Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
We aren't just going to "take your word for it". Provide some sources or.....
Bingo! They're committing horrific atrocities daily in Syria. And they're not all ISIS.
Do you have any backup for your claim that CIA vetted rebels have committed atrocities in Syria, or is this another one of your imagined news reports?
There are Syrian rebels that will fight IS terrorists as well as Assad. They are the only rebels being armed by the US. If you have any reason to doubt this reality lets hear your reason for it. Repetitive chirping anout it means nothing.
Not our War. Our interference has made things worse. Should have stayed out of it. Period, end of story.
The US had stayed out of the civil war aspect of it and it got worse on its own because of Saudi and UAE and their reckless arming of the anti-government rebels. The great Prince Bandar was relieved of his post several months ago and that 'firing' came about with the emergence of ISIS as a powerful threat even to al Qaeda.
The US has convinced the Saudis and other rebel supplier Arab nations to go through the US vetting program and those states are now apparently on board.
Would you have preferred we bombed Saudi Arabia for randomly arming Syrian rebels including ISIS when we preferred that not be done?
What do Pauline-isolationists do when our allies do the wrong things?
Oh and my link for you is the New York Times. You appear to be an ardent Obama supporter, so I thought I should at least give you a link you'd like. 
But where did you get that 'begging for a year' claim? Just curious.
From Maliki. .... I always back up everything I say. I prefer to use truly reliable sources such as the BBC, the CBC, France 24 and such.
There was no such thing as a moderate rebel ever in Syria.
US has been advising Saudi Arabia for some time as to who to give the weapons to.
Qatars military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra, to the point that a senior Qatari official told me he can identify al-Nusra commanders by the blocks they control in various Syrian cities. But ISIS is another matter. As one senior Qatari official stated, ISIS has been a Saudi project.
All Muslims are terrorists, therefore any Muslim country run by a Muslim is run by a terrorist. Now you know.
Do you have any backup for your claim that CIA vetted rebels have committed atrocities in Syria, or is this another one of your imagined news reports?
There have been a growing number of accounts of atrocities carried out by rogue elements of the Syrian Free Army, which opposes dictator Bashar al-Assad and is recognised by Britain and the West as the legitimate leadership. [/B]
But where did you get that 'begging for a year' claim? Just curious.
From Maliki. .... I always back up everything I say. I prefer to use truly reliable sources such as the BBC, the CBC, France 24 and such.
I've not seen your backup for your 'begging for a year' claim.
I'm bbqing now but wanted to get back to you.
Do you have any backup for your claim that CIA vetted rebels have committed atrocities in Syria, or is this another one of your imagined news reports?
There have been a growing number of accounts of atrocities carried out by rogue elements of the Syrian Free Army, which opposes dictator Bashar al-Assad and is recognised by Britain and the West as the legitimate leadership. [/B]
Do you know what 'rogue elements' of the FSA means? Go back to the question that I asked you? Your link is largely anecdotal without a direct tie to the FSA according to your very own source.
I'll ask again because we all know except *1776 that Christans in Syria support Assad and the Nun providing this anecdote is telling this story from Lebanon. She is not at the location where it supposedly happened.
Do you have any backup for your claim that CIA vetted rebels have committed atrocities in Syria
US has been advising Saudi Arabia for some time as to who to give the weapons to.
I don't dispute or disagree with that assessment from 2012 at all. What you are missing is that Saudi Arabia under Prince Bandar was not taking that advice and were arming ISIS in their own. Prince Bandar has been fired from his position as Chief Intelligence Officer because of the support and arming of ISIS and with the recent territorial gains by IS terrorists the Saudis are now running support through the US and CIA as they should have been doing all along.
My facts are correct:
Qatar’s military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra, to the point that a senior Qatari official told me he can identify al-Nusra commanders by the blocks they control in various Syrian cities. But ISIS is another matter. As one senior Qatari official stated, “ISIS has been a Saudi project.”
Are the Saudis to Blame for Iraq?
Are the Saudis to Blame for Iraq? - Defense One
I bet them coals are hot.Have a good night. The coals are ready so it's off to the bbq.
Letting Baghdadi go in 2009 was a big whoopsies.
On Pirros Saturday program she led into the subject with a mouth-foaming harangue about Obamas feckless leadership and socialist designs on America. On Kellys primetime program she interviewed Col. Kenneth King who claimed to have been present when Baghdadi was transferred from the custody of U.S. forces to the Iraqis, who later allegedly released him to go on to form ISIS. However, an investigation by PolitiFact uncovered a very different story, confirmed by the Defense Department, and branding the Fox report as false.
Ibrahim Awad Ibrahim Al Badry, also known as Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was held as a civilian internee by U.S. Forces-Iraq from early February 2004 until early December 2004, when he was released, the Pentagon said in a statement. He was held at Camp Bucca. A Combined Review and Release Board recommended unconditional release of this detainee and he was released from U.S. custody shortly thereafter. We have no record of him being held at any other time.
Since the right-wing is so intent on assigning blame for Baghdadis campaign of terror on the president who was in office when he was set free, then according to their logic it is all Bushs fault. But dont expect Fox News to report the facts as laid out by actual journalists. They wont even report the comments of their own witness, Col. King, who appeared on another network (ABC) and admitted that he could be mistaken. It turns out that he never knew the name of the man he presumed to be Baghdadi, he just thought there was a resemblance to the man he encountered. Nor will they report Col. Kings remarks to the Daily Beast where he downplayed the threat posed by Baghdadi, saying that He was a bad dude, but he wasnt the worst of the worst.
