Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Muslims killing Muslims ... does it get any better than this? And with thousands of them being summarily machine-gunned, and hundreds of 'em getting their heads chopped off, it's almost as good as the years of Syrian carnage or the season 4 finale of Game Of Thrones. Can't wait for the Iranians to start killing the Sunni ISIS so we'll at least have a little balance to the glorious spectacle.

Hey Obama, good plan ... Thanks! But don't you dare go all Nobel Prize humanitarian mushy now and interfere with this. Stay on the golf course.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yanno, it occurs to me.... the occupation of Iraq by ISIS ... this might BE Obama's foreign policy. I know that the admin was never too enthralled by Prime Minister al-Maliki, who refused to sign an agreement of forces (I believe it's called), which would have allowed a residual US force in Iraq. That's ONE way to dump an uncooperative foreign leader... bring in the replacements! I think what will happen is that in effect Iraq will be partitioned, except rather than being partitioned into three (Kurds in the north, Sunnis in the center and Shias in the south) the north (and its oil) will be taken over by the Sunni ISIS. With all of the attendant blood-letting.

SO don't expect Obama to do much about this; as awful as it looks, it's prolly all part of the plan.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNYM
Another potential piece of evidence is how the USA responds... if our government does not engage in robust pushback, and/or does not ask Iran for help... then perhaps this is another piece of evidence that ISIS is not entirely unwelcome.

---

Quote:

---

You have no idea if the US tacitly approved or not, nor will you know if we do anything or to what extent. Some things don't end up on the internet.

---

Quote:

---

Just another piece of your logic that shows you have no real understanding of what is what in the Middle East and why we respond the way we do.

---

Quote:

---

If we do not jump into this it is because of the message it would send to Sunni’s across the Middle East. That we side with the Shiites.

---

Quote:

---

Not because we welcome ISIS.

---

Quote:

---

If we do jump in it is because Maliki started working with the Sunni offering them a more inclusive role in government, or because we needed to do some things selectively to protect our interests in the region. Kind of a no choice thing.

---

Quote:

---

signym
But many things do. One of the points I DIDN'T bring up is that the USA has a training center in Jordan for Syrian "rebels", which included ISIS.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:

Quote:

---

signym

But many things do. One of the points I DIDN'T bring up is that the USA has a training center in Jordan for Syrian "rebels", which included ISIS.

---

Your nuts. You are absolutely clueless about what our objective is when it comes to the Middle East. We want stability. It means cheaper Oil. We don’t care who runs what so long as there is stability. With nuts like ISIS peace is not possible. As we trained the Afghani army some Taliban fighters would infiltrate the ranks. It is near impossible to tell. Shit happens, but to suggest we trained ISIS fighters to become ISIS shows a complete lack of understanding, a hidden agenda or that you are simply nuts.

Personally I think you are nuts. I think you must be damaged goods who finds the worst and a hidden agenda in everything. Nothing is what it seems and all are lying all the time.


si shen

---

Quote:

---

signym
You would be much better served by using giburu or ixquick and looking for weapons+syria+libya+cia or similar and finding this out for yourself. It's not hard, and you're an intelligent person, so rather than letting the media tell you the story it prefers you should be your own news-hound.

---

Quote:

---

The news and reputable sources on the internet tells us all they know of what is going on. The reporters on the ground there tell us what is going on.

---

Quote:

---

"Ms. Miller may still be best known for her role in a series of Times articles in 2002 and 2003 that strongly suggested Saddam Hussein already had or was acquiring an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction… Many of those articles turned out to be inaccurate ... [T]he problems facing her inside and outside the newsroom will make it difficult for her to return to the paper as a reporter."

---

Quote:

---

Democracy is a sham designed to fool us into believing we are in control. That a small group of unknown, unaccountable elites is actually pulling the strings and pretty much deciding the course of history;

---

Quote:

---

signym

Well, there's your problem right there.

"The news" has wittingly passed on false stories, and knowingly withheld information, and this has come out as fact weeks, months... and sometimes years later. Heck, look at Judith Miller of the NYT who flogged the Iraqi WMD story for all it was worth. And SHE knew it was crap, and was rightly disgraced and fired.

---

Quote:

---

Most news items are official releases by SOME arm of the government, from a "high White House source" to the "county commissioner" to the local animal shelter

---

Quote:

---

Timing is everything: the White House’s announcement, on Thursday afternoon, that America’s intelligence agencies had concluded that Bashar al-Assad’s regime was deploying chemical weapons came just as the dictator appeared to be turning back the rebels in Syria’s terrible civil war.... Ben Rhodes, a deputy national-security advisor, said that the White House had “high confidence” in the finding that chemical weapons like sarin gas had been used, and that Assad—and not the rebels—had used them. The White House conclusion dovetailed with those of other governments, including France, and non-governmental organizations, such as the Syrian Support Group. It also mirrored what a Syrian eyewitness to an apparent chemical attack told me when I interviewed him for a piece in The New Yorker.

---

Quote:

---

people like Zbigniew Brzezinski or Ken Pollack. Stanley McChrystal, Michael Hayden, Michael Morell, Richard Haass, Richard Engel, and some of the White House Press Core or Dr Roham Alvandi.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Seriously? I doubt that Assad used chlorine gas. I also question that he used Sarin. I think we can lay that at the hands of others.

