So is it the Administration's stance that they thought Benghazi was a terrorist attack from day 2?

[dkf]

Well I hope the record stands up to scrutiny.

[Tx4obama]

1. President Obama said 'act of terror' twice within two days - see below

A day after Libya attack, Obama described it as 'acts of terror'

-snip-

The facts: On September 12, the day after the attack that killed four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, Obama said in comments in the Rose Garden that he had learned about the attack on the consulate the night before.

"Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe," he said. "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."

On September 13, at a campaign event in Las Vegas, Obama vowed to bring the killers to justice. He then added, "No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America."

-snip-

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/17/politics/fact-check-terror/index.html

[Lone_Star_Dem]

7. Pooh, pooh on his actual words!

It's not what the Republicans want to hear. As such, they are now plugging their ears and humming Star Spangled Banner.

[crunch60]

127. The GOP, the spin doctors, are just

trying to dig their man Romney, out of yet another hole he has dug for himself, ain't gonna work!
The old MSM distortion machine is dying out, lots of educated people now, thanks to social media and the inter-tubes..
.The days of Hannity, Limbaugh and the rest of their ilk, fading slowly. Few people want to hear from these misogynist creeps.

[CreekDog]

77. notice the OP's question is a repeat of what Romney asked last night?

I guess Obama's answer wasn't good enough for the OP.

Which is interesting because even Romney was quiet about it afterwards.

[ellisonz]

2. The Administrations stance is that they care about finding out the facts and not spinning the issue.

[abumbyanyothername]

102. I am pretty sure that most of America agrees. nt

[The Magistrate]

3. The Man Said What He Said, Ma'am

Description of the attack as being carried out by a body of fighters armed with heavy weapons has been consistent from all sources from the earliest reports.

[Barack_America]

8. As I recall, from the first, it was thought that a riot may have served as cover...

...for terrorists. The story then evolved (presumably once surviving security forces were interviewed and drone data analyzed) that there likely was not a riot after all (though the concurrent violent protests in Egypt certainly confounded the situation).

I don't ever recall hearing the presumption that rioters alone could have been responsible for the act.

[The Magistrate]

11. Exactly, Sir

And the rights and wrongs of that are still being sorted out.

[David Zephyr]

123. Precisely.

Thank you.

[dipsydoodle]

130. All references to what occured

and when they occured are doubtless stored here in the many OP's and responses during the few days which followed the event. Only problem at present is that advanced search is down due to volume of traffic which I find a trifle odd given that @ 11.50 am BST in the UK its only 6.50am EST and 3.50am PST. Obviously early risers over there.

[CreekDog]

81. She's been posting on this topic since it occurred, do you think it's credible she doesn't know?

I don't.

[uppityperson]

86. dkf is a "she"? Really?

[The Magistrate]

87. No, Sir: I Do Not

What is going on here is obvious, to the point of pain....

[CreekDog]

90. put on your helmet before opening her posts

to protect your face from your hand!

[A-Schwarzenegger]

4. Good to see you recovered so soon from Romney's drubbing.

[malaise]

38. +1,000n/t

[TBF]

93. lol

perfect response!

[ismnotwasm]

106. Heh

[myrna minx]

97. LOL.

Hiya A-S.

[ohheckyeah]

5. In the words of our President...

get the transcript.

[freshwest]

129. Yup. And it's not a 'stance.' Recorded and broadcast on 9-12.

Reiterated in the debate, fact checked in Romney's face, so there's no reason to even ask such a loaded question.

[quinnox]

6. oh come on

Obama just kicked Romneys ass to kingdom come and this is what you are posting about?

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

12. .

[dkf]

19. If that is their stance then so be it.

[JaneyVee]

10. The only stance I care about is uncovering the truth in transparent manner and keeping us informed

as the intel rolls in. Can't ask for much more than that.

[Live and Learn]

15. +1 nt

[dkf]

21. Yes that is what I expect of my Government.

[TwilightGardener]

13. I'm sure you do.

[applegrove]

14. The act of killing an american ambassador and 3 other americans was an act

of terror. What they did not know was whether the murder/terror was an offshoot of an earlier demonstration against the video dipicting mahommed or, as they determined two weeks later, a plan terrorist attack on the US embassy in Benghazi. Obama called the murders of the embassy officials terror from the start because it was.

[cliffordu]

16. Golly gosh, glad you brought this up.

same old song from the same old same old.


You could read the transcripts of his speeches, or just google the phrase......OH, WAIT, SOMEONE HAS DONE THE WORK FOR YOU!!!

Look at the posts above.

imagine that.

