“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Sunday, September 28, 2014

If Bush and Blair had not embarked on their Iraqi adventure, does anyone think the US would be helping Assad to destroy his enemies today?

Galloway in six minutes wraps up the case against the newest plan for the Middle East:

Isis urges more attacks on Western ‘disbelievers’

Group spokesman Adnani seems to be encouraging attacks like the killing of Lee Rigby


BAGHDAD


Supporters of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria from all over the world should attack citizens of Western states such as the US, France and UK, according to a statement by the group’s spokesman.
Abu Mohammed al Adnani urged the group’s supporters: “If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way, however it may be,” he said.

“Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him.”

Adnani seems to be encouraging attacks like the killing of Lee Rigby in 2012 who was knocked down and stabbed in London by Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale. The two Britons were members of al-Muhajiroun, a now-banned group which shared similar theories to Isis. There have been recent arrests of people suspected of planning similar attacks in Belgium and Australia.

Adnani also taunted US President Barack Obama and other Western “crusaders”, saying their forces faced inevitable defeat at the hands of Isis.

The US is building an international coalition to combat the extremist Sunni Muslim force, which has seized large expanses of territory in Iraq and Syria and proclaimed a caliphate erasing borders in the heart of the Middle East.

Adnani said the intervention by the US-led coalition would be the “final campaign of the crusaders”. “It will be broken and defeated, just as all your previous campaigns were broken and defeated,” he said.

READ MORE: WHERE DOES ISIS GET ITS MONEY?
ROBERT FISK: KERRY’S ISIS RHETORIC INSULTS OUR INTELLIGENCE
French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said the group’s call showed once again “the barbarity of these terrorists [and] why we must fight them relentlessly”.

In a statement, he added, using an Arabic acronym for the militants: “We must also eliminate the risk that Daesh represents to our security.”

US and French warplanes have struck Isis targets in Iraq, and on Sunday the US said other countries had indicated a willingness to join it if it goes ahead with air strikes against the group in Syria as well.
Isis recently killed a British aid worker, David Haines, and has threatened to kill another, Alan Henning. A third, John Cantlie, has appeared on an Isis video promising a series of reports.

British jets have carried out reconnaissance over Iraq but have so far not bombed any Isis targets.

Addressing Obama directly, Adnani added: “O mule of the Jews, you claimed today that America would not be drawn into a war on the ground. No, it will be drawn and dragged... to its death, grave and destruction.”

In his statement, Adnani criticised Kurdish fighters who are battling the Isis militants in both Syria and Iraq. “We do not fight Kurds because they are Kurds. Rather we fight the disbelievers amongst them, the allies of the crusaders and Jews in their war against the Muslims,” he said.

A US State Department notice described Adnani, born under the name Taha Sobhi Falaha, as the “official spokesman and a senior leader of Isis”. It described the Isis spokesman as the “main conduit for the dissemination of official messages”.

On Monday, Syrian Kurdish fighters halted an advance by Isis to the east of Kobani, a predominantly Kurdish town near the border with Turkey.

Don't Cry for Me, Damascus

When Irony Fails: Obama’s Syrian Airstrikes

The moment America expanded its anti-Isis war into Syria, President Bashar al-Assad gained more military and political support than any other Arab leader can boast. With US bombs and missiles exploding across eastern and northern Syria, Assad can now count on America, Russia, China, Iran, the Hezbollah militia, Jordan and a host of wealthy Gulf countries to keep his regime alive. If ever that creaking old Arab proverb – that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” – contained any wisdom, Assad has proved it true.
In his Damascus home, the Syrian leader can reflect that the most powerful nation on earth – which only last year wished to bomb him into oblivion – is now trying to bomb his most ferocious enemies into the very same oblivion. Sunni Saudis whose “charity” donations have funded the equally Sunni “Islamic State” now find their government supposedly helping the US to destroy it. As Shia Iran and its Hezbollah protégés battle the Sunni executioners and throat-slashers on the ground, US bombs and missiles rain down to destroy the enemies in front of them.
Not since Churchill found himself an ally of Nazi Germany’s erstwhile friend Stalin in 1941 can a president have found a fearsome antagonist transformed so swiftly into a brother-in-arms. But – and it’s a very big “but” – the Baathist Syrian regime is not so stupid as to take the word “friend” at face value. Neither should we. Obama is the last person with whom Assad would want to associate himself – as Vladimir Putin doesn’t need to remind him – and the Syrian regime will be watching with the deepest concern as America’s promiscuous use of air power spreads inexorably to include more and more targets outside its original stated aim.
Quite apart from the civilian casualties in Idlib province, America’s targeting of the al-Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra suggests that the Pentagon has more than Isis in its sights. How soon, for example, before a missile explodes in a Syrian regime weapons depot – by “mistake”, of course – or other government facilities? Since the US has decided to fund and train the so-called “moderate opposition” to fight Isis and the Syrian regime, why should it not bomb both sets of enemies? And how will Syrians who support whatever is left of these “moderates” react to the American bombs in Idlib which killed their fellow civilians rather than Assad’s forces – bombs, indeed, which appear to have been just as lethal as the munitions dropped on them by Assad’s aircraft?
As for the Gulf Arabs, not one has so far shown evidence that it has physically bombed any targets in Syria. Only Jordan has claimed to have attacked Isis; the rest of King Abdullah’s allies in the Arab “coalition of the willing” – how quickly we have forgotten that this was George W Bush’s expression for those nations which supported his 2003 Iraq invasion – appear to have limited their co-operation to providing airstrips, refuelling planes and perhaps patrolling the peaceful waters of the Gulf. In his hearings on Capitol Hill last week, the Secretary of State John Kerry was given an impatient grilling from Congressmen over just how many Arab aircraft would be dropping ordnance on Isis. Kerry fluffed his answers.
The Gulf Arabs, after all, have been here before. They remember clearly the exaggerated claims of military success in the air – of smart bombs that did not slaughter civilians, of cruise missiles that destroyed bunkers and training camps and “command and control centres” in 1991 and 2003. It all proved to be a very dodgy war menu. Yet now the Americans are re-cooking these old snacks for the Isis conflict.
Were these Islamist “warriors” really sitting around – drinking tea, perhaps – at “training camps” so that the Americans could kill them? Does Isis boast anything like a “command and control centre” – a bunker of computers and blinking target indicators – rather than just a clutch of mobile phones? Yet a “command-and-control centre”, no less, was said to have been destroyed.
And, as so often amid the excitement of yet another conflict escalation, the “experts” and decrepit ex-ambassadors on our screens need to leaf through a history book or two before explaining “our” actions. The “Islamic State” was created out of al-Qaeda in Iraq, which absorbed the anti-American resistance to American occupation, which in turn followed the illegal 2003 Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. If Messrs Bush and Blair had not embarked on their Iraqi adventure, does anyone think the US would be helping Assad to destroy his enemies today?
“Irony” doesn’t measure up to the words of the Middle-East’s “peace envoy” who this week transformed himself into a war envoy by holding out the prospect of more Western troops in the Muslim world. Is the Syrian regime supposed to laugh or cry?
Robert Fisk writes for the Independent, where this column originally appeared. 

129 comments:

  1. The movement towards
    America’s promiscuous use of air power spreads inexorably to include more and more targets outside its original stated aim.

