As the Obama Administration and a Compliant Lame Stream Media Continue the Benghazi Spin...
by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
From the lame stream media, no doubt fed by the not to be trusted Obama administration, we are hearing more false spin from dutiful left wing wing nuts.
More wing nuttery from the progressive lame stream media.
Via: Memeorandum
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
From the lame stream media, no doubt fed by the not to be trusted Obama administration, we are hearing more false spin from dutiful left wing wing nuts.
The Washington Post The Romney campaign may have misfired with its suggestion that statements by President Obama and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice about the Benghazi attack last month weren’t supported by intelligence, according to documents provided by a senior U.S. intelligence official.
“Talking points” prepared by the CIA on Sept. 15, the same day that Rice taped three television appearances, support her description of the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate as a reaction to Arab anger about an anti-Muslim video prepared in the United States. According to the CIA account, “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”
The CIA document went on: “This assessment may change as additional information is collected and analyzed and as currently available information continues to be evaluated.” This may sound like self-protective boilerplate, but it reflects the analysts’ genuine problem interpreting fragments of intercepted conversation, video surveillance and source reports.
The senior intelligence official said the analysts’ judgment was based in part on monitoring of some of the Benghazi attackers, which showed they had been watching the Cairo protests live on television and talking about them before they assaulted the consulate.
“We believe the timing of the attack was influenced by events in Cairo,” the senior official said, reaffirming the Cairo-Benghazi link. He said that judgment is repeated in a new report prepared this week for the House intelligence committee. {Read More}
More wing nuttery from the progressive lame stream media.
Via: Memeorandum
Where are your facts, evidence, and reports to prove what the administration said is not true?
ReplyDeleteAnyone can write on his blog that something is mere "false spin" [whatever that is]. But it takes facts and evidence to actually refute what's been reported.
Where are yours?
Where is the Obama administrations and yours?
DeleteNowhere. Spin, spin, spin and lies. It's all ya got. But resy comfortably knowing 47% of America buys the sh*t.
Sorry, Shaw, but Eli Lake, Mark Hosenball, Jake Tapper, Fran Townsend, and Bob Baer (a former CIA agent with multiple sources) have all said that the administration knew well within 24 hours that this was a planned terrorist attack and not some spontaneous (LOL) eruption of some protest (there in fact were no protesters at the Consulate prior to the attack) in response to that video. The administration was simply trying to put forth some self-serving narrative that al Qaeda was on the run and they thought that they could slip it on past us just prior to the election. As for Ambassador Rice, she either didn't get the intelligence paper or she did and said what she said anyway. In either event, the woman should be fired.
DeleteYou published the piece and gave your approval
ReplyDeleteShaw is correct, where are your facts?
Feel free to refute what I printed. If you can.
DeleteThe job is yours to back up what you say, not mine.
ReplyDeleteThere are no proven facts in the article, which you approve of.
Only the willing ObamaBots ignore what the rest know to be the truth. Your evasion is amusing.
DeleteYour refusal to state facts is telling. Making your statements false.
DeleteIndeed your willing refusal to accept reality is telling...
DeleteOh, I see you are just a lying ass hole
DeleteOh lookie! Anon the cowardly demented asshat has returned. Hurry now, it's time for your Quaalude fix.
DeleteLMFAO at your demented a*s...
Oh look Mr. No Facts calls people names when they call him on writing bullshit.
DeleteNo I call asshat like you names because you deserve to be called names, You are an arrogant asshat ignorant lying bigoted racist bastard who has been doing precisely this to me for by far to long. So I now respond in kind. You are nothing but a cowardly pile of sh*t.
DeleteNow go grab your mood elevators, Quaalude, and have a few very heavy drinks. Do the world some good for a change asshat.
Wrong again Mr. NOT know it all, that's a different anon, but you can now include me in the same group that just because I won't except bullshit without facts you name call. Proving what others have said about you, you are simply an irrational jackass. Steve is right, you are so egotistical, you think only one guy is 6 guys. What a jerk.
DeleteLaughs on you jackass. Reality is you and the other jackasses started this because you are all so damned intolerant you simply cannot accept views you don't like. Typical know it all elitist progressives with their heads so far up their ass*s they can't see squat. Oh well, whatever.
