Regarding the attack on the consulate, Romney has had both feet in his mouth from the beginning, and during the debate he continued to chew on them.
According to the newspaper of record, which apparently had a reporter on the ground there, the deadly attack on the consulate in Benghazi was launched by a local group upset by the insulting video. So, it was about the video and it was a terrorist attack.
The Romney/Ryan campaign has so politicized the attack, and the administration has been so busy ducking and weaving, that the facts hardly seem to matter.
Whether or not it was ‘terrorism’ is irrelevant. John nailed it in the news piece (see his link above): “While the issue of whether or not the Obama administration called the attack a terrorist attack was the only thing being talked about, the question of whether or not the US should have gone to war in Libya without congressional approval and helped support the rebel groups there in the first place was ignored. The case study of blowback that the Benghazi incident represented was ignored.”
I should clarify: whether or not the administration called it a terrorist attack is irrelevant. Of course, the term ‘terrorism’ is relative. Blowback is an apt term.
The newspaper of record is a propaganda outlet for the WH. All the evidence collected since the attack have confirmed it was a planned attack by factions associated with AQ. You aren't even trying troll.
The newspaper of record is a propaganda outlet for the WH. All the evidence collected since the attack have
The Romney/Ryan campaign has so politicized the attack, and the administration has been so busy ducking and weaving, that the facts hardly seem to matter.
Great!
your résumé. You do if Ambassador to Saudi Arabia means what doing the "important work" needed under current policies
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/world/africa/election-...
Regarding the attack on the consulate, Romney has had both feet in his mouth from the beginning, and during the debate he continued to chew on them.
According to the newspaper of record, which apparently had a reporter on the ground there, the deadly attack on the consulate in Benghazi was launched by a local group upset by the insulting video. So, it was about the video and it was a terrorist attack.
The Romney/Ryan campaign has so politicized the attack, and the administration has been so busy ducking and weaving, that the facts hardly seem to matter.
Whether or not it was ‘terrorism’ is irrelevant. John nailed it in the news piece (see his link above): “While the issue of whether or not the Obama administration called the attack a terrorist attack was the only thing being talked about, the question of whether or not the US should have gone to war in Libya without congressional approval and helped support the rebel groups there in the first place was ignored. The case study of blowback that the Benghazi incident represented was ignored.”
I should clarify: whether or not the administration called it a terrorist attack is irrelevant. Of course, the term ‘terrorism’ is relative. Blowback is an apt term.
The newspaper of record is a propaganda outlet for the WH. All the evidence collected since the attack have confirmed it was a planned attack by factions associated with AQ. You aren't even trying troll.
The newspaper of record is a propaganda outlet for the WH. All the evidence collected since the attack have
The Romney/Ryan campaign has so politicized the attack, and the administration has been so busy ducking and weaving, that the facts hardly seem to matter.
Great!
your résumé. You do if Ambassador to Saudi Arabia means what doing the "important work" needed under current policies