    US Considers a No-Fly Zone to Protect Civilians From Airstrikes by ...
    New York Times-Sep 26, 2014
    WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has not ruled out establishing a no-fly zone over northeastern Syria to protect civilians from ...

    ReplyDelete
  2. I would love to hear the rebuttal to the last 45 seconds of Galloway’s debate.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yeah, now the Syrian Air Force can concentrate its bombs on the people that we're trying to help (the FSA.)

    A "No-Fly Zone" (for Syrian aircraft) is the next logical, if controversial, step.

    After that comes the air war with Syria. This will last about two days, and result in all Syrian aircraft being grounded for the remainder.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no FSA, on the ground, Rufus.
      The people we are trying to help, will be training in Jordon.

      Even President Obama agreed, before he didn't

      “This idea that we could provide some light arms or even more sophisticated arms to what was essentially an opposition made up of former doctors, farmers, pharmacists and so forth, and that they were going to be able to battle not only a well-armed state but also a well-armed state backed by Russia, backed by Iran, a battle-hardened Hezbollah, that was never in the cards,” the president said.

      Barack Obama rebukes Syrian ‘fantasy’

      Delete
    2. All politicians are bullshit artists (er, "debaters,") but, there obviously Is an FSA.

      And, for quite some time, now, they've been pounded on the one side by Assad's forces, and the other by IS. There Must be "something" to them.

      Delete
    3. All I know about the situation in Syria is what I read, Rufus.

      And what the President tells US is a great part of what is available to read.
      He obviously dismissed the FSA, before he embraced it.

      When McCain went to visit with the FSA, in Syria, he ended up meeting with Daesh and even al-Baghdadi.
      The multiple images of those meetings do not lie.

      Delete
    4. There is no FSA on the ground, in Syria.
      They hold no territory, they may have been a force, once upon a time, they may become a force in the future, but today, it does not exist as an "Active Partner".

      The President WAS correct, when he said that they (FSA) were going to be able to battle not only a well-armed state but also a well-armed state backed by Russia, backed by Iran, a battle-hardened Hezbollah, that was never in the cards,”

      And they will be unable to defeat the Daesh, as presently constituted, which even the US Congress acknowledges, as does the President. It will take upwards of a year to get whomever travels to Jordon, gets vetted, and then trained, ready to enter the fray.

      Delete
  4. "We must declare War on War so the outcome will be Peace upon Peace"

    Barack Obama and George Orwell - an entertaining 1:36

    "Don't let it happen, it depends on you"

    ReplyDelete
  5. Galloway says "there Is No Free Syrian Army.

    Then, his "solution" is to arm the Free Syrian Army.
    (then, throws in a reference to the Kurds, at the end, when he realizes that he's getting out of whack.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Galloway and the President agreed, then, there is no Free Syrian Army.

      Both of their solutions, to arm the Free Syrian Army

      Delete
  6. The map that I put up, upthread, will inform you that Kobane is way the hell and gone over to the North West of Iraqi Kurdistan, and the area of the feared and respected Peshmerga Fighters.

    It's an area of zero tactical, or Strategic, value (for the overall effort,) and there really IS NO Active, Local Partners, as far as an outsider can see.

    Air Strikes "might" be able to keep the IS beat away from the main town, but there doesn't seem to be anyone capable of going out and reclaiming the lost villages on the periphery.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "upthread" should be previous thread.

      Delete
    2. Especially with the Turkish military keeping the Turkish ethnic Kurds out of the fight.

      But even so, the Peshmerga fighters we supported near Mosul, were associated with the Iraqi Army.
      There is no communication between the Kurds that have allied themselves with the Assad regime and US.

      Delete
    3. According to local Arab and Kurdish sources, the Democratic Union Party (PYD) has been enlisting Arab loyalists in its armed wing, the People's Protection Units (YPG), in a bid to boost its credibility among Arabs and join efforts with the Syrian regime on the battleground against the opposition.

      The brigade's commander Hawas Jammo and another of its fighters, Osama Jasim al-Karot, are known to be regime collaborators who attacked anti-regime demonstrators in 2012, according to the Rihab News report and local Kurdish activists and journalists who spoke with Al-Monitor.

      On Dec. 24, the press agency of the pro-Barzani Yekiti Syrian Kurdish Party (PYKS) denounced the merging of the Abu Jabal Brigade with the YPG in the area of Tel Hamis, southeast of Qamishli. The Arab-populated town of Tel Hamis is one of the few rebel strongholds left in the northern Hassakeh province. The brigade's commander, Yusuf al-Abdullah from the Arab Sharabia tribe, is a member of the Popular Army, otherwise known as National Defense Army (NDA), a pro-regime militia whose local branch is headed by Mohammad Faris from the Tayy tribe.


      Read more:

      Delete
    4. So, while we might have some limited interest in killing the Daesh, even in such a remote region, we would have very little interest in helping the "Pro-Regime" Kobani Kurds, themselves.

      Delete
    5. Who then, but the Syrian Air Force would be ready, willing and able to support those forces battling the Daesh, in Kobani,

      That stands as an illustration as to the foolishness of grounding Assad' air force.
      They just add to the Coalition, they do not detract from it.

      The FSA is not engaged in the fight.

      Delete
    6. Nah, Assad's air force has not been attacking ISIS, "Anywhere."

      He's concentrating on the others (the FSA.) He made the correct (actually, quite brilliant) calculation a ways back that the Western Powers would come into the fight against ISIL, freeing his army up to concentrate on the "moderates."

      Delete
    7. There is no FSA, Rufus.
      The "Moderates" are not moderate, they are allied with Daesh.
      The "Moderates" sold that one fella that was beheaded to the chop shop.

      That is the fly in Obama's ointment, with regards to Syria.
      There is no "Active Partner", there is no FSA. it is a nonentity.

      Find a map with their territory highlighted, I can't.

      Delete
    8. Actually, I Did see such a map. However, it was on TV; I doubt that I could find it very quickly on the internet.

      Remember, a couple of weeks ago, the "IS flag will fly over the white house" guy? HE was killed by the FSA.

      Delete
    9. Here you go, Rufus.
      Syrian SitRep

      The war in Syria has drastically affected the reality on the ground in Syria, with multiple players controlling and influencing different areas of the country. It is no longer a matter of Bashar al-Asad versus rebels. There are multiple rebel groups, many of which are in conflict with each other as well as with the Asad`s Syrian Army. National borders no longer accurately define Syria, with certain groups controlling territory that crosses borders into Lebanon and into Iraq.

      Here is the first map I`ll show you, basically just to show you how complicated the conflict is, and how many different players are involved, including rebels, loyalists, the Syrian army, and Kurdish forces.


      It shows some FSA enclaves.

      But then, in the second map of Syria that is presented ...

      The FSA disappears

      This next map from Business Insider shows "Syraq" - the virtual irrelevance of the national borders of Iraq and Syria due to the new reality of ISIS which straddles the border and wishes to create a new Islamic Caliphate controlling international territory.

      There are lots of maps to choose from


      Delete
    10. If at first you don't succeed...

      Syrian SitRep

      Try again ....

      Delete
    11. Here is one from March, so it may be a bit 'dated', even so it lumps the FSA in with a variety of other 'rebels'.

      13 March 2014
      Syria: Mapping the conflict


      Are there 'rebels' not associated with the Daesh? Perhaps.
      Are they 'combat effective'? No, even President Obama admits that.

      Delete
  7. The over-arching Strategy is to keep the crazies out of the major oil fields.