DeleteI realize it makes you (the cowardly) Anon, and the other jackasses feel as though you are accomplishing something important here. DELUSIONAL as usual.
I find it absolutely side splitting funny that jackasses like you continue to come to this site thinking I, or anyone else for that matter actually gives a rats arse what you or your buddies think or have to say. Which is of course always NOTHING.
Fact is whether it be 1, 3, 6, or whatever... you are all jackasses cur from the same proverbial demented cloth.
LMFAO at you.
Bye bye and may your panties stay in a twisted knot for the rest of your miserable existence, however long that may be. The longer the better, you deserve to live a long life in your pitiful and pathetic existence.
Les, the trouble with the Right's attacks on the Admin's handling of Benghazi is that you guys we're drawn like moths to that stupid anti-Islam video just like those stupid rioters over there.
ReplyDeleteA non-ideologue sees what happened over those days last month in a way the admin saw as well, and obviously.
That stupid video made for a great excuse to make for riots covering terrorist operations.
Why you cons keep harping on this is beyond me. If this story becomes widely understood, it's the Right that will come off looking foolish, stupid, counter-productive, annoyingly irresponsible. Give it a rest, man.
JMJ
Much seems to be beyond you. Could it have something to do with your favorite word? Just saying...
DeleteNice try. I guess reality is beyond you.
DeleteAll ideology. No reality.
JMJ
Whatever jmj, whatever.
DeleteThe Left knows that Benghazi-gate has the potential for destroying both Obama's re-election chances and his supposed legacy in foreign policy. What will remain as his legacy, then? ObamaCare? Not likely that ObamaCare will stand -- at least, not in full.
ReplyDeleteFrom now until the election, the mainstream media will shill for Obama as never before.
The Left -- always a sore loser and nasty in the extreme when they see defeat on the horizon.
You are so correct. We have been seeing this phenomena as Romney has started to close in.
DeleteNote Ema below as just one example.
.
ReplyDeleteLet me get this straight. You are doing your 'chicken-little' soiling yourself hysteria squawk-dance because a CIA prepared "Talking Point." My knowledge of geography is that CIA headquarters is in Langley, Virginia. UN is in New York City.
("“Talking points” prepared by the CIA on Sept. 15, the same day that Rice taped three television appearances, support her description of the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate as a reaction to Arab anger about an anti-Muslim video prepared in the United States.")
Other than a desperate attempt to score political points, why should people of USA listen to your twaddle?
Or are you trying out for the part in the new Parah Salin movie? If you are you need to improve your word-salad 'buzz words' (you only used two in your headline - FAIL).
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
Can you try to make sense? So much of what you said was in code-words, and what I could decode wasn't true at all. Try again.
DeleteSorry, Will,the CIA says you and the mob that want to turn the tragedy in Libya into a scandal are wrong:
ReplyDeleteFrom ABC News and other sources on the internet:
The latest intelligence assessment of the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi indicates there was little if any pre-planning for it and that it was in part an opportunistic response to the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo.
Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the attack, which has become a political hot potato in the presidential campaign with questions over when the Obama administration called the attack an act of terrorism.
“Right now, there isn’t any intelligence that the attackers pre-planned their assault days or weeks in advance,” said a U.S. intelligence official. ”The bulk of available information supports the early assessment that the attackers launched their assault opportunistically after they learned about the violence at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo.” But the official added that “no one is ruling out that some of the attackers may have aspired to attack the U.S. in Benghazi.”
And this:
lCIA documents back up Rice’s description of Benghazi attack
Progressives, aided by Lame Stream ABC willing overlook the obvious. But that is par far the course and to be expected as they rush to the defense of their "fearless" leader.
ReplyDeleteTake your pick, there is much that doesn't support the storyline of the government and progressive left slant.
But RN, you give us nothing to back up your claim that the government is "spinning."
ReplyDeleteYou give no link to anything that disproves what the CIA has reported: That Susan Rice was not "spinning," and that the attack in Benghazi was not planned.
