Obama Intentionally Caused Ambassador's Death By Shutting Down Military Response

But your boy Romney has praised Obama for signing NDAA into law, and has vowed to use it even more than it's already being used.

I'm anti-Obama, not pro-Romney. The most controversial portion of NDAA is where Obama claimed the right to detain American citizens without trial. If you have any proof that Romney vowed to use that section to greater effect, I'd love to see it. But I doubt that you do.

Step 1 - go to OpenSecrets.org
Step 2 - look at the top donors for Obama in 2008
Step 3 - look at the top donors for Romney in 2012
Step 4 - you have now swallowed the red pill. Congratulations.

Cool, does that show the estimated 300 million dollars Obama received in 2008 from foreign sources? Or the millions he's receiving through outright fraud from foreign nations now? As I said before, correlation does not equal causation. Bankers will always support candidates financially. There's an estimated 2 billion dollars being spent in this election. Money might buy you some influence, but this notion peddled by the "libertarian/anarchist" wing that they are wholly owned subsidiaries of Goldman and J.P. Morgan is just absurd. I would wager that most of the influence wielded by the banks is due to the fact that they could singlehandedly implode the national economy if they went under.
 


What happened in Libya was a incredible tragedy that this administration is trying to sweep under the rug.

This is about Libya, this ONE incident and nothing else.

My understanding is that there are a lot of Spec Ops that is incredibly upset about this. The folks in the safe house defended their position, painted the target with lasers and were denied any type of support 3 different times. Notice that some of the information is coming from guys in the house itself. Unlike others, these guys will NOT be intimidated like others.

Honestly, I'm just sad... there is no honor in this...

./end thread
 
What happened in Libya was a incredible tragedy that this administration is trying to sweep under the rug.

This is about Libya, this ONE incident and nothing else.

My understanding is that there are a lot of Spec Ops that is incredibly upset about this. The folks in the safe house defended their position, painted the target with lasers and were denied any type of support 3 different times. Notice that some of the information is coming from guys in the house itself. Unlike others, these guys will NOT be intimidated like others.

Honestly, I'm just sad... there is no honor in this...

./end thread

The most plausible theory so far is that Obama had worked out a deal with the MB to kidnap Amb. Stevens. In a dramatic Iran 1979-ish situation, Obama would make an exchange for the ambassador, giving them the Blind Sheik and winning him the election. This is the most rational reason for why he would tell the military not to interfere when the Islamists were attacking. But then something went wrong and they killed/raped Stevens instead of merely kidnapping him, so now Obama has a real shitstorm on his hands.
 
The most plausible theory so far is that Obama had worked out a deal with the MB to kidnap Amb. Stevens. In a dramatic Iran 1979-ish situation, Obama would make an exchange for the ambassador, giving them the Blind Sheik and winning him the election. This is the most rational reason for why he would tell the military not to interfere when the Islamists were attacking. But then something went wrong and they killed/raped Stevens instead of merely kidnapping him, so now Obama has a real shitstorm on his hands.

This is just some tin-foil BS and conspiracy theories do not matter.

Facts do.

These fallen Americans may be just a 'cool' distraction and a way to make the CIC look bad. But to others... they are sons, fathers, friends and family.
 
The most plausible theory so far is that Obama had worked out a deal with the MB to kidnap Amb. Stevens. In a dramatic Iran 1979-ish situation, Obama would make an exchange for the ambassador, giving them the Blind Sheik and winning him the election. This is the most rational reason for why he would tell the military not to interfere when the Islamists were attacking. But then something went wrong and they killed/raped Stevens instead of merely kidnapping him, so now Obama has a real shitstorm on his hands.

Not that I am up for speculation, but it is curious that the CIA nearby were told to stand down. They went on their own to protect everyone, against orders. They then killed, what was it, 60? The invaders at that point were probably out of control. Interesting take.
 
Would have voted for NDAA "as written":

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaIJSICjPos]Mitt Romney Confronted On NDAA, Full Secret Service Detail - YouTube[/ame]
 
You'll love this one Hellboy: (Obomba gets pressed hard on this topic)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=OHN8tmHd-HU#!
(EDIT: Yep, they put lots of odd characters like dashs and hashes in the URL of this one so it won't embed... No conspiracy to hide any truth here...!)

This Kyle Clark dude is nearly as fearless as Benn Swann!


False left-right paradigm, brah.
Yes, the left and right parties certainly are a false paradigm. Didn't think you agreed tho, good to hear that you do!