    Everything else is just "tactics."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And to do that, the US should come to terms with Assad, not attack him.

      Delete
    2. Assad IS the only "Active Partner" the US could utilize in the fight against Daesh.
      If the US does not do so, it is an indication that the US is not 'serious' about fighting the "War on Terror".
      As authorized on 14SEP01.

      The lack of cooperation, it gives lie to the US intent.

      Delete
    3. I agree, which gives lie to the true intent of the US.

      It is not to 'Defeat, Destroy and Dismantle Daesh.

      The US did ally with Stalin, to defeat the dreaded NAZI.
      Assad does not pose a threat to the US, while across Party lines, in the US and in Europe, it is claimed that Daesh does.

      Delete
    4. Those claims are either false, or not taken seriously.
      To know what people really think, pay regard to what they do, rather than what they say.
      - George Santayana

      Proof is in the tasting.

      Delete
    5. Leaving all else aside, what is the One thing that we most want to accomplish?

      Above All?

      Protect those big oil fields.

      When all other attempts at logic fail, you can come back to that "one true truth."

      Let the rest read the "Tea leaves, chicken bones, cats' entrails, yada, yada, yada,"

      But, Job One: Protect the F'n Oil.

      Delete
  8. Several points on Galloway:

    1. In the British parliament, unlike our bullshit artists in the Conga Line, there is an actual debate, where it is one up against the entire house, not 90 seconds of reading notes to an empty chamber and television cameras. His having to present a plan in 60 seconds to a hostile chamber was not bad at all.

    2. Galloway states that with a cult of 20,000 murdering thugs running around in a territory the size of Britain. they have to have support of the locals or they would cease to exist. The support for ISIS is because the governance provided to the locals is hostile to their interest. Without the local support ISIS is history.

    3. Saudi does have 700 aircraft. Add to that Iraq, Turkey, Iran, Jordan and the Emirates and you are in the thousands.

    4. Turkey has the manpower and equipment.

    5. FUKUS was a source of destabilization in Libya, Iraq, Syria, Iran and all the countries surrounding Israel.

    6. We have been bombing Iraq and interfering in Iran for the past so years.

    7. There is really no reason that this problem could not be solved in the region. You will recall: That was Obama's first choice.

    Not bad for a six minute un-telepromted debate with open challenge from a chamber of competent orators.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 5. FUKUS was a source of destabilization in Libya, Iraq, Syria, Iran and all the countries surrounding Israel.

      See ISIS: A DECEPTIVE TOOL OF US-ISRAEL FOR “THE NEW MIDDLE EAST
      The Yinon Plan and the role of the ISIS


      Then for deeper background go to

      The Zionist Plan for the Middle East
      Translated and edited by Israel Shahak


      The program, it's moving right along ....

      Delete
    2. http://www.thedailystar.net/the-yinon-plan-and-the-role-of-the-isis-31469

      http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/The%20Zionist%20Plan%20for%20the%20Middle%20East.pdf

      Delete
    3. He's just a bullshit artist, like all the rest (U.S. and U.K.,) Deuce.

      The Daesh is strongly over-rated, especially in the "popularity" dept.

      Let me give you an example:

      Fallujah - The local tribes had taken control of Fallujah Before the IS arrived. The Daesh managed to take part of Fallujah away from the locals, BUT, the locals were able, By Force, to keep IS out of a large part of the town.

      On the "battle map," Fallujah is shown as belonging to ISIS, but, in reality, it only controls part of the town, and the locals control the rest.

      Delete
    4. AND, the Sunni tribes in Fallujah, and the rest of Anbar, Have Stated that they are willing to work with the Government IF the government will take heed of, and address their grievances.

      Delete
  9. Forbes -

    A new report showing the continued pileup of unpaid medical bills in states that didn't expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act is escalating criticism on these Republican-led areas of the country to expand the health insurance program for the poor.

    ReplyDelete
  10. 40-year-old Yakup Bulent Alniak leaves behind his wife and two children.
    World Bulletin / News Desk
    A Turkish aid worker who survived the Mavi Marmara incident in 2010 has been killed in a US-led air strike targeting ISIL positions in the Syrian city of Idlib, Turkish media has revealed.
    40-year-old Yakup Bulent Alniak was in Syria to carry out aid work ahead of the Islamic Eid al-Adha feast, organizing the distribution of meat of Syria's needy.
    Alniak, who in 2010 escaped unharmed when Israeli commandos raided IHH Humanitarian Relief's Gaza-bound Mavi Marmara aid flotilla, in which ten Turkish citizens were killed after being hit by live ammunition, had been in Syria for two months.
    He leaves behind his wife and two children.

    ReplyDelete
  11. .

    You can't but help but find it a little amusing to sit here and notice that the same people who over the last few years have been complaining about the US indulging in endless wars, about the lack of real US interests in either Europe or the ME, about how we should stop funding the wars there through foreign aid, about what a great job Obama has done in getting us out of foreign entanglements during his presidency, complaining about oil being the root of all our conflicts in the ME, etc. are now all of a sudden become certified hawks, bragging about every vehicle or refinery taken out by the 'coalition', excusing any lack of progress, politicking for an expanded war, justifying taking out the government of a foreign country, arguing we have to do it for the oil, etc.

    Nothing like war to stir the martial instincts.

    :o)

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is the preferred course, Quirk, then the practical course.

      There was never a doubt that the US was going to take military action.
      The only 'Real" debate, what form will that action take.

      The professional military, in the US and England,have been advocating for another invasion.
      Another occupation. Udaho Bob has advocated for that, as well.

      The "Rat Doctrine" of supporting local "Active Partners", while abstaining from inserting combat forces into the region is the smallest footprint the US has a hope of,while still accomplishing the stated goals.
      There were and still are those, here and in DC, that tell us that the "Rat Doctrine" is bound to fail.
      Then, just a day or two ago the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs was quoted in support of the "Rat Doctrine".

      So, while the course that the President is presently on, while not optimum from my view, not as strategically grand as constructing ethanol distilleries that would boost US output by 500%, it is superior to placing US troops directly in the fight.

      It would seem that advocating for air support of local forces option has won the political fight in DC, at least in the short term.
      Long term disengagement from the region, does not seem to be in the cards.

      Assisting Israel in its long term strategies, is.
      Learn it, live it, don't have to love it.

      So, to keep those that advocate for direct US involvement in the fray, it is important to make the successes of the "Rat Doctrine" as widely known as possible.

      Delete
    2. So, to keep those that advocate for direct US involvement in the fray, from winning the day it is important to make the successes of the "Rat Doctrine" as widely known as possible.

      Delete
    3. While I would certainly support Deuce's premise that the locals could do it all 'on their own', there is not a snowball' chance in hell that the US will allow that to happen.

      Delete
    4. That's because ISIS is a DIRECT threat to the American WAY.

      Hamas, Hezbollah and the assorted various other palestinians/arab/islamic groups that murdered Jews 1st, Israelis 2nd and Americans 3rd was not important.

      let's remember Hezbollah murdered HUNDREDS of American Marines, assorted Palestinians? Have ASSASSINATED an American Politician (Bobby Kennedy), Diplomats, heck even American Diplomats seeking to get Palestinians signed up fro the Fulbright scholarships have been murdered:

      In October 15, 2003, a U.S. embassy convoy was on a visit to Gaza to interview Palestinian candidates for Fulbright scholarship programs in the United States. The convoy consisted of three fully armored but unmarked Suburbans. The first vehicle was occupied by the diplomats on the interview mission. The second vehicle was occupied by American contract protective security specialists: John Branchizio (36), John Linde (30), and Mark Parsons (31). The third vehicle had agents of the Diplomatic Security Service on a “route and area familiarization” trip.

