logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> He Knew, Obama is a liar, does this change your opinion of him?
Barack Obama, serial liar.
You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Total Votes: 25
Guests cannot vote 
Bikerdad
post Oct 24 2012, 07:37 PM
Post #1


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,829
Member No.: 715
Joined: May-8-03

Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



White House told of militant claim two hours after Libya attack
QUOTE
Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

Now, when assessing whether or not President Obama is a serial liar, we are going to use the strictest of standards, or more accurately, the most charitable. Thus, campaign promises aren't going to be considered. Sure, he promised that he would close Gitmo, but clearly he hasn't. Claims that others have made on his behalf which he let stand for years aren't going to be considered either. After all, perhaps he truly didn't know that his publicist/agent claimed in promotional material for years that he was born in Kenya. Nor are we even going to consider claims he made that fly in the face of common sense and would never pass the "reasonable doubt" test, such as his claim that he didn't know Reverend Jeremiah Wright was a spouting anti-American, racist black liberation theology from the pulpit, even though President Obama attended his church for 20 years.

“It was also there — at Trinity United Church of Christ on the South Side of Chicago — that I met Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., who took me on another journey and introduced me to a man named Jesus Christ. It was the best education I ever had.”

We aren't going to look events 40 years ago, of which there are no records. No, we're going to focus on simple, factual statements made by Obama about events, some of which Obama himself was party to, events that are in the public record. We've got three examples here. The first is his and his Administration's response to the Benghazi attack, linked above.

The second is a speech then Senator Obama gave at Hampton University, on June 5th, 2007. Departing from his prepared speech, Obama said (paraphrased):

Obama mentions the Stafford Act, which requires communities receiving federal disaster relief to contribute 10 percent as much as the federal government does. Senator Obama, as he was then, pointed out that this requirement was waived in the case of New York and Florida because the people there were considered to be "part of the American family." But the people in New Orleans, they've been stiffed -- "Where's your dollar? Where's your Stafford Act money? ... The people down in New Orleans they don’t care about as much!”

You can see the entire video of his speech here. The section in question starts roughly at the 22:00 mark, and continues for about two minutes.

So, where's the lie? On May 24, 2007, the Senate voted on the final amendments to HR2206, which included Stafford Act waivers for New Orleans. It passed the Senate 80-14. Senator Barack Obama voted against it. The "they" in his above quote apparently includes OBAMA and 9 other Democrat Senators (plus one independent), and only 3 Republicans. hmmm.gif

The third example is Obama lying to protect his Administration, again, about facts that are a matter of public record.

QUOTE
Asked about the Fast and Furious program at the Univision forum on Thursday (Sep 20th, 2012), President Obama falsely claimed that the program began under President George W. Bush.

“I think it’s important for us to understand that the Fast and Furious program was a field-initiated program begun under the previous administration,” the president said. “When Eric Holder found out about it, he discontinued it. We assigned a inspector general to do a thorough report that was just issued, confirming that in fact Eric Holder did not know about this, that he took prompt action and the people who did initiate this were held accountable.”

In actuality, the Fast and Furious program was started in October 2009, nine months into the Obama presidency. - ABC News



1} Do you believe Obama is a serial liar, merely a politician, or perhaps a mix?

2} What is the dividing line between annoying spin, and lying? Does the dividing line move depending on the ideological perspective of the spinner/liar?

3} "People died, Obama lied"? Accurate statement regarding Benghazi, or not?

4} IF it were established beyond any reasonable doubt that Obama himself in full knowledge lied about Benghazi and the video, should he resign? (Reasonable doubt means HE knew, not that he SHOULD HAVE known.)

5} Springboarding from #4, at what point is the distinction between malfeasance (lying) and ignorance irrelavent, i.e. whether lying or incompentent, ya gotta go?






Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 45)
amf
post Oct 29 2012, 03:09 PM
Post #41


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,372
Member No.: 1,540
Joined: October-23-03

From: Atlanta, GA
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE
As I said, my information is from the hearing. Did you watch it? In the hearing Lamb testified that she witnessed the attack nearly real time.


