Bipartisan Senate Report on Benghazi

[blackhawk]

Has anyone wondered why Stevens might have gone with using Libyans for security? Do you think it might have been because the administration had a no boots on the ground policy?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

[MENTION=36422]blackhawk[/MENTION]

Has anyone wondered why Stevens might have gone with using Libyans for security? Do you think it might have been because the administration had a no boots on the ground policy?

Idiot! It's well known Stevens went 'native' and thought he was winning the hearts and minds of the Libyans. He forgot Libya contained far too many factions and loyalties...he trusted too much....remember "Trust but verify"

 

[OKTexas]

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".

All reports so far have proven my opinion correct, the mulatto messiah and his administration knew it was a terrorist attack from day one and lied their ass off about it.

 

[blackhawk]

[MENTION=36422]blackhawk[/MENTION]

Has anyone wondered why Stevens might have gone with using Libyans for security? Do you think it might have been because the administration had a no boots on the ground policy?

Idiot! It's well known Stevens went 'native' and thought he was winning the hearts and minds of the Libyans. He forgot Libya contained far too many factions and loyalties...he trusted too much....remember "Trust but verify"

You really didn't address my point the Obama administration had a no boots on the ground light foot print policy towards Libya so again what choice did Stevens have other than to go native as you put it?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

[MENTION=36422]blackhawk[/MENTION]

Has anyone wondered why Stevens might have gone with using Libyans for security? Do you think it might have been because the administration had a no boots on the ground policy?

Idiot! It's well known Stevens went 'native' and thought he was winning the hearts and minds of the Libyans. He forgot Libya contained far too many factions and loyalties...he trusted too much....remember "Trust but verify"

You really didn't address my point the Obama administration had a no boots on the ground light foot print policy towards Libya so again what choice did Stevens have other than to go native as you put it?

boots on the ground in Libya? who was proposing that?