      Just after the convoy entered the Gaza Strip from the Erez checkpoint, an explosion totally destroyed the second vehicle in the motorcade, killing the three specialists. A U.S. embassy document states that the device appeared to have been “placed under the road and remotely detonated as the vehicles passed.”

      Delete
    5. Not the 'American Way', but the United States of America, "O"Rdure.

      Certainly anyone that travels to a conflict zone, to a country where there is and has been a Civil War waging since 1948, takes upon themselves certain inherent risks.
      Those risks taken by individual are not a threat to the US.
      Involving the US in those conflicts is what threatens the American Way.

      Delete
    6. Even if we were to accept your premise, "O"rdure, it is not Syria that poses a threat to US, but the conflict in Israel/Palestine that does.
      The US relationship with Israel is what has created a threat to the American Way.

      Thanks for that clarification.

      Delete
    7. What and who is "O"rdure?

      I am "What is "Occupation" or WiO

      I guess you are still seeing little Jews under your bed again..

      Delete
    8. A side note. Did "Jack Hawkins" try (and fail) to make a point? (again)

      One cannot read our resident Iranian Firster "Jack" and even attempt to make sense of his delusions.


      Delete
    9. Let's all remember that Jack Hawkins, AKA the Rat, AKA Farmer Rob, aka dozens of ANON sign ons is the blog's paid Iranian Apologist and Jew hater.

      Disinformation, lies and misdirection, slander at Israel, Jews, Judaism, Who is a Jew, and Zionism are his hourly screeds.

      All his points are suspect.

      Delete
    10. Jack HawkinsSun Sep 28, 01:10:00 PM EDT
      Not the 'American Way', but the United States of America, "O"Rdure.
      Certainly anyone that travels to a conflict zone, to a country where there is and has been a Civil War waging since 1948, takes upon themselves certain inherent risks.
      Those risks taken by individual are not a threat to the US.
      Involving the US in those conflicts is what threatens the American Way.




      Notice how he is claiming that the arab israeli war/conflict is a civil war?

      Delusional

      Par for the course.

      Delete
    11. Jack HawkinsSun Sep 28, 01:13:00 PM EDT
      Even if we were to accept your premise, "O"rdure, it is not Syria that poses a threat to US, but the conflict in Israel/Palestine that does.
      The US relationship with Israel is what has created a threat to the American Way.
      Thanks for that clarification.



      A complete crock of shit. But that doesn't stop Jack from commenting above his pay grade on every subject, every thread...

      A textbook narcissist...

      Delete
    12. .

      My comment was not addressed to those here who propose war as the solution to all problems but merely to those who can turn on a dime. It just makes me chuckle.

      .

      Delete
  12. "Never get outta of the boat ...

    Never get out of the boat.
    Absolutely goddamn right.
    Unless you were going all the way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yakup Bulent Alniak must have missed that part of the movie.
      Or he did not bother to heed the lessons learned by others..

      Delete
  13. Jack HawkinsSun Sep 28, 12:57:00 PM EDT
    So, to keep those that advocate for direct US involvement in the fray, from winning the day it is important to make the successes of the "Rat Doctrine" as widely known as possible.


    Notice the craving for attention by making up and inventing "doctrines" after the fact to then claim some sick "elephant bar blog" fame.

    Narcissist...

    Or a 5 year old.

    Either way?

    crap from the crapper

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You don't get it, WiO.

      The "Rat Doctrine" is as fluid, intuitive, changeful.......as life itself.......it can be

      1) do nothing
      2) do a little
      3) do a lot

      depending.................

      perhaps on what side of the bed one gets up on in the morning

      Delete
    2. Wrong, again, Robert Peterson.

      That was not posted by desert rat.
      Why did you leave off the date time stamp. Once again your lying ways have caught up with you.

      Delete
    3. As to whatever "O"rdure wrote, I'll wait for the Cliff Notes version.

      Delete
  14. If Obama hadn't taken the troops out too soon we wouldn't be in this pickle.

    Since others repeat endlessly, I might as well too.............

    Bombing jihadis is futile, says top British general
    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/Defence/article1464818.ece


    However the Kurds would be 'active partners'.

    ReplyDelete
  15. How does one not notice that the fortunes of the headcutters have reversed since we started bombing them?

    They "were" gaining territory, now they're losing it.

    How does that go unseen by the "top general?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What's the difference between a "head cutter" and a jihadist that using .45 cal?

      Nothing.

      israel, killed over a thousand of them this summer, much to the complaints of the blog's 3 amigos.

      In the end, Hamas? Moslem Brotherhood? ISIS? Assad? Fatah? Hezbollah? Revolutionary Guards?

      all the same.

      just wear different hats.

      they all scream "allah akbar" and hate the USA and Israel.

      may they all die.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. Just ignore them in place, that's the Quirk Program.

      If the rest of the world did not need their oil, I would give that a try.
      It works well in Indonesia and India, where millions of Muslims do not bother US.

      As for Israel, those Europeans to move there, choose to live in the ghetto.
      Their choices are on them, not their neighbors, and it is not the responsibility of US to protect them from their choices.

      Delete
    4. .

      How does one not notice that the fortunes of the headcutters have reversed since we started bombing them?

      None of which impacts on the observations made about the miraculous transformation we have seen involving doves turned into hawks, a feat worthy of that new TV series Wizard Wars.


      They "were" gaining territory, now they're losing it.

      How does that go unseen by the "top general?"



      Hmmm. I must have missed that part. I have seen vehicles taken out, training facilities and infrastructure bombed, a couple contested dams liberated. As for territory? Not so much.

      .



      Delete
    5. As for Israel, those Europeans chose to move there, choose to live in the ghetto.

      Delete
    6. As oted earlier, Quirk, as long as it is local forces on the ground, it is the best of the possible options.

      Delete
    7. Well, then, Quirk, you just haven't been paying attention. The Kurds have recovered a Lot of ground, and villages, up around Irbil, Mosul, and Sindar.

      Delete
    8. You had noted, Quirk, that it would be the Kurds with hundreds of miles of 'front' to defend.

      I said the tables would be turned, and they have been.

      That you wish to discount the reversal of the Daesh at the dams, in Iraq, no matter.
      The Daesh still lost them, and have moved from offense to defense, in Iraq. Whether or not you noticed.

      Delete
    9. Willful ignorance, is still ignorance.

      Delete
    10. As for "Doves to Hawks:" I've been on record for years supporting a large expansion of our Ethanol program. I even put forth an idea, several years ago, of an ethanol refinery in every county, or four or five in every congressional district.

      But, those that thought as you do won the day. No such program was ever able to get off the ground. So, we have what we have - a huge dependency on foreign oil. So, here we go.

      And, yes, I'm too much of a Patriot to root against my country when the planes are in the air.

      Delete
    11. .

      If the rest of the world did not need their oil, I would give that a try.

      This is merely an extension of the fluctuating need for war as a solution by some here.

