US President Obama to miss anti-terrorism unity rally in Paris

PARIS, January 11. /TASS/. US President Barack Obama will not be attending an anti-terrorism unity rally in Paris to commemorate victims of the recent terrorist attacks in the French capital, Agence France-Presse reported, but did not specify why the American leader would miss the event.

Hey, the protest march was scheduled for Sunday and Obama goes golfing on Sunday ... so go figure.

It is a matter of priority!

Skeptical wrote:PARIS, January 11. /TASS/. US President Barack Obama will not be attending an anti-terrorism unity rally in Paris to commemorate victims of the recent terrorist attacks in the French capital, Agence France-Presse reported, but did not specify why the American leader would miss the event.

Hey, the protest march was scheduled for Sunday and Obama goes golfing on Sunday ... so go figure.

It is a matter of priority!

If he attended, it would be like him admitting it was a TERRORIST attack.

He can't do that.

The guy flies to Paris and you get angry about him flying to Paris.

He doesn't fly to Paris and you get angry about him not flying to Paris.

If he takes his whole family to this rally in Paris, I'd imagine that would anger you too.

Faux anger is wasted energy and not good for a person physically or mentally.

Liberal wrote:The guy flies to Paris and you get angry about him flying to Paris.

He doesn't fly to Paris and you get angry about him not flying to Paris.

If he takes his whole family to this rally in Paris, I'd imagine that would anger you too.

Faux anger is wasted energy and not good for a person physically or mentally.

You truly are blind, aren't you?

Flying to Paris for a vacation is different than flying to Paris to honor those killed by terrorists he he refuses to call terrorists.

BladeRunner wrote:

Skeptical wrote:PARIS, January 11. /TASS/. US President Barack Obama will not be attending an anti-terrorism unity rally in Paris to commemorate victims of the recent terrorist attacks in the French capital, Agence France-Presse reported, but did not specify why the American leader would miss the event.

Hey, the protest march was scheduled for Sunday and Obama goes golfing on Sunday ... so go figure.

It is a matter of priority!

If he attended, it would be like him admitting it was a TERRORIST attack.

He can't do that.

What war on terror ~ Obama/liberal/twinkie/winnar/shortieslover/holder/biden/johnthornton

What a brilliant idea.  Send our highest ranking elected officials to a hot terror zone to take part in a march.  Would we have stamped targets on their backs as well?  Maybe we should have sent Boehner. Holder was attending security meetings in Paris.  Our Ambassador to France took part, as did our assistant Secretary of State.  We were certainly doing our part.

Dr. Jones wrote:What a brilliant idea.  Send our highest ranking elected officials to a hot terror zone to take part in a march.  Would we have stamped targets on their backs as well?  Maybe we should have sent Boehner.   Holder was attending security meetings in Paris.  Our Ambassador to France took part, as did our assistant Secretary of State.  We were certainly doing our part.

So Netanyahu doesn't represent a target? And yet he marched. Even the White House tardily admitted it screwed the pooch by not sending a more prominent official although it readily had a list of excuses for not sending Obama, Biden or SoS Kerry. If not them, then which "prominent" WH official would it have been? Just more pablum and wanting to have it both ways from this tiresome man boy. Which is not surprising in the least coming from an administration that has trouble even using the word terrorism let alone linking it to radical Islam.

And seriously, aren't the tears Obama sheds for Charlie Hebdo croccidilian in nature? After all didn't the Big "O" scold us at the UN “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” in direct reference to Charlie Hebdo's satirical cartoons.

My apologies to Shakespeare:

"If that the earth could teem with man's tears,
Each drop he falls would prove a crocodile."

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:What a brilliant idea.  Send our highest ranking elected officials to a hot terror zone to take part in a march.  Would we have stamped targets on their backs as well?  Maybe we should have sent Boehner.   Holder was attending security meetings in Paris.  Our Ambassador to France took part, as did our assistant Secretary of State.  We were certainly doing our part.

So Netanyahu doesn't represent a target? And yet he marched. Even the White House tardily admitted it screwed the pooch by not sending a more prominent official although it readily had a list of excuses for not sending Obama, Biden or SoS Kerry. If not them, then which "prominent" WH official would it have been? Just more pablum and wanting to have it both ways from this tiresome man boy. Which is not surprising in the least coming from an administration that has trouble even using the word terrorism let alone linking it to radical Islam.

And seriously, aren't the tears Obama sheds for Charlie Hebdo croccidilian in nature? After all didn't the Big "O" scold us  at the UN “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” in direct reference to Charlie Hebdo's satirical cartoons.

