Why do Hillary people think it is ok to say you were shot at when you were only at risk of being

[dkf]

shot at.

Is it OK if I file a police report because I drove through the bad part of town and say "I was SHOT AT!" even though I wasn't?

This is a typical Bush type lie...overstating danger for political purpose.

How can we trust a commander in chief who does this to us?

[SoFlaJet]

1. they are still operating with the 1992 rulebook dkf

they seem to forget we all have computers and there is YouTube and "the Googilll"-in other words not only do they THINK we're stupid they absolutely DEPEND on it

[jaxx]

2. It's so much more dramatic.

Besides that, she's vetted. ;-)

[Kittycat]

3. They're desperate.

[MethuenProgressive]

4. Congratulations on starting DU's 100th thread on this diversion from PastorGate!

Is it working?
No? NGU.

[Buzz Clik]

6. 1000 threads dedicated to the same information about Wright are not enough for you?

So, in your opinion, the ONLY issue between now and August is Jeremiah Wright? Perhaps you need your own forum dedicated to this single subject.

EDIT: Currently, there are 1445 threads at DU talking about Jeremiah Wright in the opening post.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

8. what the hell are you talking about?

Oh, you speak of the vile, secretive, dominionist christian group that Hillary belongs to. IN that case, I agree.

[Andy823]

10. And thank you

For once again bringing it all back to "pastor gate"! Sad when all the Clinton supporters have these days is rehashing their so called "pastor gate"! What happened to the issues? You know the economy, Iraq, NAFTA, outsourcing, jobs, SS, lobbyists, etc.?

[Guava Jelly]

11. Everything here is a diversion

It is a silly pissing contest the only difference between both issues is who is getting wet and who is doing the pissing.

[dkf]

14. You think Hillary Clinton lying about being shot at is a diversion?

You simply have no clue, do you?

[TwilightGardener]

17. Pastorgate was nothing. This is a big, fat, lie from the candidate's own mouth--

not a "I might get in trouble, so I'll protect myself" lie, more like a Cliff Clavin self-aggrandizing lie. Much, much worse, because it tells us a lot about her character.

[KittyWampus]

35. Cliff Clavin! Thanks for the memories.

[Quixote1818]

50. If Hillary supporters can start 1,000 threads about Rev. Wright

who Obama disagrees with then why are you complaining about a few threads that focus on a lie Hillary actually made?

[Swamp Rat]

57. She's toast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2rtBUfc6YA&feature=related

[dchill]

59. Congratulations to your candidate...

for supplying some real fodder for discussion! Keep your head down.

[ecstatic]

68. You think guilt by association is more important than actual lies by a candidate?

[Forkboy]

69. Good, rational defense there MP.

:eyes:

[Buzz Clik]

5. It was a classic Al Gore-style fuck up.

Get most of the story right, but totally screw up a critical detail.

Two Gore examples that fit this perfectly:

• Tell an union audience that your parents used to sing you to sleep with "Look for the union label..." even though that union and that song were not in existence at the time. It was another union song. Oops.
  
• Stated that he "took the initiative to develop the Internet" when what he really meant was that he was critical in writing and passing legislation that opened the door for today's Internet.

Those of us who loved Gore and supported Gore's 2000 campaign spent hours defending his misstatements.

Hillary now has the same disease -- get the basics correct but exaggerate so horribly that she ends up looking like a bad liar.

[MonkeyFunk]

7. The big difference is that back then

it was the right-wing jumping on these alleged lies, magnifying them, and focusing on them 24/7.

This time it's so-called Democrats doing it.

[Buzz Clik]

9. So-called Democrats?

Take that back, please.

[MonkeyFunk]

31. No

When people stop using freeper tactics, I'll consider it.

[Buzz Clik]

63. Do you hold the Clinton campaign to similar standards?

[MonkeyFunk]

76. I don't think there's been anything freeperish about

the Clinton campaign - but this isn't about campaigns. It's about the tactics people use here.

