- Sep 16, 2012
- 66,870
- 62,615
- 3,605
I can't believe people fall for this shit, I really can't.
ISIS Using WMDs. Where Did They Get Them? HMMMMM????
- Thread starter mudwhistle
- Start date
depotoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 9, 2012
- 40,719
- 13,430
- 2,280
I can't believe those that don't research actual documentation and only believe what their biased media/politician's feeds them.
ClosedCaption
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2010
- 53,233
- 6,723
- 1,830
And you're responding to me too. Welcome to the loser club
JoeB131
Diamond Member
Right. "The Bible Code.... you mean the one that keeps predicting the end of the world that never happens?
Remodeling Maidiac
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #45
I respond to lots of people but focus on none. Sorry to break it to you but you're not important enough to garner any focus.
Now off with you boi
ClosedCaption
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2010
- 53,233
- 6,723
- 1,830
I'm in other threads too...Multi Tasking yanno.
- Sep 16, 2012
- 66,870
- 62,615
- 3,605
No, I think that is the end of it. I stated my case. The media does you're thinking for you, and I showed you how foolish the thoughts they were giving you were. There isn't much more to it.Another highly intellectual post.Yeah, because you saw it on TV, it has to be true. Because CFR media tells you it is so, must be so, right?
Don't stop now....
Where exactly is ISIS going to hide a chemical weapons munitions plant, how is it going to establish an economy and get a labor force to produce the munitions that the CIA, Mossad, and M16 wouldn't find about it? And why haven't our airstrikes taken it out? That's because allied intelligence services would know about them, and we would take them out. They aren't a nation, they are a funded rebel/terrorist network supplied with what they need to create chaos and change. That is all they are.
Oh, wait, I'm sorry, that would involve THINKING for yourself . . . and you like to have the TV and the CFR/RIIA media do all of that complicated reasoning for you. If the establishment doesn't tell you how the world works, then you certainly can't be bothered figuring out it for yourself.
Remodeling Maidiac
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #48
I haven't commented on any media source. In fact, until reading this thread i hadn't heard this story.No, I think that is the end of it. I stated my case. The media does you're thinking for you, and I showed you how foolish the thoughts they were giving you were. There isn't much more to it.Another highly intellectual post.Yeah, because you saw it on TV, it has to be true. Because CFR media tells you it is so, must be so, right?
Don't stop now....
Where exactly is ISIS going to hide a chemical weapons munitions plant, how is it going to establish an economy and get a labor force to produce the munitions that the CIA, Mossad, and M16 wouldn't find about it? And why haven't our airstrikes taken it out? That's because allied intelligence services would know about them, and we would take them out. They aren't a nation, they are a funded rebel/terrorist network supplied with what they need to create chaos and change. That is all they are.
Oh, wait, I'm sorry, that would involve THINKING for yourself . . . and you like to have the TV and the CFR/RIIA media do all of that complicated reasoning for you. If the establishment doesn't tell you how the world works, then you certainly can't be bothered figuring out it for yourself.
But don'tlet that stop your asinine ASSumptions
- Sep 16, 2012
- 66,870
- 62,615
- 3,605
So you never heard about the "Rat Line," huh? It was a piece by Pulitzer-prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh about how the Obama administration funneled weapons from the former Gaddafi regime to Al-Qaeda rebels fighting to create the New Middle East project in Syria.
Pulitzer-Prize Winning Reporter Sy Hersh: Benghazi Is a HUGE Scandal … But Not For the Reason You Think
Beyond Partisan Politics: What Benghazi Is Really About
Pulitzer-Prize Winning Reporter Sy Hersh: Benghazi Is a HUGE Scandal ... But Not For the Reason You Think
A highly classified annex to the report, not made public, described a secret agreement reached in early 2012 between the Obama and Erdoğan administrations. It pertained to the rat line. By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria. A number of front companies were set up in Libya, some under the cover of Australian entities. Retired American soldiers, who didn’t always know who was really employing them, were hired to manage procurement and shipping. The operation was run by David Petraeus, the CIA director who would soon resign when it became known he was having an affair with his biographer. (A spokesperson for Petraeus denied the operation ever took place.)
The operation had not been disclosed at the time it was set up to the congressional intelligence committees and the congressional leadership, as required by law since the 1970s. The involvement of MI6 enabled the CIA to evade the law by classifying the mission as a liaison operation. The former intelligence official explained that for years there has been a recognised exception in the law that permits the CIA not to report liaison activity to Congress, which would otherwise be owed a finding. (All proposed CIA covert operations must be described in a written document, known as a ‘finding’, submitted to the senior leadership of Congress for approval.) Distribution of the annex was limited to the staff aides who wrote the report and to the eight ranking members of Congress – the Democratic and Republican leaders of the House and Senate, and the Democratic and Republicans leaders on the House and Senate intelligence committees. This hardly constituted a genuine attempt at oversight: the eight leaders are not known to gather together to raise questions or discuss the secret information they receive.