My apologies to Shakespeare:

"If that the earth could teem with man's tears,
Each drop he falls would prove a crocodile."

Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:What a brilliant idea.  Send our highest ranking elected officials to a hot terror zone to take part in a march.  Would we have stamped targets on their backs as well?  Maybe we should have sent Boehner.   Holder was attending security meetings in Paris.  Our Ambassador to France took part, as did our assistant Secretary of State.  We were certainly doing our part.

So Netanyahu doesn't represent a target? And yet he marched. Even the White House tardily admitted it screwed the pooch by not sending a more prominent official although it readily had a list of excuses for not sending Obama, Biden or SoS Kerry. If not them, then which "prominent" WH official would it have been? Just more pablum and wanting to have it both ways from this tiresome man boy. Which is not surprising in the least coming from an administration that has trouble even using the word terrorism let alone linking it to radical Islam.

And seriously, aren't the tears Obama sheds for Charlie Hebdo crocodilian in nature? After all didn't the Big "O" scold us  at the UN “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” in direct reference to Charlie Hebdo's satirical cartoons.

My apologies to Shakespeare:

"If that the earth could teem with man's tears,
Each drop he falls would prove a crocodile."

Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

So French President Francois Hollande, British Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy didn't take a risk marching? Obama is the world's #1 apologist for Islamic extremists. It's a wonder he didn't frame this massacre as "workplace violence" since it all occurred in businesses.

Face it, Obama likes to display his bravado and pound his chest but in reality he is a ruff-tuff creampuff. Not unlike when he admitted that joining the military was an honorable option, but since the Vietnam War had come to an end and that we weren't engaged in an active military conflict he decided against it. WTF?

And WTF is an imminent public apology?

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:What a brilliant idea.  Send our highest ranking elected officials to a hot terror zone to take part in a march.  Would we have stamped targets on their backs as well?  Maybe we should have sent Boehner.   Holder was attending security meetings in Paris.  Our Ambassador to France took part, as did our assistant Secretary of State.  We were certainly doing our part.

So Netanyahu doesn't represent a target? And yet he marched. Even the White House tardily admitted it screwed the pooch by not sending a more prominent official although it readily had a list of excuses for not sending Obama, Biden or SoS Kerry. If not them, then which "prominent" WH official would it have been? Just more pablum and wanting to have it both ways from this tiresome man boy. Which is not surprising in the least coming from an administration that has trouble even using the word terrorism let alone linking it to radical Islam.

And seriously, aren't the tears Obama sheds for Charlie Hebdo crocodilian in nature? After all didn't the Big "O" scold us  at the UN “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” in direct reference to Charlie Hebdo's satirical cartoons.

My apologies to Shakespeare:

"If that the earth could teem with man's tears,
Each drop he falls would prove a crocodile."

Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

So French President Francois Hollande, British Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy didn't take a risk marching? Obama is the world's #1 apologist for Islamic extremists. It's a wonder he didn't frame this massacre as "workplace violence" since it all occurred in businesses.

Face it, Obama likes to display his bravado and pound his chest but in reality he is a ruff-tuff creampuff. Not unlike when he admitted that joining the military was an honorable option, but since the Vietnam War had come to an end and that we weren't engaged in an active military conflict he decided against it. WTF?

And WTF is an imminent public apology?

An imminent public apology would be an apology that you know you will have to give as a result of your plan of action. A pawn of sorts, if you will. A small price to pay for the bigger picture.

Again, who gives a shiste what other countries choose to do with their elected officials. Ours were right where they belonged.

Dr. Jones wrote: Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

Who is giving or gave this "imminent public apology" and for what ??

Skeptical wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote: Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

Who is giving or gave this "imminent public apology" and for what ??

Are you crazy?

Obama is either an Islamist sympathizer a plain chicken shiste or both.

Skeptical wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote: Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

Who is giving or gave this "imminent public apology" and for what ??

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/01/12/top-obama-administration-officials-criticized-for-not-appearing-at-paris-march/

Now run along troll...

Dr. Jones wrote:

Skeptical wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote: Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

Who is giving or gave this "imminent public apology" and for what ??

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/01/12/top-obama-administration-officials-criticized-for-not-appearing-at-paris-march/

Now run along troll...

That was so ... so, yesterday .... what is IMMINENT about something that already happened ?

im·mi·nent
/ˈimənənt/
adjective
adjective: imminent

1. about to happen.

Skeptical wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Skeptical wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote: Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

Who is giving or gave this "imminent public apology" and for what ??

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/01/12/top-obama-administration-officials-criticized-for-not-appearing-at-paris-march/

Now run along troll...

