Bipartisan Senate Report on Benghazi

Dante

On leave
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
52,462
Reaction score
3,366
Points
1,825
Location
On leave
Bipartisan Senate Report on Benghazi

Very telling: Thursday, January 16, 2014 | Foreign Policy: Morning Briefing

"In addition to excoriating the State Department and U.S. intelligence agencies for failing to boost security beforehand, the report criticizes Stevens for recommending that the U.S. mission hire local Libyan guards in Tripoli and Benghazi. " - ForeignPolicy.com


:eusa_whistle:
 

Yurt

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
25,603
Reaction score
3,601
Points
270
Location
Hot air ballon
day late and a dollar short dante, already threads on this and citing someone's opinion is not indicative of what the report actually said, the report said there were mistakes
 
OP
Dante

Dante

On leave
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
52,462
Reaction score
3,366
Points
1,825
Location
On leave
day late and a dollar short dante, already threads on this and citing someone's opinion is not indicative of what the report actually said, the report said there were mistakes
Stevens
 

bendog

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
34,597
Reaction score
3,985
Points
1,140
Location
Dog House in back yard
Well, it was more than Stevens, but you do have a pt that some of the fault lay with him, and arguably he was NOT the right guy for the job, but blaming a dead guy is very non-PC.

Stevens was a guy who won hearts and minds, and in Libya we were transferring weapons from terrorists groups to other terrorist groups. That's a very dangerous thing to do, and probably better left to a guy with a rigorous military background.
 

NoTeaPartyPleez

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
11,826
Reaction score
1,912
Points
245
day late and a dollar short dante, already threads on this and citing someone's opinion is not indicative of what the report actually said, the report said there were mistakes

My oh my, so now you're just calling it "mistakes". LOL! I see you aren't exactly reciting these "mistakes" from the report actually. They don't fit your opinion?
 

Yurt

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
25,603
Reaction score
3,601
Points
270
Location
Hot air ballon
day late and a dollar short dante, already threads on this and citing someone's opinion is not indicative of what the report actually said, the report said there were mistakes

My oh my, so now you're just calling it "mistakes". LOL! I see you aren't exactly reciting these "mistakes" from the report actually. They don't fit your opinion?
i cited them in the other thread you fanatical tool
 

g5000

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
93,980
Reaction score
15,630
Points
2,180
Has anyone changed the opinions which they formed about Benghazi before any facts were known?

Didn't think so.

Whoever gets to the blank slate that is a rube's mind first has all the advantage. No amount of contrary evidence to what the puppet masters write will do anything to reverse them, much less teach them not to swallow whatever piss is poured for them in the absence of factual information.

You are going to see what you want to see in any "report".
 
Last edited:
OP
Dante

Dante

On leave
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
52,462
Reaction score
3,366
Points
1,825
Location
On leave
Well, it was more than Stevens, but you do have a pt that some of the fault lay with him, and arguably he was NOT the right guy for the job, but blaming a dead guy is very non-PC.

Stevens was a guy who won hearts and minds, and in Libya we were transferring weapons from terrorists groups to other terrorist groups. That's a very dangerous thing to do, and probably better left to a guy with a rigorous military background.
Military background? Pshaw! Stevens suffered from hubris and idealism and he paid with his life, but he put other people's lives at risk. So much for diplomats knowing everything.
 
OP
Dante

Dante

On leave
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
52,462
Reaction score
3,366
Points
1,825
Location
On leave
Has anyone changed the opinions which they formed about Benghazi before any facts were known?

Didn't think so.

Whoever gets to the blank slate that is a rube's mind first has all the advantage. No amount of contrary evidence to what the puppet masters write will do anything to reverse them, much less teach them not to swallow whatever piss is poured for them in the absence of factual information.
Of course some of us modified opinions as more info came out, but even during the attack, GOP Presidential nominee, Mitt Romney was spreading manure
 

Sallow

The Big Bad Wolf.
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
56,532
Reaction score
6,240
Points
1,840
Location
New York City
Has anyone changed the opinions which they formed about Benghazi before any facts were known?

Didn't think so.

Whoever gets to the blank slate that is a rube's mind first has all the advantage. No amount of contrary evidence to what the puppet masters write will do anything to reverse them, much less teach them not to swallow whatever piss is poured for them in the absence of factual information.
Of course some of us modified opinions as more info came out, but even during the attack, GOP Presidential nominee, Mitt Romney was spreading manure
And that was a first.