You guys magnify, distort and outright lie about EVERYTHING in order to feed into the perception that the Clintons are pure evil. I remember the tactic very well from the 90s. It's just as lame now as it was then.

[Buzz Clik]

77. Praising McCain at the expense of Obama is just one example. You, my friend, are going on my ignore.

4, 3, 2, 1, ... goodybe. See you in August.

[MonkeyFunk]

78. Yay!

Another idiot who can't stand anyone disagreeing with him.

And people wonder why some think this place is a mindless echo chamber.

[dkf]

13. If the President of the United States goes around the world and says they were shot at

when they weren't that is a BIG FREAKING DEAL.

Think about it.

[Drachasor]

38. Alleged lies? Alleged? It's a bloody fact she didn't tell the truth.

She blatantly contradicted the reality of the situation.

[TwilightGardener]

23. What part of the story did she get right? She wasn't in danger.

She wasn't shot at. She didn't run for cover. There was clearly a ceremony. The military and the Secret Service would not ALLOW her and Chelsea to land and step off the plane unless the entire area around the airport was secured. This whole thing is ridiculous.

[Buzz Clik]

26. The back-pedaling has already begun. Apparently...

"Oh, wait. It was ANOTHER stop where I was running from gunfire. You know ... that other place. We'll get the details to you later."

I'm allowing for wiggle room. There will be much wiggling.

[bigtree]

37. at that stop, MAYBE. But the danger from sniper fire has been corroborated

by several sources. To deny that there was a danger from snipers is ridiculous. And, HOW do YOU know what SHE was told by the SECURITY FORCES who were escorting her to these camps in the combat zone?

[Drachasor]

39. She said she was UNDER sniper fire and running for cover

That NEVER happened.

[bigtree]

47. you don't know that for certain

all you have is some evidence that it didn't happen at this ONE stop. All the other evidence suggests that there was the risk she described. And, you know nothing about what she was told by the security forces protecting and escorting her. You have NO detail about the security procedures surrounding her landings and deplaning. To suggest that none of what she described took place on her trip relies on your limited perspective. Other accounts corroborate her account of the danger. There are, presently, no detailed accounts of what was involved in her landings and exits from the plane or helicopter. Certainly these itineraries provided as 'proof' don't detail any of that. So, I'm left wondering how YOU would know WHAT she was told by the security forces, or what maneuvers she was forced to undertake for her protection on the trip.

[Drachasor]

58. Find one account besides hers the other day that backs her up!

She didn't say there was "possible danger" she said there was actual sniper fire.

And there are detailed accounts:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/03/hillarys_balkan_adventures_par.html

That includes her own book in which she doesn't mention any sniper fire. Other people on the trip who refute her claims. Her trip was not disrupted.

[dchill]

73. "All the other evidence..." uh, what evidence?

Evidence of risk? That is a truly gossamer-thin connection to reality you're hanging from. All the other evidence is that Sinbad and Cheryl Crow had a good time. All the other evidence is that the news coverage shows nothing remotely like what Clinton has confabulated. The Tuzla landing is the ONLY one where she flew in on a C-130 - or any plane.

Where are the contemporaneous news reports of "First Lady Ducks Sniper Fire" or "Hillary Bravely Faces Gunfire"? You KNOW we'd have seen and heard all about it. All we see is a welcoming ceremony that Hillary says never took place. In your heart, you know that the Secret Service and the US military would NEVER put the First Lady AND First Daughter in that kind of dangerous situation - and so does Hillary. They would not have landed under sniper fire.

Finally, I'd like to see those "Other accounts" that "corroborate her account of the danger." Got any links? The danger of a situation is different from an actual occurence, but you know that, too. No, I wouldn't know what she was told, or "what maneuvers she was forced to undertake" - all I know for sure is that the event she described is at total odds with the reality of what actually happened, or what even could have been allowed to happen.

