Obama's Christmas Day Bomber Lie

[332nd]

Redtail, I think I did answer your question.

No, you did not.

Unless you think by "extremist" he was saying "not a terrorist".

 

[BeAChooser]

No, you did not.

Yes, I did. The fact that you don't understand says something in itself.

 

[332nd]

Yes, I did.

Well it didn't make any sense. Could you explain?

The fact that you don't understand says something in itself.

What?

 

[Matthew Best]

If he was alone on the plane, then he was isolated at that point.

Isolated
–adjective
separated from other persons or things; alone; solitary.

 

[leftysergeant]

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...ee-a-foreign-terrorist-right-in-front-of-them

Collins is not an expert on counter-terrorism. Drinks Cheney's Accient Swill like it was lemonade.

 

[rwguinn]

If he was alone on the plane, then he was isolated at that point.

Isolated
–adjective
separated from other persons or things; alone; solitary.

Please. Don't confuse BAC by actually using the English Language.
Words only mean what the speaker (writer) wants them to mean. Just ask any troofer...
(Of course, BAC must also ignore his hero, Rush, who has been know to state "Words have meaning...")

 

[Praktik]

That guy? I remember several years ago him saying some ridiculous, outrageous, unsubstantiated claims about Canada Canukistan, its immigration system, and the supposed presence of Al-Qaeda in the country in worrying numbers.

fixed

 

[BeAChooser]

Please. Don't confuse BAC by actually using the English Language.

I'm not confused by the English language. For example, I know full well what Janet Napolitano meant when she said "Right now we have no indication that it's part of anything larger", even though she said that days after the terrorist had told FBI agents that he was trained by Al-Qaeda and that there were other bombers like him in the pipeline (a fact then confirmed by British Intelligence). Do you think she was not apprised of those facts, rwguinn?

And I'm also not confused by Obama's actions with regards to terrorism over the past year or two. His is an administration that virtually deleted the word terrorist from it's vocabulary. That wants to treat them as just criminals. Which is why this terrorists was mirandized after just an hour of questioning, without consultation with ANY national security agency, including Homeland Security. But maybe that wouldn't have made any different to "the system worked" Napolitano whose first speech to Congress as head of HS didn't even contain the word "terror". She spent more time talking about the threat of hurricanes than anything else. And if the folks that Obama has put in charge of Homeland Security are afraid to accurately describe our enemy, can we really trust them to protect us from them?

Finally, it wasn't until just the other day, after Obama started drawing heat over his and his administration's handling of the the Christmas Day bomber, that Obama for the first time said we are at war with terrorism. Not that he means it in the way you, being a self-proclaimed expert in the English languageand *true* conservative (not like me and Rush), must think he means it.

And by the way I'm not a troofer. Nice attempted smear.

 

[leftysergeant]

BAC, living in constant fear of the bogeyman can lead to serious health issues. You really need to chill. We are no longer buying Nosferatu Cheney's Anti-Goblin Suppositories. They were too painful to apply.

 

[332nd]

I'm not confused by the English language. For example, I know full well what Janet Napolitano meant when she said "Right now we have no indication that it's part of anything larger", even though she said that days after the terrorist had told FBI agents that he was trained by Al-Qaeda and that there were other bombers like him in the pipeline (a fact then confirmed by British Intelligence). Do you think she was not apprised of those facts, rwguinn?

And I'm also not confused by Obama's actions with regards to terrorism over the past year or two. His is an administration that virtually deleted the word terrorist from it's vocabulary. That wants to treat them as just criminals. Which is why this terrorists was mirandized after just an hour of questioning, without consultation with ANY national security agency, including Homeland Security. But maybe that wouldn't have made any different to "the system worked" Napolitano whose first speech to Congress as head of HS didn't even contain the word "terror". She spent more time talking about the threat of hurricanes than anything else. And if the folks that Obama has put in charge of Homeland Security are afraid to accurately describe our enemy, can we really trust them to protect us from them?

