You must be right the video "Innocence of Muslims" video couldn't possibly cause any problems, could it?

https://dailynewsegypt.com/2012/09/15/reactions-to-innocence-of-the-muslims/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactions_to_Innocence_of_Muslims

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_response_to_Innocence_of_Muslims_protests

http://everything.explained.today/Chronology_of_the_reactions_to_Innocence_of_Muslims/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_reactions_to_Innocence_of_Muslims

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_of_Muslims

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Reactions_to_Innocence_of_Muslims/Archive_1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Reactions_to_Innocence_of_Muslims/Archive_2

What was I thinking, Muslims obviously wouldn't be upset at all over a simple video, thanks for setting me straight. *sarcasm intended*

Perhaps you can do some research before making such uninformed comments. Oops, my bad, I forgot to whom I was speaking, carry on and any "chocolates" you find up there, they are all yours.

=================
Shame on you Barracuda. You are all LIARS:
OBAMA'S and HILLARY'S CRIMES ON B******I.
1. 600 times requests never reached Clinton? she is he biggest LIAR of all times.
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-h****r/more-600-b******i-security-requests-never-reached-clintons-desk-reports.

2. Clinton did not do her job.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/rnc-2016-b******i-hillary-clinton-225758

3. Attack on the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in B******i
Various critical statements about the response to the September 2012 terrorist attacks on the U.S. mission in B******i, Libya.
DAVID MIKKELSON
PUBLISHED 1 NOVEMBER 2012
Reports have just surfaced from a former Navy Seal present in B******i that those on the ground in B******i sent an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate. Those requests were denied by U.S. officials — who told the CIA operators twice to “stand down” rather than help the ambassador’s team. They were told to “stand down,” according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to “stand down.” Thankfully, that former Seal and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire.

4. Obama LIED to the UN stood in podium and blamed the Mohammed video. Then he apologized to the whole world about the Mohammad video.
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/25/remarks-president-un-general-assembly

5. Clinton and Susan Rice ALSO LIED, blamed the Mohammad video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPUJ73VDus8

6. Obama's and Clinton's dereliction of duty.The following morning after the B******i attack, Obama went to Las Vegas to do fund raising for his political campaign.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/10/25/b******i-obamas-actions-amount-to-a-shameful-dereliction-of-duty/

https://www.nrcc.org/2014/07/10/six-times-president-obama-attended-fundraisers-crisis/

No need to respond because it’s clear you did not and I mean did not read the Muellar report, you lack the basic understanding of what it’s intent was and his findings.

Your talking the Uranium One again and it’s not 20% and the uranium mined cannot be exported out of this country and it gets sold to US nuclear power plants, and Clinton had nothing to do with the approval process. That whole issue was nothing. So again you lack the basic understanding when a foreign country wants to buy an American company the process for approval is immense. So debating something which you have no understanding is a waste of time.

Again you have not read the Iran deal you lack a basic concept that was in the Iran deal so it’s difficult to debate someone on an issue such as Iran and you never read the agreement.

This the problem with Trump supporters they hear something on Fox news or read an article written by a conspiracy theorist that because your facts.

The Russians understand the right wing ignorants they know nothing matters but there r****t agenda. They will hack into our social media and as you can see you posted it on this site without one once of fact checking..

Let’s just ask a basic question on the Uranium one deal. How many agencies within the federal government were required to approve Uranium one and what restriction were put on the new owner. Simple enough you commente on the issue so you should have the answer.

First of all the US has not sold one GD piece of uranium to Russia, let me repeat not one GD piece.that is a stupid ignorant statement.

A total of 8 agencies within our government were involved with the approval process and the major restriction is that uranium that gets mined in the US does not get exported so the statement that Russians exporting is totally false. Do you realize there are government inspectors at every uranium mine in this country and it’s documented as to how much comes out and where it is being sold and that uranium is sold to our Nuclear Power plans.

Now if you do your research Russia has plenty of uranium they don’t need ours. And actually you have it backwards we buy most of our uranium from Russia. So do some research.

Actually the whole controversy over Uranium one was an articles written by Steve Bannon when he was at Breitbart and we all know that he’s a GD lying conspiracy theorist.

It bothers me when people take one article written by Steve Bannon and all of a sudden its factual. Look at the whole situation and the restriction on Uranium One.

It isn't about "protecting" either Obama or Hillary, but lies from the right, very typical. That article was written by a fairly well known ERWNJ named Peter Ferrara who is also heavily involved in The Heartland Institute an ERWNJ ""think" tank". It is clearly an opinion piece with minimal if any fact checking. Obviously nothing more than an attempted hatchet job and of course low intellect fools will naturally believe it. Good job witless showing your unwavering ignorance.

Congratulations in sticking around. I was not expecting any further correspondence from you. I think I was quite clear in my argument about the negligence, severe negligence of Hillary and Obama. The Video was a Red Herring and a piss poor one at that. The facts are that violence in B******i was apparent and growing. You can stick to your video fantasy, but the attack was not some anger induced surprise. It was a predictable event. The people who died knew beforehand the danger they were in.

The Tragedy was that good people were being lead by fools. That is extremely common whenever Socialist-C*******ts head a government.

