• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

"Act of Terror"- Libya

tigerswood

tigerswood

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
13,137
Reaction score
3,648
Location
CharLIT
Since it turned into probably the biggest gaffe/controversy of this debate, I figured I'd start a new thread.

Here's the Washington Post's Fact Checker.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/16/fact-check-libya-attack/

Further reading:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/from-video-to-terrorist-attack-a-definitive-timeline-of-administration-statements-on-the-libya-attack/2012/09/26/86105782-0826-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html

Really just proves how out of line Candy-the-Hut was. I'm sure both sides could spin it their way, but it seems pretty obvious it was not condemned as a terrorist attack for far too long to me.
 
The spin on this will be hilarious and futile given the statements in following days where he intentionally refused to call it an act of terrorism.

Obama needs to hope this is all he gets out of Romney on this issue.
 
Not a good moment for Candi to assert something was factual that was not, in fact, factual. She reminded me of Karl Hess reffing a game in Cameron Indoor Stadium at that moment--charging foul on Romney...
 
Nice semantics check.

If that is the best Republicans have, it's clear Obama won the debate.
 
It's really parsing words to claim that an act of terror isn't terrorism.
 
serious? we're arguing over whether he said the word 'terrorism' fast enough... and whether 'act of terror' is the same meaning. yup - this is what people care about this election... romney had a great chance to pound obama on his foreign policy and it blew up in his face.
 
Romney got caught with his pants down, but at least he didn't have the information right in front of him. tiger is posting the link and still can't get it right.
 
tigerswood said:
Since it turned into probably the biggest gaffe/controversy of this debate, I figured I'd start a new thread.

Here's the Washington Post's Fact Checker.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/16/fact-check-libya-attack/

Further reading:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/from-video-to-terrorist-attack-a-definitive-timeline-of-administration-statements-on-the-libya-attack/2012/09/26/86105782-0826-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html

Really just proves how out of line Candy-the-Hut was. I'm sure both sides could spin it their way, but it seems pretty obvious it was not condemned as a terrorist attack for far too long to me.
Click to expand...

That isn't the point though. Romney's original statement was not that it took a long time to declare it a terrorist attack but rather said "it took a long time for him to declare it an act of terror". Your boy fucked up big time on that and there is no other way to look at it. A shooting in public is an act of terror but not necessarily terrorism. Unfortunately your absolutely brilliant guy apparently spent so much effort on his business he forgot to learn to comprehend the English language such that he equates the term "act of terror" with planned terrorist attack by AQ. The administration did take too long to labeling a terrorist attack and Mitt Romney put his foot in his mouth by saying Obama didn't say something he actually said the next day.
 
WFdeacon04 said:
serious? we're arguing over whether he said the word 'terrorism' fast enough... and whether 'act of terror' is the same meaning. yup - this is what people care about this election... romney had a great chance to pound obama on his foreign policy and it blew up in his face.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm also arguing that our President and administration failed the four Americans who were killed, including the only sitting Ambassador since 1979, and did a horrible job of handling the aftermath. He was too busy trying to raise money than do his actual job. And it's no wonder he performed better this debate, considering he was, paraphrasing from CNN, "holed up in a resort in Williamsburg" practicing against John Kerry, rather than doing his actual job.
 
PhDeac said:
Romney got caught with his pants down, but at least he didn't have the information right in front of him. tiger is posting the link and still can't get it right.
Click to expand...

Really. Are you saying your president didn't know for six hours that there was a validated terrorist attack that killed our ambassedor and he believed it was a spontaneous protest that led to the fall of our embassy? Really? And you think Obama won on this issue after throwing Hillary under the bus. Meh.
 
tigerswood said:
Well, I'm also arguing that our President and administration failed the four Americans who were killed, including the only sitting Ambassador since 1979, and did a horrible job of handling the aftermath. He was too busy trying to raise money than do his actual job. And it's no wonder he performed better this debate, considering he was, paraphrasing from CNN, "holed up in a resort in Williamsburg" practicing against John Kerry, rather than doing his actual job.
Click to expand...

Is this serious? Is this serious?
 
BigTreeDeac said:
That isn't the point though. Romney's original statement was not that it took a long time to declare it a terrorist attack but rather said "it took a long time for him to declare it an act of terror". Your boy fucked up big time on that and there is no other way to look at it. A shooting in public is an act of terror but not necessarily terrorism. Unfortunately your absolutely brilliant guy apparently spent so much effort on his business he forgot to learn to comprehend the English language such that he equates the term "act of terror" with planned terrorist attack by AQ. The administration did take too long to labeling a terrorist attack and Mitt Romney put his foot in his mouth by saying Obama didn't say something he actually said the next day.
Click to expand...

He was not referring to the attack in Libya with his statement in the Rose Garden, but any and all "acts of terror". This has been stated by plenty of media outlets.
 
DirkTheDeac said:
Really. Are you saying your president didn't know for six hours that there was a validated terrorist attack that killed our ambassedor and he believed it was a spontaneous protest that led to the fall of our embassy? Really? And you think Obama won on this issue after throwing Hillary under the bus. Meh.
Click to expand...

I'm saying that Obama did what he said he did and Romney said he didn't.
 
tigerswood said:
He was not referring to the attack in Libya with his statement in the Rose Garden, but any and all "acts of terror". This has been stated by plenty of media outlets.
Click to expand...

Then why would he bring up acts of terror if he wasn't including the attack in Libya?
 
tigerswood said:
He was not referring to the attack in Libya with his statement in the Rose Garden, but any and all "acts of terror". This has been stated by plenty of media outlets.
Click to expand...

Well now I know any efforts to discuss this with you are useless. When you are discussing something that happens and say " we will not stand for any acts of terror" that is you including said event in the category of all acts of terror.
 
"No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

Mitt screwed the pooch again. His firm actions took this "issue" off the table for last debate.
 
BigTreeDeac said:
Well now I know any efforts to discuss this with you are useless. When you are discussing something that happens and say " we will not stand for any acts of terror" that is you including said event in the category of all acts of terror.
Click to expand...

Please show me the next time in the media he referred to it as terrorism or an act of terror, since you are so sure he was including this event. Was it 12 days later? I know it was quite some time..
 
So he has to call it an act of terror twice for you to be happy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top