US ambassador to Libya and 3 embassy staff members reportedly killed in Libya

[Lanie]

Obama's policies..his support of radical Islam in Egypt and Libya and his continued snubs to our lone ally in the region have motivated these attacks.

By doing nothing..by backing the Muslim Brotherhood...he's told the terrorists it's ok to do this without repercussions.

So yes Bridget...it IS his fault.




Clinton condemned allllllllll the attacks against the U.S. and it's citizens and embassies too...with almost the same words as Obama.

They're empty words. The terrorists know that. Hence the reason the Embassy in Egypt is under siege again today and they are burnig the American flag of our Embassy in Yemen.



Finally getting tired of the Dems Bridget? I mean after all they are the party that refuses to take the blam for anything and continue to blam a Preaident who has been out of office almost four years now for all of America's problems.

To the best of my knowledge, all Obama did was say it was wrong to create a film putting down Mohommad. He didn't encourage laws against the film. He simply expressed his opinion on the subject. He did that to discourage attacks, but it didn't work. Four arrests have been made in the attacks. Obama supports that. Probably 99.9% of liberals support that. I support that.

Obama doesn't support radical Islam. If he did, our butts might be up in the air right now.

This is a tragedy that should have brought us together, but instead you use it for your sick hatred of Obama and anything liberal.

It's one thing to have strong, conservative values. That's fine. However, it's wrong to use every event, every tragedy that happens to stick it to Obama and liberals. This is no better than DUers using everything including Katrina to stick it to Bush and conservatives. People are people.

The biggest threat in a few weeks is NOT the threat of communism. It's not the threat of terrorism (because oddly enough, they tend to get caught as of lately). It's not radical Islam. It's not the threat of theocracy. It's not the threat of a war on women. It's not Medicare problems.

The biggest threat in a few weeks is people from both sides hating each other with big, disgusting hatred. I'm glad that I don't have kids because I hate that our country does this to each other every few years. God bless the USA? One nation under God? We'd have to be a country which values love and not hate for that to be true.

[Lanie]

Tell me, Bridget/Lanie/Jade, do you think this would have happened with an apology and a half assed threat under President Bush? Think we'll see anything of significance come from obama in response or will this be a replay of Carter's debacle in 1979? Keep in mind that Carter helped oust the Shah and install Kohmeni before you take it upon yourself to answer.

YESSSSSSSSS!!!!!! Are you serious? These types of zealots have been attacking people just because somebody insulted their god, Muhummad. They think Allah will save them from anything in their way. Even Bush wouldn't have struck people before an attack. I don't think he would have struck Egypt after the attack. I think he would have given them the chance to bring in the terrorists, which they did.

I was never Jade.

[SaintLouieWoman]

To the best of my knowledge, all Obama did was say it was wrong to create a film putting down Mohommad. He didn't encourage laws against the film. He simply expressed his opinion on the subject. He did that to discourage attacks, but it didn't work. Four arrests have been made in the attacks. Obama supports that. Probably 99.9% of liberals support that. I support that.

Obama doesn't support radical Islam. If he did, our butts might be up in the air right now.

This is a tragedy that should have brought us together, but instead you use it for your sick hatred of Obama and anything liberal.

It's one thing to have strong, conservative values. That's fine. However, it's wrong to use every event, every tragedy that happens to stick it to Obama and liberals. This is no better than DUers using everything including Katrina to stick it to Bush and conservatives. People are people.

The biggest threat in a few weeks is NOT the threat of communism. It's not the threat of terrorism (because oddly enough, they tend to get caught as of lately). It's not radical Islam. It's not the threat of theocracy. It's not the threat of a war on women. It's not Medicare problems.

The biggest threat in a few weeks is people from both sides hating each other with big, disgusting hatred. I'm glad that I don't have kids because I hate that our country does this to each other every few years. God bless the USA? One nation under God? We'd have to be a country which values love and not hate for that to be true.

Lanie, the biggest problem is an administration that doesn't have the sense to post extra security around embassies after there were warnings that there was major unrest. Especially with 9-11 coming up, they should have done it That's called negligence.

Since when in the US do we have to shut up when something is so wrong? Romney didn't say that much to justify the way he was attacked. Carter says way worse stuff all the time against other presidents, including fellow Democrats.