That was so ... so, yesterday .... what is IMMINENT about something that already happened ?

im·mi·nent
/ˈimənənt/
adjective
adjective: imminent

1. about to happen.

My gawd you are retarded.  

His choice from before the march not to go preceded the administration's apology after the march.

Dr. Jones wrote:What a brilliant idea.  Send our highest ranking elected officials to a hot terror zone to take part in a march.  Would we have stamped targets on their backs as well?  Maybe we should have sent Boehner.   Holder was attending security meetings in Paris.  Our Ambassador to France took part, as did our assistant Secretary of State.  We were certainly doing our part.

You are correct .. after all the terrorists only killed at least 12 unarmed people at a place publishing cartoons and no unarmed young black man was killed so no big concern to the MT suit HMWAIC.

Skeptical wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:What a brilliant idea.  Send our highest ranking elected officials to a hot terror zone to take part in a march.  Would we have stamped targets on their backs as well?  Maybe we should have sent Boehner.   Holder was attending security meetings in Paris.  Our Ambassador to France took part, as did our assistant Secretary of State.  We were certainly doing our part.

You are correct .. after all the terrorists only killed at least 12 unarmed people at a place publishing cartoons and no unarmed young black man was killed so no big concern to the MT suit HMWAIC.

This is like a merry-go-round, what are you talking about?

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:What a brilliant idea.  Send our highest ranking elected officials to a hot terror zone to take part in a march.  Would we have stamped targets on their backs as well?  Maybe we should have sent Boehner.   Holder was attending security meetings in Paris.  Our Ambassador to France took part, as did our assistant Secretary of State.  We were certainly doing our part.

So Netanyahu doesn't represent a target? And yet he marched. Even the White House tardily admitted it screwed the pooch by not sending a more prominent official although it readily had a list of excuses for not sending Obama, Biden or SoS Kerry. If not them, then which "prominent" WH official would it have been? Just more pablum and wanting to have it both ways from this tiresome man boy. Which is not surprising in the least coming from an administration that has trouble even using the word terrorism let alone linking it to radical Islam.

And seriously, aren't the tears Obama sheds for Charlie Hebdo crocodilian in nature? After all didn't the Big "O" scold us  at the UN “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” in direct reference to Charlie Hebdo's satirical cartoons.

My apologies to Shakespeare:

"If that the earth could teem with man's tears,
Each drop he falls would prove a crocodile."

Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

So French President Francois Hollande, British Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy didn't take a risk marching? Obama is the world's #1 apologist for Islamic extremists. It's a wonder he didn't frame this massacre as "workplace violence" since it all occurred in businesses.

Face it, Obama likes to display his bravado and pound his chest but in reality he is a ruff-tuff creampuff. Not unlike when he admitted that joining the military was an honorable option, but since the Vietnam War had come to an end and that we weren't engaged in an active military conflict he decided against it. WTF?

And WTF is an imminent public apology?

An imminent public apology would be an apology that you know you will have to give as a result of your plan of action.  A pawn of sorts, if you will. A small price to pay for the bigger picture.

Again, who gives a shiste what other countries choose to do with their elected officials.  Ours were right where they belonged.

LOL....you don't care what other countries think on this issue, but on others you do.

Go figure.

Alleycat wrote:Obama is either an Islamist sympathizer a plain chicken shiste or both.

And then there's that......

BladeRunner wrote:

Alleycat wrote:Obama is either an Islamist sympathizer a plain chicken shiste or both.

And then there's that......

There's what?

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:What a brilliant idea.  Send our highest ranking elected officials to a hot terror zone to take part in a march.  Would we have stamped targets on their backs as well?  Maybe we should have sent Boehner.   Holder was attending security meetings in Paris.  Our Ambassador to France took part, as did our assistant Secretary of State.  We were certainly doing our part.

So Netanyahu doesn't represent a target? And yet he marched. Even the White House tardily admitted it screwed the pooch by not sending a more prominent official although it readily had a list of excuses for not sending Obama, Biden or SoS Kerry. If not them, then which "prominent" WH official would it have been? Just more pablum and wanting to have it both ways from this tiresome man boy. Which is not surprising in the least coming from an administration that has trouble even using the word terrorism let alone linking it to radical Islam.

And seriously, aren't the tears Obama sheds for Charlie Hebdo crocodilian in nature? After all didn't the Big "O" scold us  at the UN “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” in direct reference to Charlie Hebdo's satirical cartoons.

My apologies to Shakespeare:

"If that the earth could teem with man's tears,
Each drop he falls would prove a crocodile."

Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

So French President Francois Hollande, British Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy didn't take a risk marching? Obama is the world's #1 apologist for Islamic extremists. It's a wonder he didn't frame this massacre as "workplace violence" since it all occurred in businesses.