Ever.

Nice it was a Conservative candidate doing that. :eusa_whistle:
 

g5000

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
93,980
Reaction score
15,630
Points
2,180
Has anyone changed the opinions which they formed about Benghazi before any facts were known?

Didn't think so.

Whoever gets to the blank slate that is a rube's mind first has all the advantage. No amount of contrary evidence to what the puppet masters write will do anything to reverse them, much less teach them not to swallow whatever piss is poured for them in the absence of factual information.
Of course some of us modified opinions as more info came out, but even during the attack, GOP Presidential nominee, Mitt Romney was spreading manure
I don't recall Romney doing so, but the right wing hack media outlets sure were. It was just weeks before the election and they were doing their best to muddy the already murky waters as much as possible.

The exploitation of the dead is always a sickening spectacle, whether it is done by the Left with their parades of black coffins representing our war dead, or done by the Right with Benghazi.
 

NoTeaPartyPleez

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
11,826
Reaction score
1,912
Points
245
Has anyone changed the opinions which they formed about Benghazi before any facts were known?

Didn't think so.

Whoever gets to the blank slate that is a rube's mind first has all the advantage. No amount of contrary evidence to what the puppet masters write will do anything to reverse them, much less teach them not to swallow whatever piss is poured for them in the absence of factual information.

You are going to see what you want to see in any "report".
I never saw a cover-up or a conspiracy, never thought it was Hillary's fault or Obama's any more than I think 9/11 was the Dick and the Bush's fault. The difference is that the Dick and the Bush are a couple of opportunists who took Rahm Emanuel's advice before Rahm Emanuel said it, "Never let a good crisis go to waste".

The Dick has profited greatly from 9/11 through Halliburton. Bush was stupid enough to think he would build a great legacy from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Hillary and Obama didn't capitalize on Benghazi. And given the amount of universal vitriol that the rest of the world holds for America, it's a wonder attacks like this don't happen more often.
 
OP
Dante

Dante

On leave
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
52,462
Reaction score
3,366
Points
1,825
Location
On leave
Has anyone changed the opinions which they formed about Benghazi before any facts were known?

Didn't think so.

Whoever gets to the blank slate that is a rube's mind first has all the advantage. No amount of contrary evidence to what the puppet masters write will do anything to reverse them, much less teach them not to swallow whatever piss is poured for them in the absence of factual information.
Of course some of us modified opinions as more info came out, but even during the attack, GOP Presidential nominee, Mitt Romney was spreading manure
I don't recall Romney doing so, but the right wing hack media outlets sure were. It was just weeks before the election and they were doing their best to muddy the already murky waters as much as possible.

The exploitation of the dead is always a sickening spectacle, whether it is done by the Left with their parades of black coffins representing our war dead, or done by the Right with Benghazi.
“From the hours after the attack, beginning with the Republican nominee’s unfortunate press release, and then his statement the day after, there has been an effort to politicize a tragedy here, the deaths of four Americans, to try to suggest that even though the President called it an act of terror, even though the Ambassador to the United Nations referred to possible responsibility not just by extremists but possibly by al-Qaeda or al-Qaeda affiliates, that we were somehow not talking about that, when the publicly available evidence proves the opposite,” Carney said.

Read more: White House: GOP Focus On Benghazi Tied To Mitt Romney (With Transcript) | TIME.com White House: GOP Focus On Benghazi Tied To Mitt Romney (With Transcript) | TIME.com


“The Republicans, again, [are] in this ongoing effort that began hours after the attacks when Mitt Romney put out a press release to try to take political advantage out of these deaths, or out of the attack in Benghazi—in a move that was maligned even by members of his own party,” Carney told reporters. “And from that day forward, there has been this effort to politicize it.”

Read more: White House: GOP Focus On Benghazi Tied To Mitt Romney (With Transcript) | TIME.com http://swampland.time.com/2013/05/10/romney-to-blame-for-gop-focus-on-benghazi/#ixzz2qb4PgLXJ
 
Last edited:

NoTeaPartyPleez

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
11,826
Reaction score
1,912
Points
245
Has anyone changed the opinions which they formed about Benghazi before any facts were known?

Didn't think so.