I understand that these reports by the CIA go against the rumors you and others here need to believe, so you, without any shred of evidence or even a link to anything that refutes the CIA, call it "spin."
So I challenge you to give us proof that the CIA is "spinning," or worse, lying.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
It appears that when conservatives are faced with facts that don't conform to their suspicions and rumors, they call it "spin."
But we'll wait to see you post your evidence that what is being reported is "spin."
So far, all we've seen is opinion backed up by nothing.
I have no compelling reason to link to anything. You see I realized long ago that progressives pretty much live in the vacuum they create for themselves. People who actually look to a broader source for information, and do not swallow hook line and sinker that which the progressive puppet masters feed them realize the body of evidence is there and points to a huge Obama administration failure and cover up. The spin, nearly a month down the road is amusing to watch. The administrations own incongruous back and worth statements are telling.
DeleteI'm just enjoying the wiggle and squirm by the progressive collectivist horde as they twist themselves into human pretzels covering for the Obama administrations mistake.
.
ReplyDeleteOh the victim-hood.
"... the mainstream media will shill for Obama as never before."
Murdoch Media/Fox Networks have been shilling for the President??! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...
Really? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...
Sorry; lost it a bit.
Does youse guys ever get tired of playing the 'Woe is me, victims? It is tiresome.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
Am I ever enjoying myself watching progressives turning into human pretzels. Thanks for providing the entertainment Ema.
DeleteRN, you do realize that your answer to me is evasion and spin?
ReplyDelete"I have no compelling reason to link to anything." --RN
This means you have nothing, you can't. And that's your true reason. --SK
"You see I realized long ago that progressives pretty much live in the vacuum they create for themselves." --RN
Again, this statement has nothing whatsoever to do with my asking you to please provide me a link to something that disputes or dispells what the CIA has reported: That Susan Rice was NOT lying, and that the attack on the consulate was NOT planned. --SK
"People who actually look to a broader source for information, and do not swallow hook line and sinker that which the progressive puppet masters feed them realize the body of evidence is there and points to a huge Obama administration failure and cover up." --RN
Where is your "broader source for information?" And how much broader is it than from the CIA? What you've written above is nothing more than your biased opinion. And we all know what is said about opinions, don't we. --SK
"The spin, nearly a month down the road is amusing to watch. The administrations own incongruous back and worth statements are telling." RN
More opinion from you that does not address my request for you to supply facts that dispute what the CIA reported. --SK
"I'm just enjoying the wiggle and squirm by the progressive collectivist horde as they twist themselves into human pretzels covering for the Obama administrations mistake." --RN
You certainly prove by your own words what "wighgle and squirm" mean when a person can't answer a simple request:
Show us PROOF that the CIA is spinning, and that their report is false.
You have, so far, done nothing more than offer words, words, words, with absolutely NO PROOF.
As far as I'm concerned, you proved my point.
Shaw, as far as I'm concerned you proved my point. I guess it's check then.
DeleteActually it is not I but rather you who limit your data to what you want to read and hear. If it doesn't rise to your progressiveness level and the collective movements misguided direction you handily discard it. I on the other hand have posted numerous items that are considered wrong by die hard ideologues on the right.
Dialog is good, disagreements are even better. I respect your right to your opinion, whether they are right or wrong. At least you refrain from straight out lying and character assassination like your friends Anon, Steve, and Racist Republican.
Have a nice Sunday evening Shaw. And I do believe LCR's comment below hit the nail squarely on it's head.
Sorry, Shaw, but you're not going to be able to derail this one. a) The people who I listed aren't a mob. They're journalists and/or terrorism/national security/intelligence experts. b) Eli Lake has been all over this story from day one and he has stated categorically that the people on the ground knew from day one that this wasn't some spontaneous mob action (there actually wasn't a mob and people normally don't bring heavy armaments to a protest) that was directed at a video. c) It's hardly surprising that there are now people in the media and C.I.A. who are trying desperately to cover their asses on this and it hardly persuades. d) This consulate had been attacked several times prior to this and there was recently sworn testimony that additional security had been requested. e) Yes, there were in fact some budget cuts to embassy security (I'm assuming that you'll be going here) but there were actually more Democrats than Republicans (149-147) who voted for these cuts. f) There's supposedly a tape in real time of the events of that day and hopefully the American people will be able to hear it and see how their government has yet again lied to them.......And don't even try and hit me with the partisan charge. I haven't voted Republican for President since 1988 and I won't be voting for them this time, either (moderates for Johnson - 2012).
