Because Al Qaeda Is Spelled Differently Than Ansar al-Shariah ….. Says The NY Times


Well, I guess they want this, so, we can give it to them.

The NY Times have written an editorial defending their bootlicking article parroting the old and debunked talking points of the State Dept and the Administration’s narrative about the Benghazi attack. 

Essentially, the article states that the reason for Benghazi was, in part, caused by the video no one ever heard of before the attack, and that Al Qaeda wasn’t involved, trying very hard to imply this wasn’t a carefully calculated, and planned terrorist attack. 

The attempt at deception is clear.  The editorial fights back at the criticisms of these farcical assertions, claiming Repubs are just trying to sling mud on Hillary.  I love the projection.  The piece was wrote for Hillary.  Because people refute the article (easily), then they’re refuting it because they want to tarnish Hillary, as if she doesn’t do a fine enough job of that herself. 

Well, lets see.  What is most easily slapped down is the fact that Ansar al-Shariah was part of the attack.  Ansar al-Shariah has close ties to Al Qaeda.  It was, is, and always will be a terrorist attack.  While I almost never agree the Rep King from NY, he’s entirely correct.

“It’s a distinction without a difference,” Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., said.

I think, by now, most Americans recognize Al Qaeda isn’t a very centralized group, but, rather a loose collection of rabid lunatics who operate under different names in different regions.  To say Al Qaeda wasn’t involved is like saying the OFA isn’t involved with the Democrat party.  It’s an absurd contention. 

And, then back to the video.  The Libyan president at the time disagrees with the NY. Times.  And, clearly, because of the use of motars, we can conclude there wasn’t any spontaneity in the attack.  Which is, after all, what the NY Times is trying to suggest.  In fact, there was no protest at all.  

And, now, in rebut of the editorial, we should remind the Times that it isn’t just Repubs showing them that they’re wrong, and misleading.  Dem congressman Adam Schiff also says AQ was involved. 

We’ll see if they want to continue to double down in their race to obscurity. 

This entry was posted in News and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Because Al Qaeda Is Spelled Differently Than Ansar al-Shariah ….. Says The NY Times

  1. Me says:

    Did they forget about this? 😆

  2. DirkH says:

    Somebody is pumping up the NYT stock. They’re now at a P/E ratio of 45. Nearly tripled the quote in 18 months. One of the socialist billionaires buying up the propaganda organ for his beloved Lider?

  3. DirkH says:

    BTW, Egypt office of Al Jazeera has been raided by Egypt secret service, 4 journalists arrested, Al Jazeera seen as promoting MB; MB now outlawed in Egypt.
    Al Jazeera journos have previously complained that their paymaster Qatar forced them to report in a pro-Al Qaeda fashion during the Syrian conflict. Qatar starts to use it as their mouthpiece now it seems.

  4. Fred from Canuckistan says:

    While Obama slept, resting up for a big fundraiser, 4 Americans died, left behind on a battlefield and the Commander in Chief refused to even try to send aide to them. Hillary did nothing, the Pentagon did nothing.




    Let them alone to die, without any attempt to even try to save their lives.

    A POTUS of great character.

  5. leftinflagstaff says:

    ‘We’ll see if they want to continue to double down in their race to obscurity.’

    It’s their only hope to avoid obscurity. They know who buys their product. People who want Hillary.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s