XPost: alt.society.liberalism, alt.atheism, talk.politics.guns
From: malcolm@theriomorph.me.uk
On Mon, 13 May 2013 18:26:09 -0400, Scout wrote:
> "Steve" wrote in message
> news:8732p8d4g208n7nlbjmj4bts2rerk1j3v0@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 13 May 2013 15:22:29 +0000 (UTC), Zepp wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 12 May 2013 22:30:33 -0700, Jason wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article , RD Sandman
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jeanne Douglas wrote in
>>>>> news:hlwdjsd2-3FE0AA.21083112052013@news.giganews.com:
>>>>>
>>>>> > In article , Zepp
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> On Sun, 12 May 2013 19:57:25 -0700, Wayne wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> > On Sun, 12 May 2013 07:54:21 -0700 (PDT), Davej
>>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>>> >> >> On May 12, 9:50 am, Kurt Nicklas
>>>>> >> >> wrote:
>>>>> >> >> > [...]
>>>>> >> >> > There's new evidence, obtained by ABC, that the Obama
>>>>> >> > administration
>>>>> >> >> > did deliberately purge references to "terrorism" from
>>>>> >> >> > accounts of
>>>>> >> > the
>>>>> >> >> > attack on the Benghazi diplomatic mission...
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >> Darrell Issa needs both hands to wipe his own ass. I'm still
>>>>> >> >> waiting for the Republicans to explain why it is so, so, so
>>>>> >> >> important to
>>>>> >> > give
>>>>> >> >> terrorists the publicity they crave.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > The whole thing could be put to bed if Obama/Clinton would just
>>>>> >> > fess up.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Ah, the old "if they weren't guilty of something, why would we be
>>>>> >> accusing them?"
>>>>> >
>>>>> > These Republican assholes are obsessing over the process for how
>>>>> > talking points are created.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, most of the problems are the lies about who created what. Big
>>>>> difference between what Hillary and the White House claim they did
>>>>> and what the CIA and FBI claim they did.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They go back and forth and everybody puts
>>>>> > their 2 cents in and, eventually, the final version is produced.
>>>>> > NOTHING before that means a damned thing; it was just the point of
>>>>> > the view of the first people to start the ball rolling.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you honestly believe that it took them a week to realize that
>>>>> video didn't have a damn thing to do with it?
>>>>
>>>> They knew they were lying. They just wanted to make it past the
>>>> election before revealing the truth.
>>>>
>>>> They had a chance to talk to the survivors the week after the attack
>>>> so they knew the truth--that it was a well planned terrorist attack.
>>>
>>>And said so within hours of the attack.
>>
>> Liar...
>
> "(Reuters) - Officials at the White House and State Department were
> advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission
> in Benghazi,
> Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit
> for the attack, official emails show."
>
> "The first email, timed at 4:05 p.m. Washington time - or 10:05 p.m.
> Benghazi time, 20-30 minutes after the attack on the U.S. diplomatic
> mission allegedly began - carried the subject line "U.S. Diplomatic
> Mission in Benghazi Under Attack" and the notation "SBU", meaning
> "Sensitive But Unclassified." "
>
> "A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time,
> carried the subject line: "Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims
> Responsibility for Benghazi Attack." The message reported: "Embassy
> Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter
> and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli." "
>
> Seems they were told about 2.5 hours after the start of the attack.
>
A claim of responsibility is evidence, but not confirmation.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