DeleteAnd your definition of the word, "planned", is very Clintonian. I mean, did they sit around in a smoke-filled room like Humphrey Bogart, Peter Lorre, and Sidney Greenstreet and put it all together Hollywood style? No, probably not. But they obviously did have some premeditation and coordination because a) there weren't any protesters and b) protesters don't generally bring heavy armaments to a protest.......This is really sad, Shaw. Your government is lying to you and simply because the administration is Democratic you apparently do not care.
DeleteAnd you say that you want facts - how 'bout the FACT that numerous eye-witnesses have been interviewed and not a single one has stated that there were protesters that evening outside the embassy. NOT ONE!! How in the hell can the protesters (replete with heavy armament, mind you) spontaneously erupt when there wasn't even a frigging protest happening? Susan Rice is either incompetent or she's lying (my suspicion is that she probably wants to be Secretary of State after Hillary and that this was a way to score some political hay and so the lady went a long with what is CLEARLY a lie).
DeleteThank you Will for having the patience to respond in detail to Shaw.
DeleteAs this weekend was not only my Wife's birthday and our Grandson"s as well I simply did not have the time nor the desire to refute the progressive responses presented by the VERY nervous Obama drones.
The data and FACTS you present were certainly available for all to see. Progressives rather than look at a situation objectively they go with their gut and emotion. In the process they certainly get their panties all tied up in a knot.
Now that my break from studying the muscle and skeletal system has come to a close I am back to studying for tomorrows test. Which is why posting has been a bit light and will continue for the foreseeable future.
Just another example of us "conservative right wing dummies" as the left views all who disagree with them going back to get more education.call us. Amusing don't you think?
Based on the amount of progressive naysaying in the comments to this post, Les has hit the nail on the head in this post. You guys and gals really are worried about this telling Obama admin. debacle, aren't you? Otherwise you wouldn't be here screaming around about it.
ReplyDelete.
Delete"Based on the amount of progressive naysaying in the comments to this post, Les has hit the nail on the head in this post. You guys and gals really are worried about this telling Obama admin. debacle, aren't you? Otherwise you wouldn't be here screaming around about it."
No.
It is the mistaken belief by honest readers/posters, that extending respect and consideration to the blog's author would result in an adult response by RationNationUSA. Instead, Les Carpenter has treated people with a show of contempt. We are treated to childish, uninformed, truculent, supercilious, abusive insults/name calling.
Needed to win = 270.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
Who Ah Ema, thanks for the stale update.
DeleteLCR and RN-USA have offered not one single bit of information or any fact whatsoever to dispute what the CIA has reported about the Benghazi tragedy.
ReplyDeleteWhat the CIA reported is NOT MY opinion RN, it is a report by the CIA, that happens to contradict what you and LCR "feel" is what really happened. And neither of you have a shred of evidence to dispute the CIA.
This is a clear example of what libertarians/conservatives do a lot of the time. They don't like a fact that doesn't conform to their bias about the Obama administration, so it must not be true.
This isn't a disagreement between you and me, RN, it your [and LCR's] stubborn insistence not to believe what the CIA reported.
You're both acting like the "Truthers." No matter what evidence is produced, you're both determined to NOT see it because it collides with your pre-existing condition: Obama Derangement Syndrome.
There's no nail hit here, LCR, only magical thinking on your part.
Well Shaw this a clear case of the pot calling the kettle black.
DeleteIf you choose to be gullible Shaw it certainly is your perogative. Everybody has been at one time or the other I'm sure.
I refer you to Will's accurate response. My apology for not putting my Wife's and Grandson's birthday celebrations on the back burner to respond to the barrage of progressive responses caused by anxiety from my accurate post. But somehow they are just a whole lot more important to me.
Now, if you'll excuse me I have a test tomorrow morning to study for. Wish me luck.
