"We're portrayed by Republicans as either being lying or idiots," said one Obama administration official who was part of the Benghazi response. "It's actually closer to us being idiots." (By Sharyl Attkisson / CBS News/ May 17, 2013, 10:51 AM) http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162...e-made-mistakes-but-without-malice/?tag=socsh Official Statecraft of the United States of America, the first one was posted on the State Department's website: "The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others." (Clinton) "We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others." (Obama) If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241 Clinton said: "The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others [that Negroids are Kenites, decendants of Cain, and the mark is upon them]. Our commitment to religious tolerance [of cannibalism, and eating the brains of our dead and those slain in battle and the raping of war booty including your mother and sister] goes back to the very beginning of our nation." http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_...e-u.s-apologize-for-the-cairo-embassy-attack/ Rape is not an enemy but a technique of warfare -- political intimidation through the selective breeding of unarmed non-combatants. (Zbigview Brznutski, Obama supporter) (Terrorized by 'War on Rape' - Washingtonpurplethrobbingpost) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/23/AR2007032301613.html "We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs [that liberals are brain damaged abominations before the Lord]." (Obama) "The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs [that Homos are an abomination before the Lord]." (Clinton) The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." (Obama) The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet [Warren Jeffs]? (Obama) Hypocrite? {Need definition or dictionary liberals?} "We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs [that Untermenschen should be killed in secret religious ceremonies and drive-by shootings]. (Obama) Groups regarded as SUBHUMAN (Untermenschen) included inferior racial element (such as Jews, Gypsies, Poles, Altaic peoples or Africans) and asocial element (such as the mentally or physically disabled and homosexuals, but also criminals and prostitutes, beggars and tramps, leftists, liberals and political dissidents, Jehovah's Witnesses and so-called morally degenerates). Generally people who worked against the Third Reich or who were breaking its laws were regarded as Untermenschen. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=subhumans "We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs [that jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenant of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or ones community, through quisling destruction of freedom of speech and targeting of dissidents predestined by Allah to be Untermenschen]." (Obama) "(3) Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection." (Book #62, Hadith #137)" http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHa...k=&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all "We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs [that Negros make the best war booty slaves]." (Obama)
Of course that includes those who have a religious belief that they should kill Americans because America is the "Great Satan". Clinton and Obama are both traitors.
Exactly, that is why I believe this alone was an impeachable act: "Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification for this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts." (Obama) "Non sequitur. Your facts are uncoordinated." Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. By its very nature freedom of speech exists to denigrate the religious beliefs of others for the purpose of preventing an amendment for establishment of religion, and by fact of existence of the Constitution (see Article III) and other amendments prohibit free exercise of some religions. Such religions which violate our Constitution are too numerous to name.
Just saw this and thought about the people in Gitmo. American citizens in Gitmo who are being injured, tortured, oppressed, threatened, and intimidated.......without ever having spoken to a lawyer or their own families... And then there are the "foreigners", Canadian citizens innocent of any crime who undergo rendition for a vacation in hell with some systemic sodomy, beatings, torture, and indignities I cannot describe here...http://maherarar.net/ So please, Mr. Obama, forgive those of us actually living in freedom when we think you are the classic definition of hypocrite. We have come to know what freedom looks like and it doesn't in any way involve the slaughter of civilians by drones, rendition, torture, water boarding, spying on civilians, arrest and detention without due process or any of the other crap that has become everyday life in America. And pardon the rest of the world when we sneer and laugh at Nobel Prizes and your self righteous bull(*)(*)(*)(*), your are a hollow little man not just willing but eager to advance warfare for a few points in the polls. And please lose no sleep over why we don't believe you anymore as that should be self evident to even self involved sociopaths like you.
Well I know some “liberals” believe Al Quacka was “playing by the rules of warfare,” and many “liberals” defended the notion: "If terrorists are so faceless as you say how is it we know and have known who they are? How is it they have told us and continue to tell us who they are - these people have faces and they are playing by the rules of warfare - attack, kill or terrorize the opposition.” (evryman69) But, what American citizens are in Gitmo for “free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same?” I do not believe I heard they sent this political prisoner to Gitmo: “‘We’re going to have that person arrested and prosecuted that did the video,’ said Hillary Clinton.” http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/331806/incredible-shrinking-president-mark-steyn ???
There has only been one American citizen detained at Gitmo. He was only temporarily there, and was basically given the option of staying or renouncing his citizenship and going back to Saudi Arabia. Do you progressives just make things up like this without looking them up?
Bumped again, because I really want to hear from high school English teachers and college professors, and especially Constitutional law professors. I want you to discuss the context of the situation, and what they teach in those fancy schools to explain that statecraft. Since "We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others," therefore, the belief and argument that Allah has created females to be the mates of males and that mass murder of Gays is holy cannot be blackened and stands as valid argument until the premise is impeached. “‘We’re going to have that person arrested and prosecuted that did the video,’ said Hillary Clinton.” http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/331806/incredible-shrinking-president-mark-steyn Was the video illegal under the First Amendment? If the video was not illegal First Amendment speech (don’t even bring up his parole) explain to us how the context of the statecraft of Obama and Clinton apply to the situation. “The U.S. has bought $70,000 worth of air time on seven Pakistani television channels to air an ad showing President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton denouncing the anti-Islamic video that has sparked violent protests in the Middle East and North Africa. In the 30-second ad that began running Thursday, Obama says, ‘Since our founding the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate religious beliefs of others.’ Clinton appears after Obama and says, ‘Let me state very clearly that the United States has absolutely nothing to do with this video. We absolutely reject its contents. America's commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation." http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/...-pakistan-ad-denouncing-anti-muslim-film?lite “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.]” “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Immediately you will tell us how “We absolutely reject its contents” is in compliance with those oaths of office.