What's so wrong is the way the liberal media puts out the very lines that you've quoted. You've swallowed their Kool-Aide, hook, line and sinker.

Bullies and terrorists do not respond well to fuzzy, well-meaning, mooshy pablum. They respond to strength. Look how long Bush kept our country and by extension, the representations of our country on foreign soil, safe. Obama took his eye off the ball. He's been too busy campaigning. For him to miss the intelligence briefings again, after the attacks, is outrageous.

There's no good defense for this. The only defense of his supporters is an offense, attacking Romney instead of the person who did not live up to his duty and responsibilities. I'd rather have Bill Clinton in the oval office with an intern, cigare, pizza box, etc than have Obama messing up the way he has, both economically and internationally.

[SaintLouieWoman]

Of course most, if not all Muslim countries hate America and Israel for that matter, and the reasons are many. Whatever the leaders of said countries project to the populace in order to point blame away from themselves for the crappy state of affairs in said countries and taking the money from the plunder (oil profits etc)for themselves while their people live in poverty is what we get blamed for. As far as the new govts we have a lot of work ahead since we don't have the luxury of having known them for the past 30 years and anticipating what they would do about stuff.

It's not rocket science.

Apply these comments to our own country. Isn't this the technique used by Obama to deflect an uprising due to his abject failure with oiur economy and with keeping the US safe? He's passing the blame to the rich, Romney, you name it. Anything but looking in that mirror and honestly assessing where he went wrong. That mirror is only a vanity mirror.

[Gina]

Four more years! (Of the blame game).

If that doesn't keep you up at night nothing will.

[wasp69]

YESSSSSSSSS!!!!!! Are you serious?

Considering how much terrorism and storming of embassies didn't happen after we turned our forces loose on the mohammedian savages during his tenure? Uh, yeah, I'm dead serious. Where were you during that time?

These types of zealots have been attacking people just because somebody insulted their god, Muhummad. They think Allah will save them from anything in their way.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see or deaf as those who refuse to hear. There are also none so ignorant as those who refuse to remember or learn.

Bridget, 2001 to 2009 has to be lost time for you. That is the only rational and logical explanation for this statement.

President Bush was very clear about the position of the United States in regards to terrorism and terrorist organizations. The al-queda savages learned that first hand in Afghanistan and Iraq. If they committed an act of terrorism, then they could count on an overwhelming and disproportionate response. That and actually treating terrorism like terrorism (as opposed to treating it like a tantrum or nuisance) is why you didn't see stupid shit like this happen under President Bush. Clinton sent in the FBI, Bush sent in the USMC - there is your difference, dear, and why most of the islamokazies kept their happy asses in the desert for 8 years.

Bring in obama and the lib pacifiers bowing to these savages, throwing a non secular government and army (Egypt) under the bus in favor of muslim extremists, supporting muslim extremists in favor of Khadaffi, telling Israel to piss up a rope in favor of muslim extremists (Iran), helping them dismantle relatively stable states, sending them billions of our hard earned money during a time of record unemployment and record deficits, obama strutting around the country telling anyone that would listen that he killed bin Laden, the stupid ass apology to these animals for a you tube video that had been out for 6 months.... The only thing this "culture" understands is strength and obama has shown them weakness and apathy.

My God, girl, where is your head? Why won't you listen? Why can't you draw rational conclusions from the evidence that is right in front of you? These fiends attacked us despite the ass kissing they've been getting for 4 years. Ambassador Stevens was on the ground in Benghazi helping the "rebels" and they still killed him! Why? Because obama showed them weakness! We have an embassy in Cairo where the Marine Security Detachment was unarmed! Why? Because it was the position of the United States government to show American weakness! They don't fear us because they know obama is a weakling and an amateur.

Bridget, there is already historical precedence where a President to abandoned his ally to support an islamic extremist with the thought that if they would just be good liberals (social justice, yada yada), then all would be well. That got an embassy invaded and personnel held hostage for over a year with no retribution and no example of what happens when you invade US sovereign territory.

Put the kool aid down! Break yourself out of that idiotic liberal indoctrination and put your head in the real world! These fiends mean to kill us, they don't care how much you empathize with them or want peace!

