No way.Dead ambassadors and their staff, don't fit well into presidential campaigns.
If that is the case, why wasn't security beefed up with the advent of the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks?Here is what I'm looking at:Before any "protests" occurred, the Ambassador to Egypt apologized of a video that, up until that moment, nobody had ever heard of AND he vacated his Embassy to go to a "safe house". All of this on the eve of the 9/11 anniversary. The riots start in Egypt and the embassy is trashed. Once this gets started, there is an attack (not a protest, but an actually para-military assault) on the "safe house" in Bengazi which results in the death of our ambassador to Libya. Only once the assault is well underway are there any "protests" against the anti-islamic video. The White House carries on the sham of the assault on the U.S. Ambassador to Libya as being "protests" which got out of hand for two weeks. In fact, he sends the FBI to "investigate" the incident, and then refuses to take any questions about the Bengazi incident based on the fact that "there is an ongoing criminal investigation and he can't talk about it for fear of prejudicing the investigation"!The Administration had to have known this was coming. Why didn't they take better precautions to protect our Ambassador and his staff? To my mind that borders on criminal negligence. -Dr Watt
It is criminal negligence.We've got a president that is either in denial, sympathizes with the terrorists, or both. My guess is both.My theory on why we didn't beef up security as 9/11 approached, is that Obama and his team of geniuses figured that increasing security would have given a signal that we didn't trust them. Obama still believes that if we are nice to terrorists, they will be nice to us. Failure.Then he has the nerve to call these murders a bump in the road.
I'm becoming more and more convinced that Obama is a Muslim.
Until he gave his U.N. speech, I used to think that Obama with either an atheist which exploited Black Liberation Theology to gain political credibility or power, or an all out Black Liberation Theology adherent like Rev Wright. I never gave much credence to those who said he was a Muslim. However, this one line from his speech - The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. - sure sounded like a Muslim defending his faith! While he did mention Christ and the Holocaust, his mention of them did not stand on its own. They were used to support his initial defense of Islam. A Christian would have put his faith first and then predicated not slandering Islam based on the fact that America has a long history of toleration of different religious beliefs! If he were Christian, he would have said something similar to the following: As a Christian, I seek the Truth. The Truth will not be found in denial of the Holocaust or by slandering the prophet of Islam. As an American, I respect the right of a Free People to choose how they wish to worship their Creator. I'm becoming more and more convinced that Obama is a Muslim. -Dr Watt
Methinks Dear Leader is an apologist first, a Muslim second, and a Christian by mere happenstance and political expedience.
He was taught how to be a Christian by Rev Wright.
Well the US house blocked funding for the embassys, budget cuts