[David Zephyr]

121. Amen.

And thank you for saying it better than I could have.

[OldDem2012]

17. Here it is, and I'm surprised you couldn't find it on your own....

"Get the transcript".

QUOTE:

"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."

Just curious, but what does that phrase mean to you? Does that stand up to your scrutiny?

[pinboy3niner]

20. And stevenleser posted the video of the Rose Garden statement in his OP here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021562756

[dkf]

24. Well as long as they were being up front with us right?

I'm glad you felt informed from the second day after the attack that an act of terror had been committed against us. It's very important for a people to know this so we can support the proper response.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. So what is the propper response?

And since I am assuming you want to assault the beaches, when are YOU joining up and suiting up, and chiefly, charging first out of the landing craft?

[Major Nikon]

31. His response was carefully crafted

He didn't emphatically say it was terrorism, because they probably weren't absolutely sure it was at the time. So the response was designed to mention terrorism because they were reasonably sure it was, without pointing fingers at anyone which would have been a foreign policy flop had it turned out later that it wasn't.

It was absolutely the best response that could have been made at that point in time. Anyone who wants to make political bones out of it is an asshole, IMO.

[OldDem2012]

50. What's your issue here? Were you looking for an immediate knee-jerk reaction by the President? nt.

[OneGrassRoot]

132. I second that question. What is it that you really want?

I get that right-wingers always want to paint him as weak and siding with "muslim terrorists," but beyond that, why this rush to condemn and want a definitive answer when these tragedies obviously take time to sort through?

I'm the first to believe in conspiracy theories, but I don't get the desire to undermine the administration about this tragedy.

If it were six months from now, sure; but it's still -- in the scheme of things -- a recent event.

[seabeyond]

78. it was not just the adm. the pres of libya said it. it was on the news. word started coming out

early.

so i have to wonder why you are clueless and thinking all of us ought to be clueless along with you.

[2ndAmForComputers]

118. Listen:

Obama cleaned Mitt's clock.

Get over it.

[former-republican]

18. This thread needs more of this

sorry guys but loved this moment and the look on Romney's face

[SunSeeker]

22. Your concern is duly noted.

[Major Nikon]

32. As always

[Viking12]

104. +1

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. It has, why are you using RW talking points by the way

but this has already been checked, and at the Rose Garden he said that.. the transcript is clear.

Jesus, I expect this crap at Free Republic, by the way, not here.

Now this is all over the internets, if you are careful and go check on it. Even on this same thread, if you care to read.

"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."

Just curious, but what does that phrase mean to you? Does that stand up to your scrutiny?

This is from the actual transcript from the Rose Garden statement.

[dkf]

26. So you do support the notion that the Administration has been telling us from day 2 that there was

An act of terror perpetrated on us in Benghazi?

[nadinbrzezinski]

28. Are you that daft and arguing with a transcript, and a video record of the event?

The transcript and the video are quite clear that indeed, it was called an act of terror on day two by the President of the United States. But then again you can have an act of terror and not have all the relevant information, and messy situations like this DO EVOLVE. Believe it or not, we are not that capable yet, nobody is.

This is NOT YET, George Orwell's 1984 you know. Or are you suggesting the President of the United States did not say what he said at the Rose Garden? Because if you are, then you are suggesting that the media is perpetrating fraud here. And they are being helped by the administration. Now that could be, believe or not, an impeachable offense.

What color do you want on your tinfoil hat in this case?

You see, the problem here is that for whatever reason YOU always bring RW talking points here. It is like that is all you do.

[ohheckyeah]

100. Study it out. n/t

[SunSeeker]

119. LOL nt

[WinkyDink]

54. Hmmm...let's cogitate over that one.......

[Son of Gob]

27. Rough night for you?

[msanthrope]

37. Indeed. nt

[obamanut2012]

74. hehehe

[Marr]

29. LMFAO. Deal with it.

[msanthrope]

30. You Better Believe It. nt

[randome]

40. Ah! Ha! I see what you did there!

[msanthrope]

48. It's a pretty handy retort on this board. nt

[treestar]

68. lol

[Union Scribe]

33. I for one don't care about the "scrutiny" of GOPers who

still can't accept Obama is an American. Those people live in their own fog of stupidity.

[davidn3600]

34. The confusion is Jay Carney and Hillary who blamed the video

September 13 Hillary was blaming the video

[quaker bill]

46. And they in fact may still be correct

Terrorists look to gain political advantage. The video may have sparked a political environment that the terrorists thought they could take advantage of. Perhaps they always wanted to do it, and the video made it seem like the right moment politically, where as supporting the libyian people in a revolution to remove Quadaffi wasn't. Things in the ME can be that complicated.