Even Bush wouldn't have struck people before an attack. I don't think he would have struck Egypt after the attack.

No, he wouldn't have, because the "arab spring" would have never happened. But, we'll go with the fact that it did, and I'll tell you what the difference would have been: A heightened state of awareness, Marines with their weapons locked and loaded, the gathering of a mob would have had them in full battle rattle, any idiot that came over the wall to set fires or cut down the flag (an act of WAR) would have been pumped full of .223 and .50 cal ammo faster than they could yell "we are all bin Laden".

How do I know? I was on active duty from 2001-2009, I have perspective and experience.

I was never Jade.

Circa 2004-2006? Bull, and if the archives hadn't been wiped during one of the many crashes, I would be happy to cure your amnesia about Jade and WeWillSee.

[wasp69]

The biggest threat in a few weeks is people from both sides hating each other with big, disgusting hatred. I'm glad that I don't have kids because I hate that our country does this to each other every few years. God bless the USA? One nation under God? We'd have to be a country which values love and not hate for that to be true.

You have only to look at the elected officials and "elites" from your side to find out where the "hate" comes from, dear. Don't bleat about how bad hatred is when "tolerant" liberals own it lock, stock, and barrel.

[txradioguy]

To the best of my knowledge, all Obama did was say it was wrong to create a film putting down Mohommad. He didn't encourage laws against the film. He simply expressed his opinion on the subject. He did that to discourage attacks, but it didn't work. Four arrests have been made in the attacks. Obama supports that. Probably 99.9% of liberals support that. I support that.

And that has exactly what to do with my response? Oh yeah that's right...nothing. Obama set this in motion long before their fake excuse of a movie that no one can seem to find came to light. His speech in Cairo...his support of the overthrow of the governments in Egypt and Libya...his blatant and obvious dislike of Israel while still continuing to offer an open hand to Iran. Pulling troops out of Iraq early...and now trying to pull us out of Afghanistan before it's stable. All of these things told the Muslim extremists it was ok to pull the coordinated attack that they did on 9/11...and the day they decided to attack our embassies was no mistake either. If anything it's a reaction to Obama constantly spiking the football and telling the world that he killed Obama.

All you have to do is read what the terrorists were chanting outside the gates to know that this had nothing to do with some stupid movie that might or might not exist.

Why should Obama have to apologize? Where are the apologies to other religions when Hollywood actually does make a movie that offends Christians everywhere?

All Obama did yesterday was channel Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton and toss out a lot of passionless empty words that do nothing more than make our enemies laugh.

I'd give anything for Obama to have had the same passion and fire in what he said as he did when he was out stirring the rabble with his "you didn't build that". He shows more pasison attacking the TEA Party than he did talking about attacks on AMericans by radical Islam.

Obama doesn't support radical Islam. If he did, our butts might be up in the air right now.

He does and they are.

WTF do you think the Muslim Brotherhood is? IT'S RADICAL ISLAM!!! And Obama has given it his full support twice int he last year.

This is a tragedy that should have brought us together, but instead you use it for your sick hatred of Obama and anything liberal.

It's one thing to have strong, conservative values. That's fine. However, it's wrong to use every event, every tragedy that happens to stick it to Obama and liberals. This is no better than DUers using everything including Katrina to stick it to Bush and conservatives. People are people.

You mean it's only wrong if Conservatives/Republicans do it right? I mean that must be the case since Obama himself used an event in Iraq to attack Bush. Kerry did the same thing in 2004.

Hell Reagan used the hostage crisis and the Soviets in Afghanistan like a club to hammer Jimmy Carter in 1980.

There's nothing wrong with what Romney did. It's happened almost as long as we've had a Presidential election in this country.

You and the rest of the Libtards are only crying about this because on 9/11 Romney came off appearing more like the President than Obama did.

The biggest threat in a few weeks is NOT the threat of communism. It's not the threat of terrorism (because oddly enough, they tend to get caught as of lately). It's not radical Islam. It's not the threat of theocracy. It's not the threat of a war on women. It's not Medicare problems.