[TwilightGardener]

44. OK--she was never in danger. She was the most guarded and protected

woman in that part of the world. They would not ALLOW her and Chelsea to be exposed to sniper fire, or mortars, or anything of the kind. They have advance teams that secure the perimeter for miles. When you consider the big picture, it's ridiculous that she would take the massive security precautions that the military and Secret Service would take in getting her to Tuzla and spin it somehow to mean that she was in any way endangered--to the point where she was ducking and running for cover under fire. This was a non-story, and she turned it into a badge of courage.

[bigtree]

51. Okay, I'll admit that it wasn't the best example of bravery or mettle.

But ALL of the public officials who visit these zones of conflict and war on behalf of the U.S. are placing their lives at risk. I don't think you can credibly minimize the danger to the First Lady of the United States as she travels abroad. Also, there are zones within the occupied territory which are reasonably secure. But, all of the sites had an element of danger. The airports are usually the most targeted. And, I don't think those soldiers in full body armor and loaded down with weapons and armored vehicles were defending against nothing.

[KittyWampus]

36. there is no basic fact in Hillary's experience where she was under sniper fire

[meow mix]

12. what risk when your crouch-walking behind a small child..

:shrug:

[Rockholm]

15. You people are tired of your crap.

Enough.

[leeman67]

18. huh? that doesn't even make any sense.

try again.

[dkf]

19. Being tired of the subject is no defense of Hillary.

Maybe you can tell me you actually believe she was fired at (Do you?), or you can admit she misspoke and she should correct the record.

Those are the only two legitimate responses I can see.

But seriously, conflagrating "I was in a dangerous situation where there were snipers around" into "I was shot at" is not good at all.

[TwilightGardener]

25. Oh, HELL no--this is big, and I intend to make it bigger.

[Drachasor]

40. You don't care that she blatantly lied about this?

That's hardly crap.

[guruoo]

16. How good would your recollection be in a war zone?

[dkf]

20. If I was shot at? I'd say pretty good.

It isn't like she gets shot at every day you know...

You'd think that would be a significant event in anyones life.

[guruoo]

28. Where did she say SHE was shot at, or that she actually heard the fire?

[Drachasor]

41. Here you go

"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/clintons_iraq_speech_at_gwu.html

[BumRushDaShow]

48. And you'll now hear crickets. n/t

[bigtree]

54. you people hearing crickets need to get your ears cleaned

[bigtree]

I understood that she was told of sniper fire by the forces escorting her

. . . and that the run to cover was a precaution, and not a direct evading of any incoming fire.

[Drachasor]

55. That's not correct

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/03/hillarys_balkan_adventures_par.html

"I was on the plane with then First Lady Hillary Clinton for the trip from Germany into Bosnia in 1996. We were put on a C17-- a plane capable of steep ascents and descents -- precisely because we were flying into what was considered a combat zone. We were issued flak jackets for the final leg because of possible sniper fire near Tuzla. As an additional precaution, the First Lady and Chelsea were moved to the armored cockpit for the descent into Tuzla. We were told that a welcoming ceremony on the tarmac might be canceled because of sniper fire in the hills surrounding the air strip. From Tuzla, Hillary flew to two outposts in Bosnia with gunships escorting her helicopter." -- From her 1996 speech writer.

Also: "Clinton made no mention of "sniper fire" in her autobiography "Living History," published in 2003, although she did say there were 'reports of snipers' in the hills around the airport."

There was no actual sniper fire. There was no running for cover. Her visit was not disrupted. Read the whole fact check for further details.

[guruoo]

61. Either that, or she's confusing one stop with another.

.

[Drachasor]

66. She was talking about Bosnia

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/03/hillarys_balkan_adventures_par.html

Edit: Additionally, there's no evidence she was ever fired at, including news reports from that time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOsGo_HWP-c
If she was fired it, it would have been reported.