      At least to me, there appears a certain inconsistency here. For years the rat has been arguing the need for the US to flood the markets with ethanol so that we can become independent of the ME and its problems. Now it would seem that regardless of the level of energy independence we achieve we will still be committed to combat in the ME in order to guarantee the needs of the rest of the world.

      Today, I have not been arguing against the various positions posed by people here but merely pointing out with a chuckle the inconsistency on the part of some .

      .

      Delete
    12. .

      You had noted, Quirk, that it would be the Kurds with hundreds of miles of 'front' to defend.

      I said the tables would be turned, and they have been.



      Nonsense.

      The IS advance has been stopped. I indicated that was a legitimate objective for the US bombing attack, providing time and space for the Kurds and the Iraqi army to regroup and defend themselves. I said the Kurds had hundreds of miles around their area to defend. They still do. The battles have been fluid. Since the US attacked Syria, the battlefield has expanded to Syria/Iraq. When it comes to 'territory', any gains in one area have been offset by losses in others your pollyannish view of the war not withstanding.

      .

      Delete
    13. .

      And, yes, I'm too much of a Patriot to root against my country when the planes are in the air.

      Good lord, spare me. Nobody here is rooting against their country. However, celebrating a victory here or there is some distance from advocating the expansion of the war to set up a 'no fly' zone and take out Assad's air force.

      .

      Delete
    14. That Is. Not. True. Quirk.

      There has been No territory gained in Iraq by IS since the U.S. started bombing.

      There was, briefly, a story about them overrunning an Iraqi base North of Fallujah, that was rather quickly debunked.

      In the meantime, they have been kicked off the Mosul Dam, shooed away from the Haditha Dam, and been kicked out of villages all over Northern Iraq (including those "Christian" Villages up by Sindar.

      Delete
    15. .

      Willful ignorance, is still ignorance.

      This coming from the rat. I have gone from a chuckle to a chortle. Soon, I will be rolling on the floor laughing my ass off.

      .

      Delete
    16. And have not "advocated" setting up a No Fly Zone to take out Assad's air force; I have only said that that is likely what will happen.

      Delete
    17. Your version of Rat remains a figment of your imagination, QuirkSun Sep 28, 03:57:00 PM EDT

      If it has not happened, yet, Quirk, likely it won't.

      You usually do not 'get' the joke.
      Explaining them, not my style.

      Delete
    18. .

      You usually do not 'get' the joke.


      Perhaps, it's your delivery.

      .

      Delete
  16. Rufus is right, the head cutters have been mostly slowed or stopped. Throwing the gears into reverse is some thing else again according to the majority opinions I have read.

    I too have a Doctrine.

    It is "The Bob 'Active Partner' Doctrine."

    "The very best sex spirituality and physically is with a consenting active partner of the opposite sex who is of age."

    ;0

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Done in private, of course......

      Delete
    2. And with due consideration of birth control, STD's, other minor things etc ect............

      Delete
    3. And don't whatever you do try to have sex and drive a car.

      Delete
  17. Seattle Seahawks off today I think.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That means I have nothing much to do......

      dang it

      Delete
  18. let’s remember Hezbollah murdered HUNDREDS of American Marines, assorted Palestinians?

    Those marines were not on an American ship in international waters. They were armed US combat troops in Lebanon. They were killed by Lebanese. Most Americans would do the same to foreign troops taking sides in a civil war such as American troops killing Irish and German mercenaries in The War between the States. Hezbollah had more righteousness killing American troops in Lebanon than Israelis murdering American troops on a non-combat US ship in the Mediterranean.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Never forget who attacked unarmed US Navy vessels, the Koreans and the Israeli

      While the NorKs did capture the ship, they did not murder crew members.
      The Israeli murdered US sailors. on the high seas.

      Never Forget

      Delete
    2. Deuce ☂Sun Sep 28, 04:04:00 PM EDT
      let’s remember Hezbollah murdered HUNDREDS of American Marines, assorted Palestinians?

      Those marines were not on an American ship in international waters. They were armed US combat troops in Lebanon. They were killed by Lebanese. Most Americans would do the same to foreign troops taking sides in a civil war such as American troops killing Irish and German mercenaries in The War between the States. Hezbollah had more righteousness killing American troops in Lebanon than Israelis murdering American troops on a non-combat US ship in the Mediterranean.



      Ah, back to the Liberty.

      Yes America was spying on a friend and Israel attacked that ship.

      America accepted the apology, you did not.

      Now Hezbollah, funded by Iran, intentionally targeted the Marine Barracks.

      An attack you call "righteous"

      How low you have sunk.

      Delete
    3. It was righteous from their point of view. You have made the claim that it was righteous for Israel to attack the Liberty, because the US was spying on your first love, Israel. Then you stumble around and claim it was an accident, which everyone of the survivors says is a lie. Who do we believe, the Israeli firsters or the US survivors. No one made a claim that the marine barracks was an accident. The Late Great Reagan put them in Lebanon. Why? You don’t know. I do and so did his defense secretary:

      In 2002, the Presidential Oral History Program at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center of Public Affairs interviewed Caspar Weinberger about the six years (1981-1987) he spent as Ronald Reagan’s Secretary of Defense. Stephen Knott, the interviewer, asked him about the bombing of the U.S. Marines barracks in Beirut on Oct. 23, 1983, which killed 241 Marines.

      Here’s his answer:
      Weinberger: Well, that’s one of my saddest memories. I was not persuasive enough to persuade the President that the Marines were there on an impossible mission. They were very lightly armed. They were not permitted to take the high ground in front of them or the flanks on either side. They had no mission except to sit at the airport, which is just like sitting in a bull’s eye. Theoretically, their presence was supposed to support the idea of disengagement and ultimate peace. I said, “They’re in a position of extraordinary danger. They have no mission. They have no capability of carrying out a mission, and they’re terribly vulnerable.” It didn’t take any gift of prophecy or anything to see how vulnerable they were.

      When that horrible tragedy came, why, as I say, I took it very personally and still feel responsible in not having been persuasive enough to overcome the arguments that “Marines don’t cut and run,” and “We can’t leave because we’re there,” and all of that. I begged the President at least to pull them back and put them back on their transports as a more defensible position. That ultimately, of course, was done after the tragedy.

      Delete
    4. Knott also asked Weinberger about “the impact that the tragedy had on President Reagan.”

      Weinberger: Well, it was very, very marked, there was no question about it. And it couldn’t have come at a worse time. We were planning that very weekend for the actions in Grenada to overcome the anarchy that was down there and the potential seizure of American students, and all the memories of the Iranian hostages. We had planned that for Monday morning, and this terrible event occurred on Saturday night. Yes, it had a very deep effect. We talked a few minutes ago about the strategic defense. One of the other things that had a tremendous effect on him was the necessity of playing these war games and rehearsing, in which we went over the role of the President. The standard scenario was that “the Soviets had launched a missile. You have eighteen minutes, Mr. President. What are we going to do?”

      He said, “Almost any target we attack will have huge collateral damage.” Collateral damage is the polite way of phrasing the number of innocent women and children who are killed because you’re engaging in a war, and it was up in the hundreds of thousands. That is one of the things, I think, that convinced him that we not only had to have a strategic defense, but we should offer to share it. That was another of the things that was quite unusual about our acquiring strategic defense, and which now seems largely forgotten. When we got it, we said he would share it with the world, so as to render all of these weapons useless. He insisted on that kind of proposal. And as it turned out, with this cold war ending and all, it didn’t become necessary.