PolitiFact went on to note that, even if Col. Kings account were correct, and Baghdadi was still in custody in 2009, Obama still could not be held to blame for Baghdadis release. The terms of the Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq required the U.S. to turn over all prisoners to the custody of Iraqs criminal system. That agreement was negotiated and agreed to by the Bush administration in 2008.
Our ruling
Pirro said that Obama released the current head of ISIS from government custody in 2009. The Defense Department said that the man now known as Baghdadi was released in 2004. The evidence that Baghdadi was still in custody in 2009 appears to be the recollection of an Army colonel who said Baghdadi’s "face is very familiar."
Even if the colonel is right, Baghdadi was not set free; he was handed over to the Iraqis who released him some time later. But more important, the legal contract between the United States and Iraq that guaranteed that the United States would give up custody of virtually every detainee was signed during the Bush administration. It would have required an extraordinary effort to have held on to Baghdadi and there is no evidence that he was on anyone’s radar screen, assuming that he was in custody at all in 2009.
The U.S.-Iraq agreement drove the release of thousands of detainees in 2009, but Obama had nothing to do with that.
We rate the claim False.
ISIS Leader Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi Trained by Israeli Mossad, NSA Documents Reveal | Global ResearchThe big whoopsie is on TinyDancer and Rupert Murdoch's global fake news corp:
Our ruling
Pirro said that Obama released the current head of ISIS from government custody in 2009. The Defense Department said that the man now known as Baghdadi was released in 2004. The evidence that Baghdadi was still in custody in 2009 appears to be the recollection of an Army colonel who said Baghdadis "face is very familiar."
Even if the colonel is right, Baghdadi was not set free; he was handed over to the Iraqis who released him some time later. But more important, the legal contract between the United States and Iraq that guaranteed that the United States would give up custody of virtually every detainee was signed during the Bush administration. It would have required an extraordinary effort to have held on to Baghdadi and there is no evidence that he was on anyones radar screen, assuming that he was in custody at all in 2009.
The U.S.-Iraq agreement drove the release of thousands of detainees in 2009, but Obama had nothing to do with that.
We rate the claim False.
Fox's Pirro: Obama set ISIS leader free in 2009 | PunditFact
The former employee at US National Security Agency (NSA), Edward Snowden, has revealed that the British and American intelligence and the Mossad worked together to create the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
Leaks revealed that ISIS leader and cleric Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi took intensive military training for a whole year in the hands of Mossad, besides courses in theology and the art of speech.
Now this is not a rumor. This is the real deal right from the Capitol. You have to understand that Obama hates Maliki with a passion. Almost as much as he hates Assad,
I think he was hoping for a two for one situation. Knock out both with ISIS and/or Al Nusra and then make peace with a Sunni replacement as the head of Syria and Iraq.
He does love his Sunnis doesn't he now?
Breaking on Capitol Hill is the news that Iraqi officials began requesting almost a year ago for the US to carry out drone strikes against ISIS – but the requests were shot down by the White House. That stunning revelation came during a hearing on the situation in Iraq this morning.
The Hill reports:
During a hearing on the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, House Foreign Affairs Chairman Ed Royce (R-Calif.) said the administration knew six months ago that the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS or ISIL) had established armed camps, staging areas and training grounds in Iraq’s western desert and its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was threatening to attack the U.S.
“However, what the Administration did not say was that the Iraqi government had been urgently requesting drone strikes against ISIS camps since August 2013,” Royce continued.
“These repeated requests, unfortunately, were turned down,” he said. “I added my voice for drone strikes as ISIS convoys raced across the desert.”
The New York Times previously reported that in May 2014 Prime Minister Maliki had “secretly asked the Obama administration to consider carrying out airstrikes against extremist staging areas” and that “Iraq’s appeals for a military response have so far been rebuffed by the White House, which has been reluctant to open a new chapter in a conflict that President Obama has insisted was over when the United States withdrew the last of its forces from Iraq in 2011.”
But the fact that Iraqis have been begging for nearly a year for the US to strike ISIS with drones – and that those requests were repeatedly denied by Obama – was not previously known.
Obama regularly authorizes drone strikes against terrorist targets in Pakistan, Yemen and the Horn of Africa. The White House even boasted that the president personally approves the “kill lists” himself.
Obama refused ?repeated requests? since August 2013 for drone strikes against ISIS | AEIdeas
The big whoopsie is on TinyDancer and Rupert Murdoch's global fake news corp:
Our ruling
Pirro said that Obama released the current head of ISIS from government custody in 2009. The Defense Department said that the man now known as Baghdadi was released in 2004. The evidence that Baghdadi was still in custody in 2009 appears to be the recollection of an Army colonel who said Baghdadis "face is very familiar."
Even if the colonel is right, Baghdadi was not set free; he was handed over to the Iraqis who released him some time later. But more important, the legal contract between the United States and Iraq that guaranteed that the United States would give up custody of virtually every detainee was signed during the Bush administration. It would have required an extraordinary effort to have held on to Baghdadi and there is no evidence that he was on anyones radar screen, assuming that he was in custody at all in 2009.
The U.S.-Iraq agreement drove the release of thousands of detainees in 2009, but Obama had nothing to do with that.
We rate the claim False.
Fox's Pirro: Obama set ISIS leader free in 2009 | PunditFact