============
AF!,
Procedures used were correct? There were 600 times requests for added security for Ambassador Stevens none was done.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/01/26/600-requests-from-b******i-for-better-security-what-this-statistic-really-means/

The Armed Forces nearby in Italy, had the time to help him but they were asked to stand down.
https://www.dailyrepublic.com/all-dr-news/opinion/local-opinion-columnists/b******i-they-lied-men-died/

Obama and Hillary lied that the cause of the death was the Mohammad Video.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/10/26/obama_donald_trump_is_a_liar_let_me_run_through_this_just_to_jog_your_memory.html

Obama stood at the UN podium announced that the cause of the B******i attack was the Mohammad Video. He even apologized to the world due to the Mohammad video that is controversial to his Islam faith

The Ambassador Stevens was used to secretly facilitate t***sfer of weapon to Syria via Turkey without Congress approval.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/08/hillary-clinton-wikileaks-b******i-scandal-arm-syrian-rebels-al-qaeda-isis-libya-turkey/

Everything Obama and Hillary did was against our national security policy, and they were Treasonous. Those are the real treasons committed against our country.
.

All of what you write is BS, if more security was needed why did your Republican buddies in congress cut $850 million from the State department budget.

Another thing Obama did say the video was part of it but you being ignorant to facts also said in the same speech that it was terrorist related the original protest was in response to the video and the terrors used that protest to attack the embassy. If your going to one sentence from a speech and not listen to everything he said then you will always maintain ignorance to the facts.

When the attacked started it became a military operation and Clinton at that time had nothing to do with the stand down. Military procedures state you do not send Trumps in until until you know the situation, and no they were 4 hours away.

==================
Yours are all F**E NEWS. Nothing was cut. Fact was your Obama had been funding all Muslim Mosques to build and rebuild Mosques all over the word. Money was taken from the stimulus funds to fix the economy. But Obama stimulated instead all the ISLAM MOSQUES all over the world. $3 billion given to Egypt's Morsi also, and another $200 million by Kerry.
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1MKDC_enUS772US772&q=Obama+gave+$3+billion+to++Morsi+from+the+stimulus+funds?&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjLpuat8PHiAhXHjlQKHc_BBbMQsAR6BAgAEAE

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/04/world/middleeast/kerry-announces-millions-in-us-aid-for-egypt.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/04/world/middleeast/kerry-announces-millions-in-us-aid-for-egypt.html


Obama also gave Hamas $900 million from the stimulus funds.
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/24/washington/24gaza.html

Before Obama left the WH on Jan. 2017, he funded Hamas $221 million dollars without Congress approval.

https://nypost.com/2017/01/24/obama-sent-palestine-221m-hours-before-leaving-office/
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-released-millions-palestinians/

All those Obamas donations to Islamic region are without Congress approval.

Claim
President Obama defied Congress and "quietly" sent $221 million in aid to the Palestinian Authority.

Rating

Mixture
About this rating
What's True
President Obama released $221 million in humanitarian aid to the Palestinian Authority even though two Congressional committee members had placed the distribution on hold.

What's False
The appropriation of humanitarian aid money for the Palestinian Authority had already been approved by Congress, and the President is not bound by congressional holds.

Origin
On 23 January 2017, partisan web sites posted stories reporting that outgoing President Barack Obama on his last day in office on 20 January 2017 “quietly” sent the Palestinian Authority $221 million in aid. The stories led some readers to believe the money t***sfer was dubious.

The stories link to an Associated Press report, which cited unnamed officials who evidently told reporters that although Congress had approved the funds for the 2015 and 2016 budget years, the money had been held up by at least two Republicans:

Congress had initially approved the Palestinian funding in budget years 2015 and 2016, but at least two GOP lawmakers — Ed Royce of California, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Kay Granger of Texas, who sits on the House Appropriations Committee — had placed holds on it over moves the Palestinian Authority had taken to seek membership in international organizations. Congressional holds are generally respected by the executive branch but are not legally binding after funds have been allocated.

The Obama administration had for some time been pressing for the release of the money for the Palestinian Authority, which comes from the U.S. Agency for International Development and is to be used for humanitarian aid in the West Bank and Gaza, to support political and security reforms as well as help prepare for good governance and the rule of law in a future Palestinian state, according to the notification sent to Congress.

President Obama did send the Palestinian Authority monies for humanitarian aid, but he did not do so out of the blue: The funds had already been set aside and approved by Congress, although “at least” two committee members had urged them to be held back. Although the fund t***sfer may have been opposed by some Congressmen, the monies had already been set aside for the purpose for which they were ultimately distributed.

Correct, you can only present them with the facts and hope they consider it and put forth an honest attempt to verify the validity of those facts and perhaps one day they will come to realize that they were living in an alternate reality devoid of facts. I know that you were trying to subtly imply that it isn't you that is out of touch with reality, but who knows, maybe you will make an honest attempt to confirm that it isn't you that is out of touch with reality and IF you delve deep enough and find ACTUAL facts to confirm your beliefs... Who knows, maybe you can be redeemed.

I don't mean that you need to jump in and look to what you consider "liberal sources" just that you delve deep enough to discover the ACTUAL facts, not remain stuck on far right medias sources, try government sources, third party non-biased sources and the like. You mayt just come to the realization that many of the "f**e news" sources aren't really "f**e news".