The hearing video is here: http://oversight.house.gov/hearing/the-sec...es-of-benghazi/

Don't expect me to do your homework and find it in 4 hours of video. I scanned it, but can't find what you claimed to have heard that no one except right-wing talk radio claims is there. In fact, even Geraldo on FOX said that there were no drones for over 2 hours so they couldn't have WATCHED what was going on for that first 2+ hours. So you'll have to prove your assertion with a timestamp on the video and even THEN, you'll have to prove that she was watching a "real-time video" (I'll even accept "near-real-time") and not just a slip of the tongue.

QUOTE
Maybe not made a difference in that attack, but the lack of security encouraged the attack. With more security, it might have prevented the attack. Are you saying that you don't support adding more security to our outposts in foreign lands?

This still doesn't excuse the fact that requests were made and not fulfilled. You are very good at deflecting when pushed to admit that the president's administration failed miserably on this.


And you're quick to blame the president for a request he likely never even heard about until after the fact. And it's you who refuse to admit that no matter how much security there was, it would not have been enough in the face of 150 armed fighters. Are you happy that Republicans in the House cut $330 million from embassy security last year? Do you blame them? Do you blame the ambassador for going into a volatile situation without considering the risks to himself?

With more security, it still might not have prevented the attack, you don't know that and neither do I, so trying to assert it without any basis is not a winning argument.

QUOTE
Was Panetta going to follow the President's "directive to make sure we are securing our personnel" the next day or the next week? When was he going to follow orders?

The military had assets 480 miles away at Naval Air Station Sigonella.


What military assets were at the Naval Air Station that would be useful in a street fight involving 150 fighters with heavy and light arms? Isn't that assuming an awful lot, like who would go, how they would get there, where they would land, whether they had sufficient firepower (at a Naval station?), the plan for securing the consulate buildings, etc.? All without eyes in the air for the first 2 hours to even see what's going on? Yes, you had a single Spec Forces person on the ground, relaying via phone what he could see as he hid with the ambassador in a secure room. Uhh... what exactly could he see of the street and surrounding areas? Was this an ambush with the aim to kill more American soldiers? Would Panetta order these "assets" into a "Black Hawk Down" situation by going in with inadequate intel and no real planning?

Yes, CIA and DoD seemed to have only provided "eyes in the sky" and not much else. And that's the nature of the blame game: you'd rather be blamed for not doing enough than for getting even more people killed trying to do too much. Getting more people killed because you didn't take the time to properly plan is a career killer. Panetta was right not to risk more deaths. And the empty rhetoric on both sides fails our nation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Amlord
post Oct 29 2012, 03:25 PM
Post #42


Group Icon

**********
The Roaring Lion

Sponsor

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,884
Member No.: 572
Joined: March-4-03

From: Cleveland suburbs, OH
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



QUOTE(amf @ Oct 29 2012, 11:09 AM) *
QUOTE
As I said, my information is from the hearing. Did you watch it? In the hearing Lamb testified that she witnessed the attack nearly real time.


The hearing video is here: http://oversight.house.gov/hearing/the-sec...es-of-benghazi/

Don't expect me to do your homework and find it in 4 hours of video. I scanned it, but can't find what you claimed to have heard that no one except right-wing talk radio claims is there. In fact, even Geraldo on FOX said that there were no drones for over 2 hours so they couldn't have WATCHED what was going on for that first 2+ hours. So you'll have to prove your assertion with a timestamp on the video and even THEN, you'll have to prove that she was watching a "real-time video" (I'll even accept "near-real-time") and not just a slip of the tongue.


Leon Panetta confirmed as much last Thursday.

QUOTE
Two and a half hours after the attack began, an unarmed predator drone was diverted from a surveillance mission over another part of Libya to the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.


And again, in contradiction to what the President has said, he affirmed:

QUOTE
"General Ham, General Dempsey and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation


QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Oct 29 2012, 10:31 AM) *
I don't want to agree, but I think I'm going to have to agree with pretty much everything above.

If Obama is stating that he gave the directive to secure personnel and whatever was needed and there was a conflict with Panetta, or if Panetta was acting on orders we should know. What a mess. ermm.gif

There's one easy explanation: the President wasn't truthful about the CIA and the military knowing what their orders were.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hobbes
post Nov 3 2012, 07:58 PM
Post #43


Group Icon

**********
No More Mr. Nice Guy!

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 5,311
Member No.: 1,155
Joined: September-8-03

From: Dallas, TX
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Amlord @ Oct 29 2012, 10:25 AM) *
There's one easy explanation: the President wasn't truthful about the CIA and the military knowing what their orders were.

