United We Stand - uwsboard.com

Virginia Tech fans discussing politics, religion, and football
It is currently Tue Jun 27, 2017 11:39 am

Time zone: America/New_York [ DST ]


UWS DWF UWS Lunch UWS Sports UWS Help TSL Football TSL Lounge TSL MBB Acronyms Top 25 Topics


Forum rules


Please be civil.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 170 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 2:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:25 am
Posts: 1625
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/wo ... ?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 4:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:11 pm
Posts: 3455
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Independent
Lol. Mmmmm.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 4:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:11 pm
Posts: 3455
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Independent
Seriously Chuck, you buy this from the NY Times? They are an Obama cheerleader and isn't it a bit odd they have put all this intel together on this guy so quickly?

Come on.

And you might want to go back and see how even this corrupt administration back tracked on the video excuse after the initial talking points.

That said - the IRS targeting scandal is much bigger and shows the level of corruption inherent in Obama and his administration. But I'm sure you will defend him until the bitter end. That's what blind partisans do,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:30 pm
Posts: 8570
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.



The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 9:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:25 am
Posts: 7284
there is no use to even discuss this with you, you will shape the facts to your thinking and ignore both common sense and the actual facts. If you want to believe it was a video then so be it.

chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 9:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 4:48 pm
Posts: 9925
It's just chucky, no reason to take that post seriously. He is filling the void at the bottom of the scale that was previously occupied by Diggy.

Also... I don't understand why Hillary Rodham wanted to resurrect the story about the video. It seems to be an embarrassment to her and the administration.

I have little doubt that the ringleader, the Dude according to chucky, that did this will have a story similar to Hillary Rodham's story. Almost as if they are coordinated their lies. Very Clintonesque.

So a Clinton and an al Qaeda terrorist have the same story. Our military has a different story. Whom to believe...?

Chucky, whadya think?

Looks like desperation. The truth must be REALLY bad.



hokie80 wrote:
Seriously Chuck, you buy this from the NY Times? They are an Obama cheerleader and isn't it a bit odd they have put all this intel together on this guy so quickly?

Come on.

And you might want to go back and see how even this corrupt administration back tracked on the video excuse after the initial talking points.

That said - the IRS targeting scandal is much bigger and shows the level of corruption inherent in Obama and his administration. But I'm sure you will defend him until the bitter end. That's what blind partisans do,

_________________
If you bend over backwards long enough,
eventually you'll fall down.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 9:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:25 am
Posts: 1625
RiverguyVT wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.



The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 4:48 pm
Posts: 9925
I think you nailed it, Chucky.

Some a-rab was walking home, he had just broken up with his goat, er I mean girlfriend, and was really upset. So he attacked the embassy.

Do you think all of the attackers had just broken up with their goat friends, or just a couple?



chuckd4vt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.



The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

_________________
If you bend over backwards long enough,
eventually you'll fall down.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:25 am
Posts: 1625
cwtcr hokie wrote:
there is no use to even discuss this with you, you will shape the facts to your thinking and ignore both common sense and the actual facts. If you want to believe it was a video then so be it.

chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.

I frankly don't care what their motives were. There were protests and attacks that entire day a few hundred miles away over that video. Those protests were reported all day in Benghazi. Wit Essex heard this guy yelling about the video. This guy was all over security cameras inside the embassy. This guy had hardly any link to a terror organization. But I rely don't care. Neither does anyone else except the folks who are attempting to stir up some antiObama stuff.

I would imagine if you sat down and interviewed a hundred people involved, there would be a hundred different reasons why they participated. But that video clearly contributed. Also, it contributed to other unrest and dozens of deaths elsewhere in the region. Ten years from now, this Benghazi obsession will be remembered similarly to the yellow journalism that got us involved in another war. Thankfully this time, MOST people see it for what it is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 3:10 pm
Posts: 28268
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Party: After 10
oaktonhokie wrote:
I think you nailed it, Chucky.

Some a-rab was walking home, he had just broken up with his goat, er I mean girlfriend, and was really upset. So he attacked the embassy.

Do you think all of the attackers had just broken up with their goat friends, or just a couple?



chuckd4vt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.



The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.



he could have been in a dead spot and couldn't get 4ite on his phone. I know that makes me really angry too. So angry I launch mortars at the Costa Rican embassy.

_________________
You losers lost, take off the vagina suit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2013 12:21 pm
Posts: 412
An unorganized mob that just happened to be carrying RPGs and mortars?

Stop it Chuck, you're embarrassing yourself.


chuckd4vt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.



The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:25 am
Posts: 1625
oaktonhokie wrote:
I think you nailed it, Chucky.