Whoever gets to the blank slate that is a rube's mind first has all the advantage. No amount of contrary evidence to what the puppet masters write will do anything to reverse them, much less teach them not to swallow whatever piss is poured for them in the absence of factual information.
Of course some of us modified opinions as more info came out, but even during the attack, GOP Presidential nominee, Mitt Romney was spreading manure
I don't recall Romney doing so, but the right wing hack media outlets sure were. It was just weeks before the election and they were doing their best to muddy the already murky waters as much as possible.

The exploitation of the dead is always a sickening spectacle, whether it is done by the Left with their parades of black coffins representing our war dead, or done by the Right with Benghazi.

This was an eye-opener for me early on:



Guest on Fox News to Discuss Benghazi Attack Is Given a Quick Exit


"""Fox News has devoted far more airtime to the events in Benghazi, on Sept. 11, than other television news networks, with numerous suggestions that the Obama administration is engaged in a cover-up. Erik Wemple of The Washington Post and the anti-Fox group Media Matters, among others, have documented the ups and downs of Fox’s reporting on the subject.

“Right now, pressure mounting on the Obama administration over its response to the deadly attack on our consulate in Benghazi,” the Fox anchor Jon Scott said before tossing to Mr. Ricks, a former Washington Post and Wall Street Journal reporter who is now a contributing editor to Foreign Policy. His latest book, “The Generals,” was published last month.

After Mr. Ricks said that he thought that “Benghazi generally was hyped, by this network especially,” Mr. Scott homed in on the word “hype,” asking, “When you have four people dead, including the first U.S. ambassador in more than 30 years, how do you call that hype?”

Mr. Ricks answered, “How many security contractors died in Iraq? Do you know?”

Mr. Scott said he did not know.

“Nobody does, because nobody cared,” Mr. Ricks said. “We know that several hundred died, but there was never an official count done of security contractors dead in Iraq. So when I see this focus on what was essentially a small firefight, I think, No. 1, I’ve covered a lot of firefights, it’s impossible to figure out what happens in them sometimes. And second, I think that the emphasis on Benghazi has been extremely political, partly because Fox was operating as a wing of the Republican Party.”


That was the end of the segment.
 

NoTeaPartyPleez

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
11,826
Reaction score
1,912
Points
245
day late and a dollar short dante, already threads on this and citing someone's opinion is not indicative of what the report actually said, the report said there were mistakes

My oh my, so now you're just calling it "mistakes". LOL! I see you aren't exactly reciting these "mistakes" from the report actually. They don't fit your opinion?
i cited them in the other thread you fanatical tool
Touchy! Sorry the facts didn't cooperate with your bias, you cute little rightwing sock puppet.
 

aaronleland

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2012
Messages
32,172
Reaction score
8,908
Points
1,360
Has anyone changed the opinions which they formed about Benghazi before any facts were known?

Didn't think so.
The thing about this report was that it seemed to lay some blame at the feet of all parties, Stevens included. It allows both sides to spin the information any way they choose. The whole report seems like a way for the Senate to just put the issue to rest, and I don't blame them.
 

Yurt

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
25,603
Reaction score
3,601
Points
270
Location
Hot air ballon

My oh my, so now you're just calling it "mistakes". LOL! I see you aren't exactly reciting these "mistakes" from the report actually. They don't fit your opinion?
i cited them in the other thread you fanatical tool
Touchy! Sorry the facts didn't cooperate with your bias, you cute little rightwing sock puppet.
what exactly is my bias you fanatical leftwing tool? i notice you didn't bother to debunk anything i said in the other thread. is it because i posted the actual report and it did in fact back up everything i said?
 

NoTeaPartyPleez

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
11,826
Reaction score
1,912
Points
245
i cited them in the other thread you fanatical tool
Touchy! Sorry the facts didn't cooperate with your bias, you cute little rightwing sock puppet.
what exactly is my bias you fanatical leftwing tool? i notice you didn't bother to debunk anything i said in the other thread. is it because i posted the actual report and it did in fact back up everything i said?

I haven't seen your other thread, Cletus. I'm referring to your Obama-blaming bullshit from previous posts that I'm sorry I wasted my time reading.
 
Last edited:

hazlnut

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
12,387
Reaction score
1,918
Points
290
Location
Chicago
And Now Marco Rubio wants to spend the peoples money to do another investigation and issue another report.

No wonder we all missed the repeal of the STOCK act last year -- Congress wanted to get back to their insider trading and needed to keep us distracted.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top