XPost: alt.society.liberalism, alt.atheism, talk.politics.guns
From: me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net
"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.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/24/us-usa-benghazi-emails
idUSBRE89N02C20121024
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