Some a-rab was walking home, he had just broken up with his goat, er I mean girlfriend, and was really upset. So he attacked the embassy.

Do you think all of the attackers had just broken up with their goat friends, or just a couple?



chuckd4vt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.



The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

Sure don't, but I bet everybody there was there for a different reason. What motivated people to join in the Occupy protests? Some were probably just there because they had nothing better to do. And some were probably there to get Chics. Some were there cause it looked like fun and they wanted to get on TV. Some organizers had probably been there for some specific purposes and most probably had little knowledge of hose purposes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:25 am
Posts: 1625
RoswellGAHokie wrote:
An unorganized mob that just happened to be carrying RPGs and mortars?

Stop it Chuck, you're embarrassing yourself.


chuckd4vt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.



The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

Nope, co servatives embarrassed themselves and they will pay for it by Hillary having this election gift wrapped for her.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 3:10 pm
Posts: 28268
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Party: After 10
chuckd4vt wrote:
RoswellGAHokie wrote:
An unorganized mob that just happened to be carrying RPGs and mortars?

Stop it Chuck, you're embarrassing yourself.


chuckd4vt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.



The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

Nope, co servatives embarrassed themselves and they will pay for it by Hillary having this election gift wrapped for her.


Her book has sold less copies than Frank Beamer's. UVA has a better chance of winning the football MNC next year than Hillary at being the next president.

_________________
You losers lost, take off the vagina suit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:25 am
Posts: 1625
awesome guy wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
RoswellGAHokie wrote:
An unorganized mob that just happened to be carrying RPGs and mortars?

Stop it Chuck, you're embarrassing yourself.


chuckd4vt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.



The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

Nope, co servatives embarrassed themselves and they will pay for it by Hillary having this election gift wrapped for her.


Her book has sold less copies than Frank Beamer's. UVA has a better chance of winning the football MNC next year than Hillary at being the next president.
I heard that same exact thing throughout 2011 and 2012.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 4:48 pm
Posts: 9925
Golly, you're really smart. Sort of like Diggy.


Do you think the Occupy Wall Street movement just sprang up spontaneously? In multiple cities around the country? Or was it a planned, organized, and orchestrated event?

Likewise Benghazi. Do you think it just sprang up because a bunch of guys broke up with their goats, or was it a planned, organized and orchestrated event that maybe the goat lovers joined?

So, if it was planned, organized, and orchestrated weeks in advance, but a couple of videophiles joined the attack, you are willing to lay the blame or at least part of it, at the feet of the video producer. Is that correct?


chuckd4vt wrote:
oaktonhokie wrote:
I think you nailed it, Chucky.

Some a-rab was walking home, he had just broken up with his goat, er I mean girlfriend, and was really upset. So he attacked the embassy.

Do you think all of the attackers had just broken up with their goat friends, or just a couple?



chuckd4vt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.



The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

Sure don't, but I bet everybody there was there for a different reason. What motivated people to join in the Occupy protests? Some were probably just there because they had nothing better to do. And some were probably there to get Chics. Some were there cause it looked like fun and they wanted to get on TV. Some organizers had probably been there for some specific purposes and most probably had little knowledge of hose purposes.

_________________
If you bend over backwards long enough,
eventually you'll fall down.


Last edited by oaktonhokie on Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 3:10 pm
Posts: 28268
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Party: After 10
chuckd4vt wrote:
I heard that same exact thing throughout 2011 and 2012.


and 08 when she lost to Obama? Check out her numbers, only hard left nut jobs support her. Benghazi showed she can't handle that call at 3 am.

_________________
You losers lost, take off the vagina suit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:35 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:58 pm
Posts: 16285
Location: Fake Dossier Writing Center
Alma Mater: U-Rhine
Party: Draintheswamp
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.


Wow, what complete bullshit. He's the leader of Ansar al-Sharia, a local Al Qaeda affiliate. They even have the black flag of jihad in their logo. They planned a coordinated attack with mortars and RPGs. Your narrative is complete bull shirt.

Image

_________________
UNINSTALLING OBAMA…..
███████████████████ 100% Complete!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 2:21 pm
Posts: 2103
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get
awesome guy wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
I heard that same exact thing throughout 2011 and 2012.


and 08 when she lost to Obama? Check out her numbers, only hard left nut jobs support her. Benghazi showed she can't handle that call at 3 am.


Had she been nominated in 2008, she would have won. She is a "Not-Republican"... she wins automatically when the majority of the country votes. :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:50 am
Posts: 4202
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.

Lol.....you are still defending this stupid video excuse.....and the ny times.....they are nothing but shills for this administration. That David Kirkpatrick pos article back in Dec/Jan rings a bell. I'm laughing again.....you are the minion.....too funny..... :lol:

_________________
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:25 am
Posts: 1625
HokieHam wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.

