XPost: alt.society.liberalism, alt.atheism, talk.politics.guns
From: dead@gone.com
On Tue, 14 May 2013 12:04:49 -0500, RD Sandman wrote:
> Zepp wrote in news:kmtnme$au6$7@dont-email.me:
>
>> On Tue, 14 May 2013 10:15:31 -0500, RD Sandman wrote:
>>
>>> Zepp wrote in news:kms9fk$s25$16@dont-email.me:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 13 May 2013 21:55:03 -0500, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Zepp wrote in news:kms653$s25$11@dont-email.me:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 13 May 2013 18:48:35 -0800, linuxgal wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> deep wrote:
>>>>>>>> Somebody working for Obama make a bad error in judgement an you
>>> want
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> crucify Obama for FOUR American deaths.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, I want to crucify Obama for covering up an al-Qaeda attack by
>>>>>>> running a narrative it was just a protest in response to a YouTube
>>>>> video
>>>>>>> because it was the eve of the election and he was running as the
> guy
>>>>> who
>>>>>>> killed bin Laden.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm sure you want to crucify him, but it's pretty hard to claim a
>>> cover
>>>>>> up when the NEXT DAY he's talking about it being an act of terror.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> No, he didn't. He was talking about terror in general. Listen
>>>>> carefully to that video of him in the Rose Garden.
>>>>
>>>> Given that nobody knew exactly who was behind the attacks, how
> specific
>>>> could he get?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> You missed the point. His comment about terror attacks was about them
>>> in general, not Benghazi. A week later he was still claiming that
>>> Benghazi was the result of the video.
>>
>> He was talking about Benghazi. Unless there were some OTHER attacks of
>> which we are unaware...?
>>
>>
> Not when he used the term "terrorism" or "terrorist attack". As I said
> listen closely to the audio.
So where there a whole bunch of other attacks in the previous 24 hours?
You're picking nits and you know it.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