      One thing that disappointed him most was the reaction of the academic and the so-called defense expert community to this proposal. They were horrified. They threw up their hands. It was worse than talking about evil empire. Here you were undermining the years and years of academic discipline that you shouldn’t have any defense. He said he simply did not want to trust the future of the world to philosophic assumptions. And all the evidence was that the Soviets were preparing for a nuclear war. They had these huge underground cities and underground communications. They were setting up environments in which they could live for a long time and keep their command and control communications capabilities. But people didn’t want to believe that and therefore didn’t believe it.

      R

      Delete
    5. Why did the US get entangled into Lebanon? Who destabilized Lebanon, none other than our greatest of all allies: Israel:

      The timeline from from Wikipedia:

      On June 6, 1982, Israel initiated Operation "Peace for Galilee" and invaded Lebanon ostensibly to create a 40 km buffer zone between the PLO and Syrian forces in Lebanon and Israel.The Israeli invasion was tacitly approved by the U.S., and the U.S. provided overt military support to Israel in the form of arms and matériel. However, what the U.S. agreed to support and what Israel did were altogether two separate matters. (Screwed again by Israel) Nevertheless, the U.S.’ ‘apparent support’ for Israel’s invasion of Lebanon taken in conjunction with U.S. support for Lebanese President Bachir Gemayel and the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) alienated many.

      Bachir Gemayel was the legally elected president, but he was a partisan Maronite Christian and covert associate of Israel.

      These factors served to disaffect the Lebanese Muslim and Druze communities in Lebanon. This animosity was made worse by the Phalangist, a right-wing, largely Maronite-Lebanese militia force closely associated with U.S. backed President Gemayel.

      The Phalangist militia was responsible for multiple, bloody attacks against the Muslim and Druze communities in Lebanon and for the 1982 atrocities committed in the PLO refugee camps, Sabra and Shatila, while the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) provided security and looked on.


      The Phalangist militia’s attacks on Sabra and Shatila were purportedly a response to the September 14, 1982, assassination of President-elect Bachir Gemayel. Amine Gemayel, Bachir's brother, succeeded Bachir as the elected president of Lebanon, and Amine continued to represent and advance Maronite interests.

      All of this, according to Robert Fisk, served to generate ill will against the MNF among Lebanese Muslims and especially among the Shiites living in the slums of West Beirut and around the Beirut International Airport where the U.S. Marines were located.

      Lebanese Muslims were manipulated into believing the MNF, and the Americans in particular, were unfairly siding with the Maronite Christians in their attempt to dominate Lebanon. Muslim feelings against the American presence were "exacerbated when counter-battery missiles lobbed by the U.S. Sixth Fleet hit innocent by-standers in the Druze-dominated Shuf mountains."

      Colonel Timothy J. Geraghty, the commander of the U.S. 24th Marine Amphibious Unit (MAU) deployed as peacekeepers in Beirut during the incident, has said that the American and the French headquarters were targeted primarily because of “who we were and what we represented” (Israel) and that,

      It is noteworthy that the United States provided direct naval gunfire support—which I strongly opposed for a week—to the Lebanese Army at a mountain village called Suq-al-Garb on 19 September and that the French conducted an air strike on 23 September in the Bekaa Valley. American support removed any lingering doubts of our neutrality, and I stated to my staff at the time that we were going to pay in blood for this decision.

      The naval gunfire support Colonel Geraghty referenced was from four U.S. warships: the USS Virginia, USS Arthur W. Radford, USS Bowen, and USS John Rodgers. Prior to September 19, the USS Bowen had fired an interdiction mission on September 7, and the USS Bowen and USS John Rodgers had together fired another interdiction mission on September 16 to intimidate Syrian and Druze militia firing on the Marines.[40]

      Delete
    6. I hope that answers your question.

      Delete
  19. The U.S. views the affiliate, known as the Nusra Front, as a terrorist group, but Syrian rebels have long seen it as a potent ally against both the Islamic State extremist group -- which is the main target of the coalition -- and Syrian President Bashar Assad's forces.

    Syrian rebels, activists and analysts have warned that targeting the Nusra Front will inject more chaos into the Syrian conflict and indirectly help Assad by striking one of his main adversaries. The U.S. insists it wants Assad to step down, but is not targeting his forces, which are best placed to benefit from the airstrikes.


    The FSA is the Nusra Front, which is al-Qeada, which is Daesh.

    Israel prefers Daesh (al-Qeada) in Syria, over the Alawites, Christians and their Kurdish allies

    Israel’s Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren told the Jerusalem Post that Israel so wanted Assad out and his Iranian backers weakened, that Israel would accept al-Qaeda operatives taking power in Syria.

    Which is just one reason why Mr Obama has been, shall we say, conflicted.

    ReplyDelete
  20. The peshmerga on the Mullah Abdullah Bridge are quick to praise American forces, who recently expanded the air campaign to Syria in coordination with a coalition of Arab allies. Progress has been steady in Iraqi towns further west, where the peshmerga, backed by airstrikes, have managed to retake territory. But one-third of Iraq is still under the control of the Sunni militants.

    Across the Mullah Abdullah Bridge, some 90 Islamic State fighters live among the residents, the peshmerga said — most of them in hiding, afraid of bombardment from the air.

    "Airstrikes very good," said one of the fighters in broken English, withholding his name because he's not supposed to speak to the media. "But we need more."

    The unit in Mantiqa said it received a few new guns donated by several European countries to boost their offensive against the jihadi group, although they were unsure which country they came from. Sheikhwasani said that the weapons deliveries, while appreciated, are not nearly enough to guarantee their position on such a narrow front line.

    Still, the fighters say they will hold their position on the bridge as long as they have to, and are prepared for the outcome, whatever it may be. "We said goodbye to our families," said Sheikhwasani, "not see you soon. We came here to defend our land and our families — even if it means we never see them again."

    Peshmerga - Those Who Die

    ReplyDelete
  21. Protesters demonstrating against the recent Israeli military operation in Gaza have launched a fresh picket at the Port of Oakland in California, preventing an Israeli-owned container ship from unloading its cargo.

    A picket of about 200 pro-Palestinian demonstrators campaigning under the title “Block the Boat” assembled on Saturday alongside the Zim Shanghai, a massive, 300-meter commercial vessel. No cargo was unloaded after members of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union refused to work on the ship, citing safety fears due to the crowd of protesters and police.

    One of the protest organizers, Steve Zeltzer, said: “I think it was a big victory today for those who are opposed to the policies of Israel in Gaza.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Israel prefers Daesh (al-Qeada) in Syria, over the Alawites, Christians and their Kurdish allies

      Israel’s Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren told the Jerusalem Post that Israel so wanted Assad out and his Iranian backers weakened, that Israel would accept al-Qaeda operatives taking power in Syria.

      Delete
    2. Similar protests were held against Hamas's import to the USA of products except since Hamas MAKES nothing no protest could be held.

      Hamas spokesperson stated "we do not MAKE silly consumer goods, we only serve Allah"

      Delete
    3. What was that spokesman's name, when and where did he say it?

      Or are you fabricating quotes, once again?

      Delete
  22. ISIS is good for Israel

    Video of Toyota trucks delivered to FSA utilized in the Daesh attack on Iraq

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know whe de "Bro" is, Rat, but you'll notice he was careful to say that the trucks were "a match for" the trucks that ISIL uses.