Lol.....you are still defending this stupid video excuse.....and the ny times.....they are nothing but shills for this administration. That David Kirkpatrick pos article back in Dec/Jan rings a bell. I'm laughing again.....you are the minion.....too funny..... :lol:

More people respect the NYTs than FoxNews. And Fox is about the only ones who stirred up this Benghazi conspiracy stuff. Take off your tin foil hats.

And it is relevant considering we JUST captured the ring leader and he's been pointed to as having carried on and on about that dumb video.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:50 pm
Posts: 2124
Location: Durham, NC
Cynthia McKinney was nominated to her "not-republican" Green Party in 2008. Did you consider her or any of the other "not republican" candidates, or just the democrat? Libertarian party candidate? Socialist party candidate?

VoiceOfReason wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
I heard that same exact thing throughout 2011 and 2012.


and 08 when she lost to Obama? Check out her numbers, only hard left nut jobs support her. Benghazi showed she can't handle that call at 3 am.


Had she been nominated in 2008, she would have won. She is a "Not-Republican"... she wins automatically when the majority of the country votes. :mrgreen:

_________________
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 4:48 pm
Posts: 9925
I am no lawyer, but it seems that in the past, there have been accused felons, rapists, murderers perhaps even terrorists, who have lied when giving testimony about their actions.

Especially if there were stories that could mitigate their behavior. Is that possible here? At all? Any chance that this dude as you call him, is not being fully honest?

Why do you believe the dude?



chuckd4vt wrote:
HokieHam wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.

Lol.....you are still defending this stupid video excuse.....and the ny times.....they are nothing but shills for this administration. That David Kirkpatrick pos article back in Dec/Jan rings a bell. I'm laughing again.....you are the minion.....too funny..... :lol:

More people respect the NYTs than FoxNews. And Fox is about the only ones who stirred up this Benghazi conspiracy stuff. Take off your tin foil hats.

And it is relevant considering we JUST captured the ring leader and he's been pointed to as having carried on and on about that dumb video.

_________________
If you bend over backwards long enough,
eventually you'll fall down.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 10:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:30 pm
Posts: 8570
chuckd4vt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
chuckd4vt wrote:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/world/middleeast/apprehension-of-ahmed-abu-khattala-may-begin-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?referrer=

So it turns out the group that attacked in Benghazi were not really an organized terror group and they had little to no affiliation with AQ. Also, THAT FREAKING VIDEO MOST DEFINITELY HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK. Dude who was the ring leader was apparently carrying on about it throughout.



The day the attacks happened, my views had nothing to do with Fox News whatsoever.
It went like this:

See the News?
Gosh! Our Embassy was attacked.
Yeah. The WH is saying it is due to a video.
What video?
I dunno. Some video.
Did the president notice today's date? The attack was 9/11.
Seems like the obvious reason. Anniversary of 9/11.
Yup.
Video?
Yeah, I know, right?
Have you seen the video?
Nope.

The simple answer is the simple answer.
Video. LMAO.
c'mon, man.

People had been protesting outside of and attacking the embassy in Cairo that entire day. As Hillary said, "what does it matter" anyhow? I suppose some guys were walking home drunk, heard about the video, joined the party, and attacked in Benghazi. Some guys may have lost a loved one at the hands of our military. Some might have actually watched the video. And some probably just heard about the video, broke up with his girlfriend, and wanted to fight. It was an unorganized mob and from the sound of it, the video contribjted was a rallying cry. Some Remner the Maine type nonsense. I frankly don't care what the motives were, but FoxNews has obsessed about this thing and their viewers have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.


Oh, chuck. Please.
:roll:

You're better than this. I know it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 11:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 2:21 pm
Posts: 2103
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get
Marine Hokie wrote:
Cynthia McKinney was nominated to her "not-republican" Green Party in 2008. Did you consider her or any of the other "not republican" candidates, or just the democrat? Libertarian party candidate? Socialist party candidate?


Excellent question, Marine! No, I did not consider a "third party" candidate. In my youth I tried that once... and if there was ever a time where I had "been duped"... that was it. Like it or not, America has a two party system. IMHO, any other vote is a wasted vote. In my youth, I thought there was such a thing as a "protest vote"... and I was wrong about that. A protest vote is just a losing vote.

No disrespect to any of these candidates, some of whom may have some good ideas. They just need to get those ideas picked up by one of the major parties.

And nice inclusion of the Socialist Party... but I am far from a socialist. There is plenty of room to the left of this board without coming anywhere near socialism :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 170 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Time zone: America/New_York [ DST ]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group Color scheme by ColorizeIt!