Finally, it wasn't until just the other day, after Obama started drawing heat over his and his administration's handling of the the Christmas Day bomber, that Obama for the first time said we are at war with terrorism. Not that he means it in the way you, being a self-proclaimed expert in the English languageand *true* conservative (not like me and Rush), must think he means it.

And by the way I'm not a troofer. Nice attempted smear.

Do you even read the articles you cut and paste?
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/59115

His is an administration that virtually deleted the word terrorist from it's vocabulary.

Pay particular attention to his speech. (and by that I mean actually reading it and not skimming for things you can quote mine.)

 

[applecorped]

BAC, living in constant fear of the bogeyman James O'Keefe can lead to serious health issues.

True.

 

[BeAChooser]

Pay particular attention to his speech. (and by that I mean actually reading it and not skimming for things you can quote mine.)

In a speech on a terrorist attack that came close to killing 300 people, he use the word terrorist just TWICE. You do know the meaning of "virtually" in the context I used it, don't you?

Did you also notice his use of the word "suspect" (as in *criminal*)? He used that SIX times.

Did you also notice his statement that "A full investigation has been launched into this attempted act of terrorism, and we will not rest until we find all who were involved and hold them accountable." I guess he considers a full investigation one with just a one hour interrogation of the *suspect*? And how is that effort to find ALL those involved and hold them accountable coming? Maybe not all that well given that the *suspect* lawyered up the moment he was mirandized.

The facts of the case also counter Obama's claim in the speech that "we are doing everything in our power" to keep Americans safe and secure. The fact that the *suspect* was mirandized WITHOUT EVEN CONSULTING the various national defense and intelligence agencies suggests Obama wasn't being quite honest when he said that. Wasn't being honest when he said "We will continue to use every element of our national power to disrupt, to dismantle and defeat the violent extremists who threaten us". Wasn't being honest when he said "we will do everything in our power to protect our country".

Yes, by all means, pay particular attention to his speech.

And remember that actions speak louder than words.

Oh and by the way … remember this statement from Obama's Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, back in March of 2009 (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/fir...administration-stopped-using-war-terror-term/)?

The administration has stopped using the phrase (BAC - global war on terror) and I think that speaks for itself.

 

[332nd]

In a speech on a terrorist attack that came close to killing 300 people, he use the word terrorist just TWICE. You do know the meaning of "virtually" in the context I used it, don't you?

How many times was he supposed to use it? How many times should he use it?

Did you also notice his use of the word "suspect" (as in *criminal*)? He used that SIX times.

GASP!!!! No one can be suspected of terrorism!!!!! Oh wait....

Did you also notice his statement that "A full investigation has been launched into this attempted act of terrorism, and we will not rest until we find all who were involved and hold them accountable." I guess he considers a full investigation one with just a one hour interrogation of the *suspect*? And how is that effort to find ALL those involved and hold them accountable coming? Maybe not all that well given that the *suspect* lawyered up the moment he was mirandized.

Ooooo Well you got me there! I mean how many criminal organizations have had major players caught after one of the "small fish" got arrested and lawyered up?.... Oh, wait....

The facts of the case also counter Obama's claim in the speech that "we are doing everything in our power" to keep Americans safe and secure. The fact that the *suspect* was mirandized WITHOUT EVEN CONSULTING the various national defense and intelligence agencies suggests Obama wasn't being quite honest when he said that. Wasn't being honest when he said "We will continue to use every element of our national power to disrupt, to dismantle and defeat the violent extremists who threaten us". Wasn't being honest when he said "we will do everything in our power to protect our country".

What power should have been used?

Yes, by all means, pay particular attention to his speech.

And remember that actions speak louder than words.

Oh and by the way … remember this statement from Obama's Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, back in March of 2009 (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/fir...administration-stopped-using-war-terror-term/)?