      Delete
    2. That is a very interesting video. Forget who he is; is he right, or more correctly, where is he wrong?

      Delete
    3. Built in the US and not sold in Syria.

      Delete
    4. Plus ...
      He understands the importance of Ambassador Oren's statements.

      Israel prefers Daesh (al-Qeada) in Syria, over the Alawites, Christians and their Kurdish allies

      Israel’s Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren told the Jerusalem Post that Israel so wanted Assad out and his Iranian backers weakened, that Israel would accept al-Qaeda operatives taking power in Syria.

      Delete
    5. The "small" Toyota is built in the U.S.?

      Anyway, they're ubiquitous all over the ME. Saddam's troops had probably a thousand of them.

      It would be interesting to run down the VIN number on one of them, though. :)

      Delete
    6. Yeah, the model that they were using were the Toyotas specially modified for US Special Forces.

      ISIS Drives Texas-made Toyota Trucks Apparently Modified for U.S. Special Forces
      September 18, 2014 by ajfloyd

      http://theinternetpost.net/2014/09/18/isis-drives-texas-made-toyota-trucks-apparently-modified-for-u-s-special-forces/

      Delete
    7. Toyota builds the Tacoma down in Texas, but I believe these are the Hilux model (not built in the U.S.)

      Toyota Hilux

      Delete
  23. >>>>>Nadhim Zahawi, the Baghdad-born Conservative MP for Stratford-on-Avon, said that while it was right to join a coalition of Arab Sunni states, Jordan, UAE, Saudi Arabia, and the US, "we have to be realistic about what that can achieve".<<<<


    Nadhim Zahawi, the Baghdad-born Conservative MP for Stratford-on-Avon.................:)


    'The bottom line: One week we didn't have a strategy to deal with ISIS, and the next, President Obama said we did. But we don't. No one has thought through all the subtle permutations of the impact that our strategy will have on the politics of Iraq, the perception of Sunni tribes, or even the impact of our air war on ISIS military forces. They are already trying to blend into the population, daring us to kill civilians to get at them. Might our bombing campaign alienate more Sunnis than it brings to our side?

    It appears that we are doing what we are doing in Iraq and Syria not to achieve a particular end, but rather to simply give the appearance that we are doing something. This kind of "strategy" could easily lead to disaster when you have civilians in Washington who don't have a clue of what they are doing.'

    September 28, 2014
    Brits have joined the fight but do we know what we're doing?
    By Rick Moran

    Excellent analysis of the strategic situation in Iraq from the Independent that quotes a British general who questions whether the coalition knows what it's doing.

    Concerns over the House of Commons's overwhelming vote on Friday to join the United States in carrying out air strikes on the Islamic State (Isis) in Iraq reflect the complications..................

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/09/brits_have_joined_the_fight_but_do_we_know_what_were_doing.html

    I do not know what advice Shakespeare would give in this situation.

    Except that, based on his life from what we know, he might head to London to make some money writing for the theater, then retire back home.

    Which might be the best unspoken advice of all.....










    ReplyDelete
  24. This will be the most "unsatisfying" of all wars. Because:

    (1) It's not really a "war," and, thus, there will be no United States armies kicking ass, and taking ground.

    (2) The true objective will remain unstated; to wit: To protect the ME oil fields.

    A desultory campaign of aircraft lazily loitering over a distant land, waiting for orders to pick off a Humvee, or pickup truck just isn't the stuff of which hot fantasies are made.

    ReplyDelete
  25. September 28, 2014
    The Lie That Will Start a World War
    By Mike Konrad

    The Muslim claim on the Temple Mount is the biggest fraud in history. No one dares say it, but unless someone does, another world war will erupt.

    >>Moshe Dayan, after taking the Mount in 1967, unwisely gave the administration of the area back to the Jordanian-controlled local Waqf, who had been in charge of the area before the Israelis captured it and have been in charge ever since. A Waqf is an irrevocable endowment of property to an Islamic religious or charitable trust. It may never be sold to infidels. Lest one think this is unique to Islam, the Jewish National Fund set was set up to purchase land in Mandatory Palestine that was covenantally to remain in Jewish hands forever, never to be sold – or even leased, initially – to Arabs.

    Now you know why every house or acre is fought over; both sides see land as an eternal trust.<<

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/09/the_lie_that_will_start_a_world_war.html

    This will give rat something for his rodent teeth to chew on for about a month......


    If only the Seahawks were playing today................

    :(

    (because I have posted it doesn't at all mean I agree with it all or in part)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .

      The Muslim claim on the Temple Mount is the biggest fraud in history. No one dares say it, but unless someone does, another world war will erupt.


      Riiighhhtttt.

      Where did this come from? Oh yea, the American Thinker by way of Obumble.

      .

      Delete
    2. heh

      I was wanting to get the rat chewing, not you.

      The writer is probably wrong about starting WW III.

      ;0;)

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. By the way, Thor, that article you put up the other day was published in American Thinker.

      You know the one, about all the names and stuff.....

      It was a good article.

      Delete
    5. 'The biggest fraud in history?'

      h,mmmm,,,,,,,...........

      The Donation of Constantine comes to mind..........or that one that you pulled off about the color coded strapless bras

      Delete
  26. In my link, upthread, it told of the 80, or 90 headcutter dudes, that had "blended into the local population" to avoid being killed.

    Well now, this might be irritating to the local population, but a terrorist army that has buried its vehicles, and heavy weapons, and is hiding behind the local hajibs Is Not Doing Much "Terrorisin'."

    And, a terrorist force that is frozen in place in a village, or small town, is just waiting to die.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. blended into the local population

      hiding behind the local hajibs


      Sounds like advice given them by their pals, Hamas.......

      Delete
    2. Hama, largely, IS "the local population."

      These guys are an outside cancer, unlikely to ever be embraced.

      They can hide out from the drones (for awhile,) but when Peshmerga Headquarters sends a tank, and/or a couple of armored personnel carriers down to the area it's all over but the dyin'.

      Delete
    3. ISIS is a cancer certainly, but they are all local guys, whether from Syrian or Iraqi Sunni areas.

      Delete
    4. Local Guys?

      You moron, half of them are from Chechneya.

      Delete
    5. Ignorance is bliss, and Robert Peterson is a very happy fellow.

      That data point was not emphasized in the American Stinker.

      Delete
    6. He must think that the fellas with those red beards, that they are Israeli agents.
      As was posited at "InfoWars" in the comments section.

      Robert would fit right in there, those folks are low information residents that think they are news junkies, too.

      Delete
  27. Nadhim Zawali-

    The MP from Stratfor Upon Avon, is a Kurd.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadhim_Zahawi

    He seems to have gotten out when the getting was good.......

    I have a hunch there might be a little Kurdish oil money in his family's bank account.

    That is a 'meteoric rise'.

    ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Betcha a dollar, Robert Peterson, that the MP is an Englishman.

      Delete
    2. You wouldn't pay up so why bet?

      Anyway I think you are right and if he wasn't an English earlier in his life, he sounds as if he is there days.

      Sometimes the best choice of all is getting the hell out of Dodge.

      Delete
    3. Burned once, shame on you.

      Burned twice, shame on me.

      Delete
  28. “A no-fly zone and secure zone are absolutely necessary,” Erdogan said yesterday. He said that Turkey can’t stay out of the U.S.-led coalition seeking to destroy the al-Qaeda breakaway group.