[guruoo]

71. No evidence that she has ever claimed to have been fired at.

just that, as was her understanding, the landing area was "under sniper fire"

[Drachasor]

72. "Under Sniper Fire" = Being fired at by snipers

Her only understanding is that there were reports of snipers, which is quite different from being under sniper fire.

[guruoo]

74. Semantics

[Drachasor]

75. Definition

[guruoo]

60. Still waiting to see where she said she was 'shot at'

[Drachasor]

65. "I remember landing under sniper fire" -- Please read

[guruoo]

79. I have.

[ClassWarrior]

21. Are you talking an ordinary person or someone who...

...wants to run the free world? I'd rather be led by someone who has crystal clear recollection in a war zone. But that's just me.

NGU.

[guruoo]

56. I've yet to know a person that had 100% recollection of events in a war zone.

[ClassWarrior]

62. Yeah, I guess all that poetry makes one shell-shocked.

:eyes:

NGU.

[TwilightGardener]

27. Jesus, she wasn't in the fog of combat. You've got to be kidding me.

She wasn't in any danger. There is no "trauma" to cloud her memory.

[Umbram]

29. Wow, that's some amazing spin!

Perhaps if her mental abilities are challenged under the pressures of meeting little girls on runways she shouldn't be the POTUS?

[suston96]

22. Where is the link that says she was "shot at"?

[dkf]

34. You tube is our friend...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=It6JN7ALF7Y

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

45. "We came in, uh, under an evasive manuever."

"I remember landing under sniper fire."

[Drachasor]

43. I'll give you text if you want it too (in case you don't like youtube)

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/clintons_iraq_speech_at_gwu.html

"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

(Beginning of the second paragraph).

[quantass]

24. oh Hillary you never seese to amaze me

[gristy]

30. WHY DON'T YOU ASK THEM WHEN THEY MAKE THE CLAIM?

IN THE THREAD IN WHICH THEY'VE DONE SO? WHY DO YOU THINK IT IS OK TO REFER TO "HILLARY PEOPLE" AS DOING THIS? WOULD IT BE OK TO MAKE A POST ABOUT "BLACK PEOPLE" BASED ON THE BEHAVIOR OF A SMALL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS?

[BlooInBloo]

32. Because they like to lie.

[bigtree]

33. How do you know for certain that there weren't shots fired surrounding her landings?

Several accounts confirm the risk fro snipers. Sen. Clinton says she was told that there was firing. How do YOU know otherwise what she was told?

[dkf]

42. No one else can confirm her recollection. And her story

of running from the plane is contradicted by actual media footage.

That points to delusional or lying.

You can pick the one you like.

[guruoo]

64. Or whether she has this landing confused with another, or whether

her recollection came from being told that the landing site was, or would be subject to sniper fire.

Lots of holes left to fill here.

[Drachasor]

46. She did more than say there was firing, she said she and other ran for cover

"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/clintons_iraq_speech_at_gwu.html

[Blondbostonian]

49. I believe the video of the event at the airport sealed the deal for me

There was no running for the car because of sniper fire and her daughter was at her side.

Is it so tough for you to admit her stretching of the truth and move on? Try using the critical thinking skills you were born with.

[BumRushDaShow]

52. What "accounts" do you keep mentioning?

Her statement explictly referenced when she was in Tuzla at the airport where there was to be a "greeting ceremony". NOT at a landing spot at the NATO base. The video clearly shows her at the "greeting ceremony" with others around and no sniper fire and no running off the plane and skipping the ceremony.

I even remember when this was in the news back then because it was a big thing due to her bringing Chelsea along.

[Quixote1818]

53. This reminds me of the Al Gore "I invented the internet" thing, only in that case

Gore never said it.

[guruoo]

67. It's similar in that both Gore and Hillary's accusers spun their words

to mean what they wanted them to mean, i.e.,
"worked to create tha internet" became "invented the internet"
and "under sniper fire" was turned into "I was shot at"

[Forkboy]

70. The contortions in her defense on this thread would make Olga Korbut proud.