[msanthrope]

35. Kick for the morning crowd. nt

[The Straight Story]

36. This one is easy:

After the attack, an elite anti-terrorist unit of about 40 Marines was flown in to beef up security at the American embassy in the capital of Tripoli....U.S. officials say this was not an out-of-control demonstration, but a well-executed assault by a well-armed band of thugs. Officials suspect the attackers are either associated with or sympathize with al Qaeda

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57511799/evidence-points-to-a-terrorist-attack-in-libya/

Why an elite group of Anti-Terrorist marines? Why mention Al Qaeda?

Oh, and that article...it is from Sept 12th.

[mikeytherat]

39. "Within 30 seconds of the attack, the President was not screaming, "Terror! Terror!" publicly.

Therefore, it was a huge Obama fail."

Do I have that right?

mikey_the_rat

[underpants]

41. This is a RW cottage industry at this point

they have convinced themselves of it

[beac]

76. The OP should move his cottage elsewhere. n/t

[randome]

42. Why don't you tell us what YOU think?

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

43. What's a terrorist attack?

Terrorism supposedly is violence in furtherance of political aims. Does it necessarily require planning or can it be spontaneous? Can it also arise from a religious protest over a tape or youtube vid if a certain group's religious aims coincide with their political ones? If the violence had in fact arisen over the anti-Moslem tape, would it necessarily be wrong to call that an act of terrorism as well?

[quaker bill]

44. See the video

Calling it an "act of terror" was pretty obvious, even before you know who did it. People attacked the compound, blew things up and killed the ambassador. It was called an "act of terror" because it obviously was one. Any group of people can engage in "acts of terror", it does not require membership in a terrorist "organization", that is a fact which can be and was figured out later. Rmoney was wrong and called on it.

[Renew Deal]

45. I still don't understand why it matters.

Some people have been making a big deal about this. I don't know why.

[uppityperson]

88. Me either. It was an act of terror, they waited for accurate info to come in.

Which seems like a good response to me. Call it what it was, get info on wtf happened since even in these days of instant communication, sometimes it takes time to figure it out.

And I really don't understand why it is a deal WHAT they called it. Just figure out wtf happened, react appropriately including make sure it never happens again. Oh, wait. I get it. President Obama didn't strut out doing the macho cowboy I've got my crotch stuffed with socks gun thing and attack another country. Maybe?

[msanthrope]

47. Proceed, dkf. nt

[JoePhilly]

52. Could you say that again Louder!! (Audience laughter ensues).

[cyberswede]

79. *snerk*

[AtomicKitten]

108. lol

[David Zephyr]

122. Ouch.

That was spot on.

[reformist2]

49. They didn't know how much planning went into it, but of course they thought it was terrorism!

[JoePhilly]

51. This was Mitt's Dukakis moment. He proved he is unfit to be CIC.

He was so giddy thinking he caught Obama in a lie, you could see it in his face. The 4 dead Americans no longer a concern. The investigation to find the truth, irrelevant. Mitt was going to catch Obama lying about what he said in the Rose Garden. THAT clip was going to be played over and over. Obama was finished.

And then, BOOM. Mitt finds himself laying on the canvass. He's stunned. Not sure what happened.

And now, the clip that will play over and over will have Obama saying "Candy, can you say that again louder." And then the laughter of the crowd. That terrible laughter.

After that moment, everything else for Mitt becomes a blur.

[WinkyDink]

53. I think this is the "on the record" info you're in need of:

June 14, 2002, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide bomber kills 12 and injures 51.

February 20, 2003, international diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Truck bomb kills 17.

February 28, 2003, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Gunmen on motorcycles killed two consulate guards.

July 30, 2004, U.S. embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan
Suicide bomber kills two.

December 6, 2004, U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Militants stormed and occupied perimeter wall. Five killed, 10 wounded.

March 2, 2006, U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
Suicide car bomber killed four, including a U.S. diplomate directly targeted by the assailants.

September 12, 2006, U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria
Gunmen attacked embassy with grenades, automatic weapons, and a car bomb (though second truck bomb failed to detonate). One killed and 13 wounded.

January 12, 2007, U.S. embassy in Athens, Greece
A rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the embassy building. No one was injured.

July 9, 2008, U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey
Armed men attacked consulate with pistols and shotguns. Three policemen killed.

March 18, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Mortar attack misses embassy, hits nearby girls' school instead.