Face it, Obama likes to display his bravado and pound his chest but in reality he is a ruff-tuff creampuff. Not unlike when he admitted that joining the military was an honorable option, but since the Vietnam War had come to an end and that we weren't engaged in an active military conflict he decided against it. WTF?

And WTF is an imminent public apology?

An imminent public apology would be an apology that you know you will have to give as a result of your plan of action.  A pawn of sorts, if you will. A small price to pay for the bigger picture.

Again, who gives a shiste what other countries choose to do with their elected officials.  Ours were right where they belonged.

LOL....you don't care what other countries think on this issue, but on others you do.

Go figure.

It's called thinking objectively. You should try it sometime.

Dr. Jones wrote:

Skeptical wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Skeptical wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote: Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

Who is giving or gave this "imminent public apology" and for what ??

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/01/12/top-obama-administration-officials-criticized-for-not-appearing-at-paris-march/

Now run along troll...

That was so ... so, yesterday .... what is IMMINENT about something that already happened ?

im·mi·nent
/ˈimənənt/
adjective
adjective: imminent

1. about to happen.

My gawd you are retarded.  

You are the one claiming an apology is about to happen, not me ... I am just trying to get you to tell WHEN in the NEAR FUTURE this IMMINENT APOLOGY is ABOUT TO HAPPEN, that's all !!

but, but, and I quote,

Dr. Jones Today at 10:06 am today, An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

AND Dr. Jones Today at 11:26 am today

His choice from before the march not to go preceded the administration's apology after the march.

I will grant you the MT suit HMWAIC stooges have given an a long winded excuse why no high level person attended but not sure that excuse is really an apology.

Dr. Jones wrote:

Skeptical wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:What a brilliant idea.  Send our highest ranking elected officials to a hot terror zone to take part in a march.  Would we have stamped targets on their backs as well?  Maybe we should have sent Boehner.   Holder was attending security meetings in Paris.  Our Ambassador to France took part, as did our assistant Secretary of State.  We were certainly doing our part.

You are correct .. after all the terrorists only killed at least 12 unarmed people at a place publishing cartoons and no unarmed young black man was killed so no big concern to the MT suit HMWAIC.

This is like a merry-go-round, what are you talking about?

That is your cue to quit going around in circles!

Dr. Jones wrote:

BladeRunner wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:

Dr. Jones wrote:What a brilliant idea.  Send our highest ranking elected officials to a hot terror zone to take part in a march.  Would we have stamped targets on their backs as well?  Maybe we should have sent Boehner.   Holder was attending security meetings in Paris.  Our Ambassador to France took part, as did our assistant Secretary of State.  We were certainly doing our part.

So Netanyahu doesn't represent a target? And yet he marched. Even the White House tardily admitted it screwed the pooch by not sending a more prominent official although it readily had a list of excuses for not sending Obama, Biden or SoS Kerry. If not them, then which "prominent" WH official would it have been? Just more pablum and wanting to have it both ways from this tiresome man boy. Which is not surprising in the least coming from an administration that has trouble even using the word terrorism let alone linking it to radical Islam.

And seriously, aren't the tears Obama sheds for Charlie Hebdo crocodilian in nature? After all didn't the Big "O" scold us  at the UN “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” in direct reference to Charlie Hebdo's satirical cartoons.

My apologies to Shakespeare:

"If that the earth could teem with man's tears,
Each drop he falls would prove a crocodile."

Who gives a shiste what Netanyahu does?  An imminent public apology is a very small price to pay for a very calculated risk.  Hats of to the administration for making the right decision.

So French President Francois Hollande, British Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy didn't take a risk marching? Obama is the world's #1 apologist for Islamic extremists. It's a wonder he didn't frame this massacre as "workplace violence" since it all occurred in businesses.

Face it, Obama likes to display his bravado and pound his chest but in reality he is a ruff-tuff creampuff. Not unlike when he admitted that joining the military was an honorable option, but since the Vietnam War had come to an end and that we weren't engaged in an active military conflict he decided against it. WTF?

And WTF is an imminent public apology?

An imminent public apology would be an apology that you know you will have to give as a result of your plan of action.  A pawn of sorts, if you will. A small price to pay for the bigger picture.

Again, who gives a shiste what other countries choose to do with their elected officials.  Ours were right where they belonged.

LOL....you don't care what other countries think on this issue, but on others you do.

Go figure.

It's called thinking objectively.  You should try it sometime.

Please give your definition of "objectively". We are aware to you "imminent" refers to something that might have already happened.