Really Shaw I do respect your opinion. I just happen in this case to completely disagree with you, and the Obama CIA.
Les, Shaw must also think that Eli Lake, Fran Townsend, and Bob Baer are "truthers" (to compare this to birtherism is utterly absurd). The fact of the matter is that they knew in real time (this, according to sworn testimony from State Department official, Charlene Lamb) that this was not only terrorism but that it was terrorism from an al Qaeda affiliate.
DeleteShaw, check this one out - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/20/obama-officials-spin-benghazi-attack - Even the ultra-liberal Guardian isn't buying into this Obama narrative. Now THAT is pathetic.
DeleteWill, the link to the Guardian, written by American Glen Greenwald, is dated Sept. 20, way before the CIA gave its report that there was no planned attack. Greenwald is not, if I remember correctly, employed by the CIA.
ReplyDeleteAnother point, Will, I did NOT compare this to "Birthers." I merely pointed out that you, RN, and LCR refuse to accept the CIA's report because you have your minds closed to anything that might differ from what you already believe.
Will tnp Hart: " c) It's hardly surprising that there are now people in the media and C.I.A. who are trying desperately to cover their asses on this and it hardly persuades."
Where's your evidence for this?
Lastly, a question for you, RN, and LCR: Is General Petraeus a liar? Spinner? Tool? Apparently anyone who doesn't conform to your suspicions is. You refer to sources as having the truth about the matter, when,in fact, the people you name have no access to the classified intelligence that was gathered for the most recent CIA report. These people made assumptions based on their knowledge of past operations, but they were not given access to the intelligence from which the CIA reported.
Two days after the attack, CIA Director David Petraeus briefed the House Intelligence Committee. Petraeus told lawmakers the best intelligence showed it was a demonstration sparked by the video that got out of hand, according to Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (Md.), the panel’s ranking Democrat.
Patrick Kennedy, the Undersecretary of State for Management, also said — in testimony before Congress earlier this month — that anyone would have said exactly what Rice said based on the intelligence available at the time.
Some U.S. officials have said they never believed the attack was mounted by a disorganized mob, but that was not the official assessment.
The spin-free truth is that Rice accurately stated what U.S. intelligence showed at the time, and stressed that there was an ongoing investigation where conclusions were subject to change.
Now for the second correction.
It is being charged that requests for extra security in Benghazi were denied by the administration.
The suggestion is that the attack would have been stopped, and the ambassador still alive, if the requests had been granted.
But at a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee this month, Charlene Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State and head of the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, testified that the request was for added security in Tripoli, the capital of Libya, and not Benghazi.
Shaw I choose to debate this no longer with you because your mind is equally if no more closed than mine. Had you been reading my stuff you know I am not a conservative in the sense you view me to be. Nor I'm nor am I a neocon or socon, as my multiple posts cutting both up attests to. In other words Shaw (and all your bigoted buddies on the left) I do not march to the drumbeat of those you Hate. never did, never will. As much as it irritates the hell of of you (and your bigoted buddies on the left) I neither march to the drumbeat of those you have determined I should. In case you missed it Shaw I am an INDIVIDUAL, not a collectivist such as most of the left (and right) advocates.
DeleteI am fine with your beliefs (views) being what they are, and I'm fine with you challenging mine. Hope you're fine with me challenging you back and then respecting my right to vehemently disagree when I in fact do.
It is pointless to discuss this issue any further Shaw, merry-go-rounds make me dizzy, and ultimately they accomplish little.
In other words Shaw... "It is what it is." Or the thing that has kept my wife and I together for 27 years (married 25), we figured out long ago it is okay to agree to disagree and then work on things where there is room for compromise. Fortunately for me my wife is a Libertarian and does not pout, cry, or demand that I agree or live tottally by her desires. I return the favor.
My point of the above paragraph? Progressives, Collectivists, Neocons, and especially Socons should consider chilling just a bit.
As for you buddies Anon(s), Stevie, and Racist Republican there is NO HOPE for a cure for their ailments.
Thanks for visiting. It is always a pleasure.