September 17, 2008, U.S. embassy in Sana'a, Yemen
Militants dressed as policemen attacked the embassy with RPGs, rifles, grenades and car bombs. Six Yemeni soldiers and seven civilians were killed. Sixteen more were injured

[Chorophyll]

57. Well done. And let's not forget this:

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/10/10/985191/chaffetz-absolutely-funding-embassy-security/

House Republicans cut the administration’s request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012. (Negotiations with the Democrat-controlled Senate restored about $88 million of the administration’s request.) Last year, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned that Republicans’ proposed cuts to her department would be “detrimental to America’s national security” — a charge Republicans rejected.

[WinkyDink]

60. So many facts; so little time.

[Chorophyll]

66. Indeed.

But facts are meaningless when you have an Agenda.

[OldDem2012]

55. Just curious, but how did you manage....

...to say under cover for more than 29,000 posts? Will you receive an award for this back at your HQ?

[WinkyDink]

61. Au contraire, mon ami! It is clear the posts come from the "ACME Post Supply"! Beep-beep!

[B Calm]

56. Republicans like to make up shit,

but it looks like last night they were forced to eat their shit in front of a national audience!

[Tigress DEM]

58. Even if it was a peaceful protest, those who chose to break from it and kill were terrorizing people

SO at the time contextually when we were hearing that it started as a peaceful protest against the movie and got out of hand, Obama still took it seriously that Americans were killed.

At the time he was thinking he had two different issues and was dealing with them both.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

59. Bullshit

Pure and unadulerated bullshit.

This was a criminal act committed half a planet away. Criminal acts require investigation, including the collection of forensic evidence and interviews with the victims and any witnesses, followed by locating and interrogating suspects. Under these circumstances, and particuarly given the unsettled conditions in Libya, I'm amazed that we know as much as we know already.

The very idea that the President of the United States (or anyone else, for that matter) would have instant knowledge as to the identities of the prepetrators is idiotic beyond comprehension.

[porphyrian]

62. This is a distraction and we shouldn't be drawn into this argument.

Obama mopped that stage with Romney, in part because Romney helped him. Nothing will change this.

The President's comments following the attack referred to terrorists, so they were not clueless about it, regardless of whether it was an implication or a direct charge. Police don't disclose everything to the press the day after a murder, either, and everyone in America knows this. The republicans are grasping at air as they drown. Don't give them the opportunity to make hay with this non-issue.

[elehhhhna]

63. porph, don't feed the troll

s/he's willfully ignorant

[trumad]

64. Stunning that you still breath here.

[LiberalAndProud]

65. Yes. One wonders.

[CreekDog]

91. feel free to discuss

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1240155236

[treestar]

67. The whole thing is, what is the big deal?

What is the big deal about how it was characterized? At first, we thought it was a reaction to the video.

They are looking into it.

And stuff happens in the Middle East. It could happen during a hypothetical Rmoeny administration. In that case, it would not be the President's fault.

[Jennicut]

69. Exactly. The Repubs are trying so hard to make anything a scandal.

Really bad things happened under Bush and the Repubs said nothing.

There is simply nothing here to make a big deal out of. It's not like lying about WMDs or something.

[Bluenorthwest]

70. It is more than a decade after the 9-11 attacks....did the Bushies ever explain how

that was done? Did they for example, explain how that attack was not the one warned about in the 'Bin Laden Preparing to Strike America' PDB?
How many days after that very clear attack was W standing with a megaphone saying he did not know who did this, but he'd get 'em? How many days after was he saying 'smoke 'em out' and all that? And when did he get Bin Laden? Oh, that's right, he never did that. Obama had to do it.
When did Bushco or any Republicans ever ask why those terrorists were able to strike with such ease, directly on the Pentagon, no less? When did they seek out those in our govenment who failed to protect us from that attack? They did not, of course, do so.
A decade and a year later, still no one has spoken about the security failures of the Bush administration, failures which lead to the deaths of thousands right here at home. Who among them stood up to say 'I am responsible' as both Obama and Sec Clinton have done? Sec of State Rice played self defense 'no one could have imagined such a thing'. She took no responsibility and she did nto mention the warnings, and she never, ever sought to find the security gaps and fill them. She rationalized, painted word pictures. She was warned and she did nothing. So was Bush. Ashcroft read that PDB and stopped flying commercial jets. And Ashcroft did nothing, took no reponsibility, although he protected himself with that intel, he kept it from those he was sworn to protect....

[ieoeja]

71. The GOP called the Oklahoma City bombing an Islamic terrorist attack on day one.

Was that some sort of evil conspiracy? Or just stupid people jumping to the wrong conclusion as, in fact, the GOP so often does on foreign affairs?