The annex didn’t tell the whole story of what happened in Benghazi before the attack, nor did it explain why the American consulate was attacked. ‘The consulate’s only mission was to provide cover for the moving of arms,’ the former intelligence official, who has read the annex, said. ‘It had no real political role.’
Hersh isn’t the first to report on this major scandal.
We’ve extensively documented that the bigger story behind the murder of ambassador Chris Stevens at the Benghazi embassy in Libya is that the embassy was the center of U.S. efforts to arm jihadis in Syria who are trying to topple the Syrian government.
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
19 cease fire violations led us to war. Without those violations Saddam would still be in power if he was alive.ISIS is using WMDs that the left said didn't exist in Iraq.
The U.S. believes ISIS, also known as ISIL, most likely used either mortar or rocket shells to deliver the chemical warfare agent. One official said those who fell ill had symptoms of breathing problems believed to be associated with mustard gas and not chlorine gas, which is another agent that its believed the Assad regime has used on its civilians in Syria.
Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told CNN's Wolf Blitzer, "If they do possess these kind of weapons ... my guess is they're more likely to have gotten them as old weapons left over in Iraq from the old WMD program there than they were likely to obtain them in Syria in some kind of a hidden cache of the regime's."
A U.S. official said ISIS had used chlorine in the past, but that it is hard to weaponize.
The major question for the U.S. intelligence community now is to determine exactly what happened, and if it is mustard gas, to try to figure out how ISIS came into possession of it. Officials tell CNN it may have come from old chemical weapons caches in Iraq or Syria that the U.S. does not know about.
It's also not known how much of the agent ISIS may have.
"Did ISIS find some mustard gas shells?" one official asked. "We think they did. We think they have used it."
U.S. investigating 'credible' reports that ISIS used chemical weapons - CNNPolitics.com
So Bush wasted 4000 lives in Iraq looking for mustard gas?
I don't remember him specifying that as the reason he lied us into a war.
We were FORCED to go to war because of ceasefire violations?
Why haven't North Korean ceasefire violations FORCED us to go to war there?
Can anyone help Uncle Grampa out with this one?
- Sep 16, 2012
- 66,870
- 62,615
- 3,605
I haven't commented on any media source. In fact, until reading this thread i hadn't heard this story.No, I think that is the end of it. I stated my case. The media does you're thinking for you, and I showed you how foolish the thoughts they were giving you were. There isn't much more to it.Another highly intellectual post.Yeah, because you saw it on TV, it has to be true. Because CFR media tells you it is so, must be so, right?
Don't stop now....
Where exactly is ISIS going to hide a chemical weapons munitions plant, how is it going to establish an economy and get a labor force to produce the munitions that the CIA, Mossad, and M16 wouldn't find about it? And why haven't our airstrikes taken it out? That's because allied intelligence services would know about them, and we would take them out. They aren't a nation, they are a funded rebel/terrorist network supplied with what they need to create chaos and change. That is all they are.
Oh, wait, I'm sorry, that would involve THINKING for yourself . . . and you like to have the TV and the CFR/RIIA media do all of that complicated reasoning for you. If the establishment doesn't tell you how the world works, then you certainly can't be bothered figuring out it for yourself.
But don'tlet that stop your asinine ASSumptions
Well, that's the point. This story doesn't have legs either. I have read the reports. That picture that has been posted with the story? It could be an actor for all we know, someone in make-up. There aren't even any credible sources for the story. This whole thing could just be a fiction. What is your point?
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
I've heard of Reagan's CIA providing satellite intelligence to Iraq in the eighties to aid them in chemical attacks on Iran.
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
ISIS is using WMDs that the left said didn't exist in Iraq.
The U.S. believes ISIS, also known as ISIL, most likely used either mortar or rocket shells to deliver the chemical warfare agent. One official said those who fell ill had symptoms of breathing problems believed to be associated with mustard gas and not chlorine gas, which is another agent that its believed the Assad regime has used on its civilians in Syria.
Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told CNN's Wolf Blitzer, "If they do possess these kind of weapons ... my guess is they're more likely to have gotten them as old weapons left over in Iraq from the old WMD program there than they were likely to obtain them in Syria in some kind of a hidden cache of the regime's."
A U.S. official said ISIS had used chlorine in the past, but that it is hard to weaponize.
The major question for the U.S. intelligence community now is to determine exactly what happened, and if it is mustard gas, to try to figure out how ISIS came into possession of it. Officials tell CNN it may have come from old chemical weapons caches in Iraq or Syria that the U.S. does not know about.
It's also not known how much of the agent ISIS may have.
