So CBS just released segments of an interview with Obama 14 hours after the Benghazi attack that was never aired on television. In the interview Obama says:
So now the conspiracy has taken a new twist. Since they never aired this part of the interview, it is now believed that CBS is working hand in hand with Obama to cover up what really happened in Benghazi. Hold on to your seats, folks. We're in for a wild ride.You're right that this is not a situation that was exactly the same as what happened in Egypt, and my suspicion is, is that there are folks involved in this who were looking to target Americans from the start.
It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.
Doesn't that unreleased portion seem to indicate that Obama believed it was a terrorist attack? Also, how can people get upset about those emails and decry that the US knew immediately it was only terrorists? I'm sorry, but have you ever gotten an email? I got one today asking me to send my bank info to Uganda so they could move funds to my bank account. Are people really so ignorant to think that the White House wouldn't take just a bit of time to investigate what happened before jumping into reactionary claims?
I don't know, for me it looks like this lines up perfectly with the statement Obama made about the attack. Was it muddled by the tape stuff, absolutely, but I don't see how this CBS News thing is damning in any way.
'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
Or a yawing hole in a battered head
And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
And there they lay I damn me eyes
All lookouts clapped on Paradise
All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!
That's the point.
See, Obama knew it was a terrorist attack all along, but he went out and blamed the protesters and the video. CBS had proof that Obama knew it was a terrorist attack, but decided to cover it up by not airing the interview segment.
Fuck this sounds retarded. Rush Limbaugh made it sound much better earlier.
It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.
I still don't see why people give such a shit about the embassy attack. Unless someone's stance is literally that nothing bad can ever happen to anyone working abroad, this is a non-issue.
I have two words to say to people that want to attack Obama over this "cover up" for political gain. Pat Tillman. Pat Tillman, a true American hero, was killed by our own troops either due to negligence or due to a far greater conspiracy involving the poppy fields if you want to jump down that rabbit hole. The GOP covered that up for years to maintain the support for the war and to give them a poster boy for the evils of terrorism.
Edit: And no I am not trying to shackle Romney to the decision to cover up Tillman's murder for three years. Also I shouldn't have mentioned Tillman. Any mention of that story makes me seethe.
Last edited by conscript; 2012-10-25 at 09:55 PM.
I present to you Obama saying it was a terrorist attack on his first televised address on what happened.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SK-NzSNYaJ0
So that kind of smacks the hole cover up issue your having a hard time understanding
Last edited by Tayace; 2012-10-25 at 10:33 PM.
That doesn't count. Obama did not put the word terrorist right next to the word attack in his speech. You can't infer it was a terrorist attack. You actually have to say it or they won't believe you said that. You could say the sky is cerulean and the GOP would call you out for not saying it is blue because you didn't say the word blue next to the word sky.
It counts plenty, listen life is not a perfect thing. Not everyone does things to the standards that certain individuals have, and some people just enjoy picking at the little details. But does that mean they have not done something? No of course not. He refereed to the incident as an act of Terror that's the end of it. Lets say your boss tells you to wash the floors and you do than he comes in and says he could have done better. Does that mean you have not washed the floors? No it does not. Sorry if you don't like how he did it he still did it.
Last edited by Tayace; 2012-10-25 at 10:39 PM.
I was arguing with someone yesterday.
I believe there's good, honest, tactical and strategic reason to hold your cards close to the chest sometimes. And I believe Libya was one of them. You don't go announcing to the world that you're looking for Joe Derp, who lives at 1234 Main St, before you actually have units in place to get him, for example. If he's already fled that address, fine. Before that, no.
I'm probably completely wrong again.
I'm confused. Obama said it publicly right away that it was a terror attack (or at least strongly alluded to it) so I am not sure why him alluding to it again in a CBS interview is evidence of anything.
And these guys saying "he knew". Well, getting a report is not the same thing as "knowing". Things are almost always tentative at first, and so you usually either wihhold saying something publicly (not possible here) or else you give out one message and hold to it until you're sure instead of changing it every couple of days. Obama hedged his bet a bit by alluding to terrorism, but for the most part his Admin stuck to the initial, tentative "video" theory until they felt confident enough to say otherwise.
This is not something strange or sinister. This is common and rational.