My evidence is the eye-witness testimony in which every single one of them said that there were NO protesters and, hence, NO spontaneous eruption of them. It's also the reporting of Eli Lake, Mark Hosenball, Fran Townsend, and Bob Baer (the latter 2 of which have unimpeachable sources) - all of whom have said (as did Charlene Lamb under sworn testimony) that this incident was tracked in real time and that they knew within 24 hours that it was an al Qaeda affiliate related incident.......So, do I trust the CIA or a free press? That's seriously what you're asking me here? What do you think I think?
Delete"Within 24 hours of the deadly attack, the CIA station chief in Libya reported to Washington that there were eyewitness reports that the attack was carried out by militants, officials told The Associated Press. But for days, the Obama administration blamed it on an out-of-control demonstration over an American-made video ridiculing Islam's Prophet Muhammad."......Kimberly Dozier, Associated Press, 10/19/2012. They were watching this event in real time and they know almost immediately that it was carried out by militants, Shaw, AND THERE WEREN'T ANY PROTESTERS!!! Can't you see what's going on here? The White House is leaking selective documents in an effort to cover themselves and the Washington Compost is all too eager to comply for them.
DeleteWhat Les said.
DeleteMeanwhile, Issa just release sensitive information on the attack, putting many people's lives at risk, to score political points for Romney.
ReplyDeleteSeems like the conservatives once again proved their irresponsible hypocrisy.
JMJ
If not for pressure by conservatives, the completely false story Obama has put up about the terrorist attack would be the only one anyone knows, still.
Deletedmarks, of course you realize evasion of the truth and reality in the pursuit of HOPE and CHANGE is ALL the progressives and collectivists are concerned with, right.
DeleteIt is becoming unceasingly clear the progressives and programmed ObamaBot mouthpieces are becoming VERY nervous and gasping for breath. Likely because their panties are tied in such tight knots it is cutting off oxygen supply to the brain.
ReplyDeleteStay tuned for further info on the Administration's failures and lies at 9:00 PM EDT tonight.
RN: "Shaw I choose to debate this no longer with you..."
ReplyDeleteI understand. You've not been able to offer one iota of evidence to back up your claim that the reports are all spin. No wonder you want to stop the discussion.
Q.E.D.
I have obviously given you FAR too much credit. Have it as you wish Shaw, progressives ALWAYS do when they have NOTHING but HOPE and CHANGE. But I'll give you this, it makes them FEEL superior, even though in reality they are FAR from it.
DeleteGood Day.
Again, Shaw, the evidence is eyewitness testimony and the fact that top notch reporters such as Bob Baer and Eli Lake have definitively uncovered the fact that well within 24 hours they knew that this was an attack by militants and not a mob action because there wasn't a frigging mob.......If there was anybody at the C.I.A. who, SIX FULL DAYS AFTER THE INCIDENT, told Ambassador Rice to say that idiocy then that individuaL needs to be fired and immediately.
DeleteLes, we all know the administration has suffered failures. So has every administration in history.
ReplyDeleteYou cons aren't concerned with what really happened. It's the video. That's what you're focusing on. It bothers you that it has been blamed for a terrorist attack. You've twisted the argument into such fine knots, I don't think you have a clue what your own logic is. You are covering behinds.
According to the CIA, and it should've seemed obvious to any casually observant citizen, that stupid video made for convenient cover for a terrorist attack.
So, keep covering the reckless-rude-rightie-rabble-rousers (say that thirty times fast!). See where it gets you.
Les, you're better than that. You're not a con.
The REAL issue here is the administrations failure to secure the embassy. Period. That stupid video? There's nothing we can do about that but ask people to please refrain in this time of war in the Islamic world.
I'm sure the DoD and State learned the lesson. These aren't just a pile of partisan hacks. They're mostly long-term (long before Obama) professionals.
JMJ
jmj, I have but a single RATIONAL response to your "twisted" analysis... BULLS*IT!
DeleteEnough said?
Jersey said: "There's nothing we can do about that but ask people to please refrain in this time of war in the Islamic world."
ReplyDeleteWe have a First Amendment here. Let's see more such videos. The worst thing of this is people like you attacking free expression.