[randome]

72. Sorry you were awakened early. Please return to your coma. That is all.

[bhikkhu]

73. They said as much. The whole thing only became an issue because -

the GOP was dying on the vine as the 47% remarks were sinking in, and the president had a huge lead in confidence over foreign affairs. The GOP had nothing at all to work with except the usual "let me tell you what they're thinking" BS, and reframing stories for their hateful little audience.

Why should there even be a question as to what the administration thought, exactly, of an attack on the consulate? It was under investigation in any case, and any responsible or lawyerly mindset refrains from jumping to conclusions, while pursuing every available option to bring about justice.

They referred to it as an act of terror the next day, and the second day after as well - case closed. Nobody but the vultures of hate radio would ask for daily re-affirmations, and it would just be spin-fodder to them either way.

[dionysus]

75. there you go again.

[DevonRex]

80. Your post totally fucking disgusts me.

Oh, and you might wanna check on how many hours are in a DAY, Sherlock.

[dionysus]

112. i'm just laughing.. care for a truffle?

a bed of rubies this time... out of sapphires...

[DevonRex]

113. Yay!!! Truffles with rubies and sapphires!!!

Best post-debate treat ever, after seeing what RW talking point DKF will post the next day.

[Wetzelbill]

82. oh god

Really?

[LanternWaste]

83. The question makes perfect sense

The question makes perfect sense--- but only if the intro music from Looney Tunes is played in the background...




That's all folks...

[Scuba]

84. Don't you get tired of being wrong so often?

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

85. Idiot. nt

[Hutzpa]

89. It's offensive to try and spin this when we have four dead Americans including an Ambassador.

The right should be more focused in finding the culprits who carried out this act of terror instead of trying to score cheap political points.

Just goes to show how despicable the right are.

[LaurenG]

92. What now? Exactly what are you saying?

Please clarify.

[TBF]

94. Same thing she always says - right wing meme of the day .... nt

[LaurenG]

95. Yes *sigh* nt

[obnoxiousdrunk]

103. Like Faux news

she always gives us the other side of the story.

[CreekDog]

110. same side too!

[Motown_Johnny]

96. Everything is an act of terror.

They thought it was a protest that got out of control at the time but still called it terror.

[Spazito]

98. "Well I hope the record stands up to scrutiny."

It does, much to the dismay of some, it does, indeed, stand up to scrutiny.

Poor Mittbinder and his supporters, he was appropriately humiliated and shown to be the craven and inept asshole he really is.

[Kingofalldems]

99. Kick so all can see what's going on here

[kentuck]

101. What difference does it make??

If they didn't know it was a terrorist attack from the beginning?

[stevenleser]

105. Not even trying to be cagey with the right wing spin anymore, are ya?

[leftynyc]

107. Awwww - poor baby

Rough night last night? Don't worry, your misery will be over in just 3 weeks and you'll be able to go back to your faux news echo chamber and lick your wounds.

[Iggo]

109. I don't think you really do.

[DevonRex]

111. I don't think you really do, either.

[DevonRex]

114. Debate #2, day 2: DKF attacks Obama from the right.

[CreekDog]

117. dkf seems to have taken off for a little bit

given up on this thread and DU for a while...

[Iggo]

131. The community standards seem to have shifted.

And not in his favor.

Tragic.

[tjwash]

115. Sometimes I miss Lozo too

[Electric Monk]

128. +1 Obvious is obvious. nt

[spanone]

116. it appears it has.

[IMG][/IMG]

[backscatter712]

124. Please proceed...

[Iggo]

133. I forgot to say it the other day, but...

...yours is my favorite response.

[Ikonoklast]

125. Any question that starts with "So,..." is a Straw Man.

You set up your premise based on facts not in evidence.

Got quite a lot of recs there, though....oh, wait, no, it hasn't.

This reminds me, I need to wash my dirty socks.

[Azathoth]

126. The government's position, from day 2 onward, was that it was a coordinated attack

In the first few days, there were conflicting statements over whether or not the attackers were linked to the protesters, and whether or not the video motivated the attack. Susan Rice, in particular, blamed the attack on the video. But in any case, a planned, well-armed, coordinated attack on a U.S. consulate that takes the life of an ambassador is, by definition, an "act of terror," which is how Obama characterized it in the Rose Garden on day 2.

This entire thing, from beginning to end, is a manufactured controversy straight the right-wing alternate-fact bubble. It all boils down to feigned outrage over the fact that Obama didn't spend weeks after the attack jumping up and down waving a five foot cross and screaming that we would embark on a holy crusade to cleanse the earth of the ungodly brown-skinned Islamofascist terrornazis.

[Kingofalldems]

134. Looks like a big fail