---

Quote:

---

At the time, I was extremely doubtful that Assad's government was to blame. As you may recall, I said that government-made chemical weapons have stabilizers in them, which vary depending on who is doing the manufacturing, and that they're loaded and delivered in mass-produced shells. It should be possible, then, by collecting samples of the chemical agent and by looking for the shells in which the chemicals were delivered to assign blame with less uncertainty.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
But the UN made no claims about WHO used it. And seeing that jihadists with Sarin had been arrested earlier at the Turkish border... and that Assad had absolutely no reason whatsoever to use it, partly because he was winning on the ground and mostly because it stood a good chance of bringing the USA into the war ... plus other evidence that I posted about at the time ... there is every reason to suspect jihadists rather than Assad. As I posted earlier

Quote:

---

At the time, I was extremely doubtful that Assad's government was to blame. As you may recall, I said that government-made chemical weapons have stabilizers in them, which vary depending on who is doing the manufacturing, and that they're loaded and delivered in mass-produced shells. It should be possible, then, by collecting samples of the chemical agent and by looking for the shells in which the chemicals were delivered to assign blame with less uncertainty.

---

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57708

Oh, and please be a dear and look up some of those quotes. You SAID you follow certain people, do you not?

---

Quote:

---

In the case I sited they said they were delivered by helicopter in 50 gallon drums

---

Quote:

---

you get your news from a source that says the Holocaust did not happen.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

In the case I sited they said they were delivered by helicopter in 50 gallon drums

---

fixed that for you.

Quote:

---

you get your news from a source that says the Holocaust did not happen.

---

You get our news from people who believe in one-world government?

---

Quote:

---

signym
But the UN made no claims about WHO used it. And seeing that jihadists with Sarin had been arrested earlier at the Turkish border... and that Assad had absolutely no reason whatsoever to use it,

---

Quote:

---

In the case I sited they were delivered by helicopter in 50 gallon drums,

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
You should do more research before you post.

---

Quote:

---

signym

At the time, I was extremely doubtful that Assad's government was to blame. As you may recall, I said that government-made chemical weapons have stabilizers in them, which vary depending on who is doing the manufacturing, and that they're loaded and delivered in mass-produced shells. It should be possible, then, by collecting samples of the chemical agent and by looking for the shells in which the chemicals were delivered to assign blame with less uncertainty.

---

Quote:

---

….G
I think I found out one of the problems. That is called "Reporting." What you are doing is called "Guessing." It's freeing to do what you do because you don't have to be right and you can be as creative as you like.

---

Quote:

---

…signym
Didn't I say that one of my ideas was a guess? Wow, it sure take you a long time to catch on!

---

Quote:

---

…signym
AFA "reporting" is concerned... the reporter is faced with a welter of information. The trick is to figure out which is true and -of that- which is important.

---

Quote:

---

…..G
That is called "Reporting." What you are doing is called "Guessing’s. It’s freeing to do what you do because you don't have to be right and you can be as creative as you like.

---

Quote:

---

What you say about guessing may be true unless you have an agenda in mind while guessing. That is my point, you have an agenda.

---

Quote:

---

…1kiki
And you don't?
I didn't bring it up in the Ukraine pipeline thread, but your ideas were and are just plain stupid, and showed - and ALWAYS show - a significant anti-Russian bias. You claimed that somehow it was supposed to be a lesson to Russia.
You know what would happen if Ukrainians blew up a through-pipeline? EUROPE would be pissed off AT THE UKRAINE. Especially if it looked like part of an official policy.
Man are you dumb. AND BIASED!
Troll

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

What you say about guessing may be true unless you have an agenda in mind while guessing. That is my point, you have an agenda.

---

You are hardly the one to be accusing people of having "an agenda". You can't even answer the question about where those quotes came from, because it puts your intellectual idols in a bad light. You're basically fact-avoidant because your agenda won't let you be otherwise.

In order to make good guesses, you have to put yourself in the shoes of ALL of the players. That means identifying key interests. With Russia, it was clearly Sevastopol specifically, home of the Black Sea Fleet, and Crimea generally.

With Iraq, I can imagine that the (fundamentalist Sunni) Saudi Royal family has a significant interest in denting the Shia government of Iraq (which is backed by Iran, the Saudi Royal Family's key nemesis) so they can put in a pipeline via Iraq and Syria to the eastern Mediterranean. A person can't make those kinds of projections if they are blind to the real interests of ALL the key players, and particularly if they're running around with such big blinders on that that fail to see 99% of events.

---

Quote:

---

She is doing exactly the same thing with the Middle East by suggesting the United States is sponsoring terrorists

---

Quote:

---

…..signym
I'm not "suggesting" that the United States is sponsoring terrorists, I'm saying it outright. We tolerate, aid, and abet the terrorists sponsored by Saudi Arabia, and we've been doing it for years.

---

Quote:

---

….signym
Not only have we been doing that in the Middle East, we've been doing it everywhere for years, whether they were neo-Nazis (like Franco in Spain) in Europe or generalissomos in Central and South America. It's a little hard to deny, there are far too many real-life examples with names and dates attached.

---

Quote:

---

That it took till now for you to outright admit it is how it works with you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
YOIKS! Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, are you???

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

That it took till now for you to outright admit it is how it works with you.

---

YOIKS! Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, are you??? I've been saying this ALL ALONG. You think you're digging dirt? You're not "exposing" anything... people here already know what I think and how I feel. That it took you this long to FIGURE IT OUT says more about you than me!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
YOIKS! Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, are you???

---

Heh, no. But you suffer the fools well, I must say.

---

Hello preciousss………. We be nice to them, if they be nice to us.

............

si shen

Select to view spoiler:

Quote:

---

Fwiw ZeroHedge cites the NYTimes, Reuters and WSJ as sources - maybe they don't know they are Gov stooges?

---

Quote:

---

Everything you suggest I did not address I did, and more to the point I showed my arguments to be spot on.

---