    Erdogan is seeking to “suffocate” the autonomous Kurdish region that emerged in Syria during the civil war, Sebahat Tuncel, a lawmaker from the pro-Kurdish People’s Democracy Party, said last week.

    ReplyDelete
  29. For those who don't know, the Federal Reserve was setup as a private entity in the early part of the 20th century as a sort of superbank to regulate America's money supply. It is supposed to oversee the big banks, including the many that were "too big to fail," but these disclosures find that it's been doing just the opposite

    Something like a Randian soap opera, the Federal Reserve apparently operates on a consensus model where anyone who disagrees with what currently is going on is pushed aside. If you agree and agree, you may get promoted and go off to work for a better salary in a big bank. If you ever disagree or suggest that the Federal Reserve perform its job, you are likely to be unceremoniously fired.

    In one curious case, some upstart who thought that Goldman Sachs should be held accountable for its many conflicts of interest was one of those who "didn't fit in," and was summarily dismissed. The difference was that she disappeared with many privately taken recordings of what really happens inside the Fed. Which is, apparently, a whole lot of nothing at great cost to the American taxpayer.

    Unsurprisingly, this means that the banks they are supposed to be regulating can do whatever they want, since there is not even no whistleblowing, there isn't even a whistle to blow. Whatever it's original purpose for the United States financial system, Federal Reserve as an institution has gone belly up with no end in sight. It's hard to imagine any possibility of reform for an organization that not only denies anything is wrong, but also refuses to open up any sort of records to the public eye

    ReplyDelete
  30. Here's A Quick Guide To The Startling New Scandal Involving Goldman And The New York Fed

    ProPublica and This American Life published a massive report alleging severe conflicts of interest between the New York Federal Reserve and Goldman Sachs.

    "The Ray Rice video for the financial sector has arrived," Michael Lewis said.

    The report is driven by secret recordings that suggest that the NY Fed regulators were too soft on Goldman and therefore possibly other banks as well.

    The recordings come from former New York Fed bank examiner Carmen Segarra, who was fired after just seven months on the job.

    The article is nearly 6,000 words long, and the podcast runs for over an hour.

    And there's lots of background.

    We read and listened. Here are 16 important pieces of information from the story.

    Here they are:

    1. Back in 2008, the NY Fed hired the Columbia University finance professor David Beim to conduct an "unlimited access" and totally secret investigation of the NY Fed. Basically, he was to investigate how the Fed failed to catch the financial meltdown and how it might do a better job in the future.

    2. Beim interviewed "dozens" of New York Fed employees and found that the Fed's biggest problem was its own culture: He said the NY Fed was too submissive to the big banks it was supposed to supervise.

    In his report, Beim also notes that Fed employees were afraid of contradicting upper-level management WITHIN the Fed. He writes in his report:

    [Fed employees] don't want to be too far outside from where management is thinking. The organization does not encourage thinking outside the box. After you get shot down a couple of times, you tend not to go there anymore. Until I know what my boss thinks, I don't want to tell you.

    3. Beim offered the NY Fed advice for the future: It must hire expert examiners "who were unafraid to speak up" to prevent the next crisis.

    4. Fast forward one year. The Congress gave the Federal Reserve "even more oversight authority." So the NY Fed started to hire people to examine the big banks because they could potentially hurt the financial system again.

    5. Carmen Segarra, an experienced lawyer, was one of the people who were hired. And she got placed at Goldman Sachs.

    6. And then, she was fired after only seven months on the job.

    7. So last year, Segarra sued the NY Fed. She said she was fired because she refused to "back down" from her negative finds about Goldman Sachs.

    8. The case was thrown out this year without ruling on the merits, saying, "The facts didn't fit the statute under which she sued."

    9. But here's the fun part: Segarra secretly recorded audio while she was working at the NY Fed. She was "worried about what she was witnessing" and wanted to have evidence of the inside happenings "in case the events were disputed."

    She talks about a meeting with Mike Silva, a senior Fed official stationed at Goldman, who has been working there for almost 20 years:

    He started off by talking about how he wanted to give me some mentoring feedback. And then he started talking about the importance of credibility. And he said, you know, credibility at the Fed is about subtleties and about perceptions, as opposed to reality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 10. All together she recorded 46 hours of meetings and conversations. And what's fascinating about these recordings is that Fed deliberations are rarely public — they're confidential by regulation.

      11. Her recordings allegedly show that, despite all of Beim's suggestions, the NY Fed didn't change its culture. It was still submissive to the big banks.

      An unidentified man says of the recording:

      We're not obligating them to do anything necessarily.

      Segarra says the following about this type of culture:

      I think it would've been just as scary if I had gone in there and found like an aggressive Fed that was really mean and sort of you know trying to nitpick. I think that all that power sort of being abused, that's a very scary thing. But when you find the opposite, the absence of exercise of power, the absence of the exercise of responsibility, then you are just like this is a problem because you've been made the overarching regulator, and the country is looking to you to make things better after the crisis, and if you can't do it, then we need to talk about who can.

      12. And in Segarra's case specifically, the NY Fed was submissive to Goldman. Her recordings allegedly show that it had a hard time establishing its authority and was "reluctant to push hard against Goldman" at times.

      An unidentified man on the recording says:

      I would add to his comments in that I think we don't want to discourage Goldman from disclosing these types of things in the future, and therefore maybe you know some comment that says don't mistake our inquisitiveness, and our desire to understand more about the marketplace in general, as a criticism of you as a firm necessarily. Like I don't want to, I don't want to hit them on the bat with the head, and they say screw it we're not gonna disclose it again, we don't need to.

      13. Segarra wasn't willing to conform to the status quo while she was working for the NY Fed and was often outspoken about her "negative" findings. Colleagues apparently found her "abrasive" and then complained, according to ProPublica.

      Segarra's supervisor, Jonathan Kim said to her:

      I want you to be successful. OK? There are — there's information coming in, there's opinions that are coming in. Right? ... it's really about how you are perceived, right? So if there's more a general sort of feedback that says that it's not only one person, it's not only two persons, but many more people who are perceiving that you're — um, you have more sharper elbows, right? Or that you're sort of breaking eggs. I think the message has come back to me saying you know that you really need to make these changes quickly in order for you to be successful.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. This is an outstanding story ...

      http://www.propublica.org/article/carmen-segarras-secret-recordings-from-inside-new-york-fed?utm_campaign=bt_twitter&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

      Inside the New York Fed: Secret Recordings and a Culture Clash

      A confidential report and a fired examiner’s hidden recorder penetrate the cloistered world of Wall Street’s top regulator—and its history of deference to banks.

      by Jake Bernstein

      Thanks for the lead, Anonymous !

      Delete
  31. >>If you go several centuries back, we end up being related to King Henry VIII, Vito Genovese, and a tribe of Hottentots.

    Muslim culture denies this elementary piece of arithmetic, because, like other patriarchies, traditional Muslims count only the male lineage – son, father, grandfather, great-grandfather, male, male, male, male, male. This certainly simplifies the arithmetic, but it results in a completely delusional idea about one’s relatives. There are no pure male lineages, I’m afraid.<<

    September 29, 2014
    A Modest Proposal to Quench Ethnic Hatred in the Middle East
    By James Lewis

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/09/a_modest_proposal_to_quench_ethnic_hatred_in_the_middle_east.html


    That damned racist rag American Thinker, always throwing squishy shit in Quirk's shoes.

    ReplyDelete