The biggest threat in a few weeks is people from both sides hating each other with big, disgusting hatred. I'm glad that I don't have kids because I hate that our country does this to each other every few years. God bless the USA? One nation under God? We'd have to be a country which values love and not hate for that to be true.

Biggest pile of bullshit from you I've seen in awhile. Right there you highlighted a complete and lack of knowledge of what really threatens this country.

It's even dumber than Michelle saying that obesity is the greatest to national security this country faces.

Congratulations. You've now confirmed you're a moron.

[TVDOC]

Considering how much terrorism and storming of embassies didn't happen after we turned our forces loose on the mohammedian savages during his tenure? Uh, yeah, I'm dead serious. Where were you during that time?



There are none so blind as those who refuse to see or deaf as those who refuse to hear. There are also none so ignorant as those who refuse to remember or learn.

Bridget, 2001 to 2009 has to be lost time for you. That is the only rational and logical explanation for this statement.

President Bush was very clear about the position of the United States in regards to terrorism and terrorist organizations. The al-queda savages learned that first hand in Afghanistan and Iraq. If they committed an act of terrorism, then they could count on an overwhelming and disproportionate response. That and actually treating terrorism like terrorism (as opposed to treating it like a tantrum or nuisance) is why you didn't see stupid shit like this happen under President Bush. Clinton sent in the FBI, Bush sent in the USMC - there is your difference, dear, and why most of the islamokazies kept their happy asses in the desert for 8 years.

<snip>

.

Bravo! Good analysis......

Having lived and worked in the Middle East for a number of years, I can also say with some experience that what liberals will never understand is the fact that western-style democratic governments are never going to exist in most middle eastern countries.

GWB understood that some countries (Egypt, Libya, and sub-saharan African, just to name a few) are essentially ungovernable except by a "strong-man" that has the resources and ruthlessness to keep the savages in check, and perserve his own (and Americas) interests.

These governments are going to:

.....Oppress portions of their populations

.....Keep ignorant people in poverty

.....Steal the fruits of their nations resources

.....Kill and imprison dissidents

Tough shit.....

With all of this in mind........the key questions are: Does this situation suit America's interests? Does backing a dictator provide security to ourselves and our allies? Even if brutal, does such a government bring stability to a critical area economiically for the US? Is access to essential resources for the rest of the world protected, as well as the methology and routes to transport those resources? Is the US able to secure military logistical cooperation from these governments, in order to project power elsewhere?

Everything else is "window dressing"......

If the answer to these questions is "yes", then logically and realistically America is far better off supporting a tyrant than "leading from behind", and allowing these ungovernable countries descend into anarchy and emerge as a threat to our interests as our current president seems to think is the correct foreign policy path.

Even the liberal icon, FDR understood this principle.......it was a better choice to crawl into bed with "Crazy Joe" Stalin, than to lose (or prolong) the war in Europe......American service members lives would be saved....

We need a president who's response to the situation two days ago in Cairo and Libya would be.......the protestors would be too busy burying the bodies to return......

In foreign policy, it's far, far better for America to be feared than respected/loved...........when it comes to Islam even Thomas Jefferson understood this basic truth......why Obama refuses to accept the obvious historical lessons defies the imagination......

....."The devil that you know is always better than the one that you don't........"

doc

[ABC in Georgia]

Just got home from errands today in time to watch the ceremony at Andrews AF Base.

Brought a lump to my throat, and a feeling of profound,uncontrollable,outrage at all the violence being perpetuated by these monstrous savages, now in 18 (?) countries.

Made me feel rather hopless (not quite the word I want) ... until I finally thought of the saying, "God works in mysterious ways."

Perhaps because of this, the tide will turn against Obama, even by the most surprising of his supporters, and something good may yet become of this horror taking place in the ME and North Africa.

Romney, could still win the presidency, despite the best efforts of the dishonest folks working for Obama.

It would be so wonderful to have an intelligent, God-fearing, America-loving, man who respects our Constitution, in office.

Wow! Nothing like baring my soul and wearing my heart on my sleeve, huh? ...

~ ABC

Edited to add: If this situation should escalate, in the future and become almost unthinkable, it would be far better to have a Pres. Romney in charge, rather than this poor excuse for a president.!!!