Oh Noes!!!!!! If we don't use the exact phrase "War on Terror", the terrorist will win!!!! Remember the War on Genociders!??! The War on Sneak Attackers!??! The War on Pro Slaveryers!??! The War on Taxers that don't allow Representation!!!!! Don't these people know that without using the exact words we're dooomed!!!!! Dooomed I tells ya!!!!

 

[leftysergeant]

In a speech on a terrorist attack that came close to killing 300 people, he use the word terrorist just TWICE. You do know the meaning of "virtually" in the context I used it, don't you?

Did you also notice his use of the word "suspect" (as in *criminal*)? He used that SIX times.

Yeah, well that was rude of Obama to refer to the suspect as a criminal rather than as an unorthodox freedom fighter, wasn't it? I mean, the man trained hard to become proficient in this suicide mission thing and then doesn't even get the glory of dying a martyr's death as a soldier, but winds up rotting in jail. Yeah, pretty disgusting thing to do to someone who wants to go out in a blaze of glory.

The facts of the case also counter Obama's claim in the speech that "we are doing everything in our power" to keep Americans safe and secure. The fact that the *suspect* was mirandized WITHOUT EVEN CONSULTING the various national defense and intelligence agencies suggests Obama wasn't being quite honest when he said that.

The FAIL in that statement burns like acid in the face. Had he allowed the intel agencies to beat a confession out of him the way that Rummy and Nosferatu would have, we would not see him sitting in jail awaitng a slam-dunk trial for attempted murder. Just because the Shrub and his merry morons decided to go medevial on suspects does not mean it works. If it did, we would never have had our hands of the undie bomber because al Qaeda would have been broken.

Try to remember some history here.

Did the FBI get a lead on Ressam's team before or after Ressam was mirandized?

Just a little hint for the slow people. It was after Ressam got his Miranda.)

Wasn't being honest when he said "We will continue to use every element of our national power to disrupt, to dismantle and defeat the violent extremists who threaten us". Wasn't being honest when he said "we will do everything in our power to protect our country".

Look here. That Obama is not employing the same methods as the drooling morons who had been conducting the war on terror and running it repeatedly into the ditch prior to 01.20.09 does not mean that he is not fdoing all in his power. It's kind of a waste of power to use methods that are illegal and do not work.

 

[headscratcher4]

Can't remember...but doubt that BAC was this upset when Bush/Cheney fudged the intelligence, proclaimed as a undisputed fact that Saddam had WMDs and pushed us into a war that has cost over a trillion dollars and thousands of US lives...I know, apples and oranges.

 

[BeAChooser]

If we don't use the exact phrase "War on Terror", the terrorist will win!!!!

Oh that's right. Liberals think "man caused disaster" (the phrase that Napolitano coined) is the same thing as terrorism.

 

[BeAChooser]

Can't remember...but doubt that BAC was this upset when Bush/Cheney fudged the intelligence, proclaimed as a undisputed fact that Saddam had WMDs and pushed us into a war that has cost over a trillion dollars and thousands of US lives...I know, apples and oranges.

Besides this being a deliberate derail, you don't even have the facts right.

 

[ZARDOZ]

I just had 8 years of endless Bush-Cheney are liars/incompetent/evil/stupid. Now Obama is a liar/incompetent/evil/stupid too?

Make up your minds!

 

[carlitos]

ZARDOZ, It's worse than you think.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

No Joe. Obama said this:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/59115



And that statement was made AFTER the suspect had already admitted to authorities that he'd been trained by al-Qaeda bomb makers in Yemen and that there were others trained to do the same thing. And the link in the OP of this article indicates that the Whitehouse was informed of this prior to Obama calling the terrorist "an isolated extremist". Furthermore, Janet Napolitano, even after Obama's statement, said that "Right now we have no indication that it's part of anything larger". LIAR. No wonder Obama has kept her on-board. LIARS are most comfortable in the company of LIARS.

Nonsense, as usual.

The quote of Obama you provided here is not at all what the hearsay quote said.