"Did ISIS find some mustard gas shells?" one official asked. "We think they did. We think they have used it."
U.S. investigating 'credible' reports that ISIS used chemical weapons - CNNPolitics.com
Maybe ISIS got them from the Israelis.
The threat of terrorism is strategically used to create a national security context for U..S intervention in key regions of the globe. Prior to this, we used the Soviet threat to bring resource-rich parts of the 3rd world under the Eagle's protective wing (where we installed U.S. Friendly dictators like Pinochet and Hussein so that our largest corporations and biggest political donors could have access to raw material and cheap labor markets).
Republican voters have never understood this because they are strategically conditioned to mistrust all non-Republican information sources, including even science.
Ask a Republican to speak about Reagan's support of Hussein or the Afghan Mujihadeen, and you will draw a blank stare. Ask a Republican why Reagan sold weapons to Iran while he was talking tough about Middle East terrorism, and you will draw a blank stare. The world is filled with threats to our national security, but a cursory glance of Republican statecraft reveals how useful those threats have become to the Republican party's wider geopolitical goals. This is why Reagan sounded the terrorist alarm while simultaneously partnering with the world's leading terrorists).
Consider this. The Republican Party benefits greatly from a dangerously nuclear'ized ISIS. They also benefit greatly from a homeland attack. Why? Because it validates them as the party who takes terrorism seriously. It validates and makes possible their desire to increase our military footprint next to world's most vital and profitable resource.
The biggest threat to the GOP's electoral success at home and policy goals abroad is a stable Persian Gulf - one that didn't require U.S. intervention. If ISIS didn't exist, the GOP would benefit by making them stronger or lying about their power.
When the most financially powerful political party in your nation's history benefits from global instability and domestic terrorism, the incentive for evil goes way up.
GOD HELP US
Republican voters have never understood this because they are strategically conditioned to mistrust all non-Republican information sources, including even science.
Ask a Republican to speak about Reagan's support of Hussein or the Afghan Mujihadeen, and you will draw a blank stare. Ask a Republican why Reagan sold weapons to Iran while he was talking tough about Middle East terrorism, and you will draw a blank stare. The world is filled with threats to our national security, but a cursory glance of Republican statecraft reveals how useful those threats have become to the Republican party's wider geopolitical goals. This is why Reagan sounded the terrorist alarm while simultaneously partnering with the world's leading terrorists).
Consider this. The Republican Party benefits greatly from a dangerously nuclear'ized ISIS. They also benefit greatly from a homeland attack. Why? Because it validates them as the party who takes terrorism seriously. It validates and makes possible their desire to increase our military footprint next to world's most vital and profitable resource.
The biggest threat to the GOP's electoral success at home and policy goals abroad is a stable Persian Gulf - one that didn't require U.S. intervention. If ISIS didn't exist, the GOP would benefit by making them stronger or lying about their power.
When the most financially powerful political party in your nation's history benefits from global instability and domestic terrorism, the incentive for evil goes way up.
GOD HELP US
bravoactual
bravoactual
- Banned
- #55
You people bought each and every lie told to by bush/cheney et al. You believed the WMD because you were told to believe the WMD.
You wbelieved Saddam was in volved in Sept.11 because you told to believe Saddam was involved.
You believed Saddam had Nuclear Weapons because you were told to believe Saddam had Nuclear Weapons.
The fact that you people would rather believe the lies speak for themself. You do not care about being lied to because you prefer to believe the lies than to accept the truth.
You wbelieved Saddam was in volved in Sept.11 because you told to believe Saddam was involved.
You believed Saddam had Nuclear Weapons because you were told to believe Saddam had Nuclear Weapons.
The fact that you people would rather believe the lies speak for themself. You do not care about being lied to because you prefer to believe the lies than to accept the truth.
- Sep 16, 2012
- 66,870
- 62,615
- 3,605
- Sep 16, 2012
- 66,870
- 62,615
- 3,605
I thought you were probably unaware of the bullshit Obama has been up to. There is no difference between the internationalist bullshit that Obama has been up to, and the actions in the past of the Bush dynasty. Reagan was a front, a puppet of the Bush clan.
- Thread starter
- #58
Everyone else has it except Saddam, right???
Bullshit!!
He had them.....you fuckers say he didn't.
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
How many troops did your country send to fight Saddam? Were you among them?
- Thread starter
- #60
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
Race and the American Prospect: Essays on the Racial Realities of Our Nation and Our Time, edited by Samuel Francis
- Started by Hector12
- Replies: 1
-
-
The Left Exposes Itself Over White South African Émigrés- Started by excalibur
- Replies: 7
-
BREAKING: DNC moves to void leadership election of David Hogg, Malcolm Kenyatta"
- Started by excalibur
- Replies: 4