There's another. Panetta took the order to make sure our personnel were safe to an extreme, deciding not to risk additional personnel in the attack. This is what I think happened, and what Panetta's own words say he did.

This post has been edited by Hobbes: Nov 3 2012, 08:00 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 5 2012, 08:39 PM
Post #44


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



1} Do you believe Obama is a serial liar, merely a politician, or perhaps a mix?

Yes. Not only did he know but he or someone in the situation room decided not to send in the AC-130 and/or special forces to save those in the compound.

Its so outrageous its no wonder the mainstream media ignored it for so ling. the seals died on a roof using laser designation to point to enemy positions. one of the last questions to command from the seal was "where the f%@# is the Specter Gun Ship".

We had one and Delta in Sicily able to reach the compound - the General there said that he was not asked to get involved and send it. Someone needs to answer for this debacle.

QUOTE
Reports indicate two drones and an AC-130 gunship were in the area when Benghazi was attacked, yet their resources were not used.

This runs completely against the current explanation coming out of the White House, which is that Obama did everything he could once he learned of the attack.
You'll remember that in the second presidential debate, Obama said that as "soon as I was aware the Benghazi consulate was being overrun, I was on the phone with my national security team." The not-so-subtle intimation is that Obama was stepping up to the protect the U.S. personnel who were in Libya. And in the wakes of their deaths, which weren't "optimal," we have been assured that stronger action wasn't taken stronger because those options weren't available.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/10...ull-The-Trigger
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amf
post Nov 5 2012, 10:29 PM
Post #45


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,372
Member No.: 1,540
Joined: October-23-03

From: Atlanta, GA
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Independent



Ted, you're being lied to by breitbart, but you want us to take it seriously?

Fine, here's the rebuttal to FOX's hysteria: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/02/wo...attack-20121103

QUOTE
Senior intelligence and Defense officials say there was some coverage by unarmed surveillance drones during part of the Sept. 11 Benghazi attack, but no feed was available for the president. The Special Operations team arrived on the Italian island of Sicily hours after the attack was over. And "no AC-130 was within a continent's range of Benghazi," Pentagon spokesman George Little said.


The closest AC-130 was in Afghanistan, 2500 miles away. You're being played for a sucker.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mrs. Pigpen
post Nov 5 2012, 11:32 PM
Post #46


Group Icon

**********
Carpe noctum

Sponsor
June 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 7,323
Member No.: 598
Joined: March-12-03

Gender: Female
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(amf @ Nov 5 2012, 05:29 PM) *
Ted, you're being lied to by breitbart, but you want us to take it seriously?

Fine, here's the rebuttal to FOX's hysteria: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/02/wo...attack-20121103

QUOTE
Senior intelligence and Defense officials say there was some coverage by unarmed surveillance drones during part of the Sept. 11 Benghazi attack, but no feed was available for the president. The Special Operations team arrived on the Italian island of Sicily hours after the attack was over. And "no AC-130 was within a continent's range of Benghazi," Pentagon spokesman George Little said.


The closest AC-130 was in Afghanistan, 2500 miles away. You're being played for a sucker.


Interesting link, amf. Thankyou.
QUOTE
The new account of CIA actions, for example, shows that the agency's security officers did not appear to have the heavy weapons they needed to repel the attack, and it shows how deeply the U.S. was relying on Libyan security forces that melted away. Congress and a State Department accountability review board are investigating why the security was so inadequate, both for the ambassador and for a major CIA intelligence operation as Benghazi was growing more dangerous.

*snip*

On the issue of a military response, the Obama administration got an unusual boost Friday by former George W. Bush administration Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, who wrote in a blog post that "the US did almost everything possible to protect our people once the attacks had started, though not in advance. … Decision makers in Washington appear to have been leaning forward, as they should have been. The military's most capable rescue force, based on the East Coast, was deployed immediately (something that is very rarely done), but — given the distances involved — arrived at Sigonella only after the crisis was over." Sigonella is the site of a U.S. military installation in Sicily.


Well, lie gets around the world before the truth gets its pants on, and so forth. As usual.

This post has been edited by Mrs. Pigpen: Nov 5 2012, 11:42 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: June 18th, 2018 - 12:15 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.