It's a response to guerilla's rather ludicrous assertion that Goldman owns both candidates. Romney also hasn't set his website's donation system to accept any credit card without verification.
This ain't about website donations. Opensecrets.org showed for most of 2011 and into this year that goldman sachs was one of the top 2 contributors to the romney campaign through a Super PAC of some kind... Then when the Paulites started pumping out video after video of how both candidates were funded by the same exact source, mysteriously GS dropped out of Romney's top-funded list. There was some press on the drop, go look it up for yourself.


Your continual references to "we" and "us" have not gotten any less creepy.
I guess solidarity around a common set of morals would seem creepy to those that don't understand morality...


This thread isn't about your list of grievances. It's about the President committing an impeachable offence worthy of prosecution. Pointing to bad behavior, real or imagined, to justify other bad behavior isn't going to fly.
Fine & dandy. I was just answering the question... The number of lives taken this presidency isn't so drastic yet, despite all the warmongering O has done. In the past all those impeachable offences were swept under the rug, probably a list of over 100 War crimes that the Hague is drooling to prosecute... But for some reason you think this little allowance of murder of OUR OWN 4 ppl is something that the POTUS could get nailed for?

Remember, even the two presidents who WERE impeached were not forced to leave office. Why would this offense be any different?



Maybe your computer monitor has been stuck on Russia Today; the media has been exploding with this story.
See the vid I posted above? I'm aware. Thing is though; this does not threaten the potus in the least. It would take a lot more than some sniffing around like this to give him something to worry about. A LOT more, like Hillary coming out and saying on CNN that Obomba MEANT to kill those ppl... Anything less can be simply dismissed like O did above and it all gets swept under the rug of "killing terrists!"


I want the posters and lurkers here to witness you guys vomit up your predictable TPTB garbage, so that when this is understood and prosecuted for the scandal that it is, your woefully inaccurate paradigms will be exposed.
Like allllllll the times before we were exposed about being wrong about the power structure, right?

Perhaps now, once this "scandal" goes quietly away, you'll start to see the truth a bit clearer?

I won't hold my breath, but if you want to ever figure out how the world actually works, you've got to drop your bad assumptions at some point and start seeing the patterns for what they really are.


By cover of darkness, I mean it was signed into law on New Year's Eve, a day when most Americans were getting blackout drunk, in addition to the fact that Obama specifically insisted on the controversial provision being inserted into the bill.
He knows that, but the fact is that congress all signed off on it afterwards.

Why didn't your precious republicans stand up against that tyranny?

It was, in fact the Democrips that stood up against it more! Look at the link Moxie sent; an overwhelming number of republitards voted that one in!

...But yet you insist on believing that they care more about your freedom or sovereignty. Just sad.
 
Good question. Thread title? Personal preference?

For some reason thinking of these guys as not just nameless faces but as real human beings...
Sure, but there are people being killed all the time, everywhere.

I agree, it's tragic, and it's horrible.

No one is holding candlelight vigils for all of the kids killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

There is so much violence in this world it can be overwhelming.
 
Sure, but there are people being killed all the time, everywhere.

I agree, it's tragic, and it's horrible.

No one is holding candlelight vigils for all of the kids killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

There is so much violence in this world it can be overwhelming.

You are correct its all tragic.

The difference here is that you have clear identification of weeks of lies from the administration. Are there situations like this occurring all of the time? Maybe. Does that make this instance less important? No.

Here we have the clear ability to protect American soil and Citizens and at the same time an obvious lack of response from a President an administration that is saying otherwise. It is also extra relevant because that same President is up for re-election. These factors combine to make it more of a story.

The elevation of this story does not in any way "take" from other stories.
 
solidarity around a common set of morals...

You must be the only one feeling that solidarity then. To everyone else, it just looks like you're so incapable of standing behind your own opinions that you have to find courage in the language of the collective. And yet aren't you the one droning on and on about individualism?
 
9wutb.jpg
 
The difference here is that you have clear identification of weeks of lies from the administration. Are there situations like this occurring all of the time? Maybe.
Sure they do. And this is 15 minutes of outrage for some segments of the population.

My point is, this is more outrageous how? Because people who otherwise believe the government to be the source of virtue and mortality had that reality shaken a little?

There is no duty to protect (the government protect citizens) under the law. The Supreme Court has said this. It's why you can't sue George Bush for 9/11. He's not responsible. NO ONE IS.

Likewise, Obama is also not responsible legally for whatever went down here.
 
To people who are so blind to the simple concept of morality that they can't understand concepts like Voluntaryism, it just looks like you're so incapable of standing behind your own opinions that you have to find courage in the language of the collective.
ftfy

And yet aren't you the one droning on and on about individualism?
I am one of many droning on about voluntaryism. I can't begin to fathom how you even pulled individualism out of your deluded brain this time...

Yesterday you kept calling us libertarians too... What is up with all of this trying to force incorrect labels on others you're doing lately?