Bush gave Iraq several chances to come clean. When he finally made the statement that you comply or will be bombed, right or wrong, it put him in a position he had to follow through. How would he have been looked upon as a world leader had he backed down? Obama would have apologized all over the place, and bowed to show Heussein his worship.

Under Obama we are the laughing stock of the world. We are no longer looked on as a leading nation, but one that can be walked on. Keep Obama in, the more we borrow, the worse it will get.

JWB
Kaysville, UT

Having been in the military for over 20 years and depending on the Intelligence community and the President to support us in our actions, this was not what you would expect from the administration. The intellience community includes some of the most dedicated and conscientious people in the military and government civilian force. They put themselves on the line in many circumstances to provide input to all of the organizations that depend on their ability to fight.

These dedicated individuals appear to have provided information through their chain of command to the top of the various agencies. This President has blamed the previous many administrations for his short falls, almost daily.

He has been in charge of his administration for almost 4-years. This government paid $70,000 to put the President, Hillary and Mrs. Rice on the Pakistani airwaves saying it was the video. That video due to the President's advertising help spread discontent around the world against the United States of America.

The intelligence people in the United States of America government must feel as if they have been dumped on. The intelligence community don't make decisions, that is the President's job today and tomorrow.

DSB
Cedar Hills, UT

@HVH - you may think it's a petty parsing of words, but there is in fact a significant difference between an "act of terror" and an "act of terrorism." An "act of terror" is a rather large umbrella that can include anything from a playground bully to a complex Al Quaeda attack. An "act of terrorism" is a more specific term used to describe planned violent actions by enemies to our nation.

Most of the various mob riots that occurred in the Middle East recently may indeed have been a response to that stupid video. They may have fallen under the umbrella of "acts of terror" without being technically "acts of terrorism."

You have incorrectly stated that Obama called the Libya attack an "act of terrorism." He did no such thing, but characterized it under the broader umbrella of "act of terror." That would make the narrative consistent as his spokespeople subsequently lied to our country about the motivation for the Libyan attack, since a pre-planned attack and a spontaneous riot are both "acts of terror."

It also gave him opportunity to fool a lot of gullible people into believing that he had called it "terrorism" from the start.

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

@athought(less accusation )

please quote a lie obama told. I hear lots of innuendo but have yet to see any off you point to an actual quote by obama that was a lie. The truth is he called it an act of terror three times in the first two days and called for reinforcements early on in the sedge.

George
Bronx, NY

@Kdave
Obama statement 9/12/12 "No Acts Of Terror Will Ever Shake The Resolve Of This Great Nation." 
(9/12/2012 Rose Garden)


Obama statement 9/13/12 So what I want all of you to know is that we are going to bring those who killed our fellow Americans to justice. I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America.
Obama statement later the same day As for the ones we lost last night: I want to assure you, we will bring their killers to justice. And we want to send a message all around the world -- anybody who would do us harm: No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America."

Show me the spin.

suess
Salt Lake City, UT

@Spring street

Here you go:

In an address before the United Nations General Assembly on September 25, President Obama stated, "The attacks on our civilians in Benghazi were attacks on America...And there should be no doubt that we will be relentless in tracking down the killers and bringing them to justice." He also said, "There is no video that justifies an attack on an Embassy."

Statement from Clinton 9/12

"inflammatory material posted on the internet" to clarify that true or not, that was not a justification for violence"

Clinton on 9/14

Weve seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with."

Susan Rice on 5 interview's on 9/16

We've seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful internet video that we had nothing to do with."

You really don't think Obama had anything to do with any of the statements issued by his people? Come on -- give me a break.

If he didn't know what was being said, doesn't show much of a leadership quality, does it?

George
Bronx, NY

@suess

you do realize there where attacks outside Benghazi against other embassies (notice the plural use of the word embassies in the statements you quote?) that where related to the video right? Benghazi was not the only place we where having problems at the time.

suess
Salt Lake City, UT

springstreet

In addition to the posted ones from Suess:

On 9/18 Jim Carney, White House Press Secretary told reporters:

"I'm saying that based on information that we -- our initial information, and that includes all information -- we saw no evidence to back up claims by others that this was a preplanned or premeditated attack; that we saw evidence that it was sparked by the reaction to this video".

On 9/20, during an appearance on Univision, President Obama said that protests linked to the anti-Islamic trailer on YouTube were used by extremists to launch attacks on the consulate. President Obama is quoted as saying, "What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests

Now, Springstreet, tell me how these weren't lies, when 2 hours into the attack it was stated, from Lybia, it was by terrorists. Really? To quote several on here, "show me the spin".

And please, to refer to me as athought(less accusation)?

@George, these were quotes about the Benghazi attacks, not referenced to the others.

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

athought: The very fact that you use the same confusing mix of propaganda as the bush administration by combining Iraq when talking about 911 shows a lack of knowledge about that situation also.

JWB:"The intelligence people in the United States of America government must feel as if they have been dumped on. "

Probably not as bad as Colin Powell or condie felt after being used by president (no bid contract) cheney in his little scheme to start a war for profit.

Just so I'm sure... your saying "acts of terror" is completely different than "acts of terrorism." got it?

Remember how silly republicans thought it was of Clinton arguing the definition of "is."
This is what what republican have come down to, quote out of context for the RNC theme, and arguing over "ism."

jasonlivy
Orem, UT

George:

You have got to be kidding me!

Have you not kept up with the news? Are you not seeing and hearing the same things we all are? You obviously have been caught up in the spin that's been created by team Obama and Hillary.

The facts are as clear as day! It's undisputed that these attacks had nothing to do with the YouTube video! Why would the White House want to cover them up? Well, it's an election year. The facts are that there was and is a cover up as the evidence continues to pour in.

The Libya thing is the tip of the iceberg. The most disturbing thing right now is the state of our country. We are in horrible shape under the leadership of Obama. We are 16 Trillion Dollars in debt, we are over-regulated and under educated. There are more people living in poverty than in any other point in American history other than the Depression. We are weaker as a nation. Our congress is more divided than it has ever been. Hope and Change was promised but not delivered.

Four more years would be disastrous!

George
Bronx, NY

@Jason
then how do you explain Obama's statements I quoted above, they may be undisputed within the far right bloggasfer and faux news but your facts are less then factual. As has also been pointed out there were a number of attacks on a number of other consulates that was sparked by the video.

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

@jason
over regulated? so you think there should be less oversight over corporations like bank of america? you talk about not paying attention to the news.

DSB
Cedar Hills, UT

@HVH- your comments are Exhibit #1 that Democrat presidents lie and manipulate our language to lead a highly partisan, gullible following to believe everything they say, even if what they say is in direct contradiction not only to known facts, but to their very own prior remarks.

Although you and probably most Obama followers are apparently not sophisticated enough to discern the significant difference in meaning between the words "terror" as an umbrella term and "terrorism" as a technical characterization, there is no question that President Obama knows the difference, and has cleverly used these terms in a very calculated manner to obfuscate the overall issue of how the Libya incident was handled, and to keep his gullible groupies blindly defending him.

Hemlock
Salt Lake City, UT

Telling the truth is not a metric in politics. Not being caught at it is the litmus. Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Jay Carney got caught at either lying or seeming incompetent so they are twisting in the wind and claiming that questioning them is political.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments