Now whenever i hear anyone talk about a western 'democracy' i take the word 'democracy' to mean ''run by the central bankers''
Last edited:
Are we as a society being kept from discussing the big issues?
- Thread starter muir
- Start date
-
- Tags
- right wing nut job
Now whenever i hear anyone talk about a western 'democracy' i take the word 'democracy' to mean ''run by the central bankers''
http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/news/9-times-used-chemical-weapons-WMDs.html
[h=1]9 times US and partners used chemical weapons and WMDs —and got away with it[/h] [h=2]"International law" only applied to enemies of imperialism[/h]
August 29, 2013
There has been no evidence presented that the Syrian government is responsible for the chemical attack that took the lives of hundreds of civilians. But the U.S. government and Britain claim that their allegations alone give them the moral authority to launch military action, in direct violation of international law. What they leave out is the long history of the U.S. government and its partners using chemical weapons and other weapons of mass destruction—and getting away with it. Here are nine examples:
#1: World War I, 1914-1918
Modern chemical weapons were first used on a mass scale during World War I, when the imperialist powers of the world sent their soldiers to kill and die in clouds of mustard gas and phosgene to re-divide the world amongst themselves. Germany was the first to use this deadly new weapon, but all sides of the inter-imperialist war joined in. Gas attacks killed 90,000 soldiers and civilians, while being linked to another 1.2 million casualties. Over 10 percent of all chemists in the United States were involved in the production of chemical weapons during the war, and the government ordered 3,000 tons of its own homegrown type of gas.
#2: Britain in Mesopotamia in 1920
Facing a heroic uprising staged by the people of Iraq, British colonial authorities authorized the use of chemical weapons against civilian populations, arguing in their “Manual of Military Law” that “the rules of International Law… do not apply in wars with uncivilized States and tribes”. Winston Churchill, then the civilian head of the British air force, stated that he was “strongly in favor of using poisoned gas against uncivilized tribes,” which he argued, “would spread a lively terror.”
#3: The nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945
In one of the most infamous crimes against humanity, the U.S. government dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 even though top military and political leaders knew that the war was effectively over. Approximately 180,000 people were killed immediately by the bombings, and hundreds of thousands died later of radiation poisoning in the first and only use of nuclear weapons in human history.
#4: Agent Orange in Vietnam, 1961-1971
Over the course of the Vietnam War the U.S. military dropped over 20 million gallons of a deadly chemical weapon called Agent Orange. This campaign killed or maimed 400,000 Vietnamese and led to 500,000 babies being born with debilitating birth defects, in addition to devastating the economic life of the Vietnamese countryside by destroying all plant life that the chemical contacted.
#5: Iran-Iraq War
During the 1980-1988 war between Iraq and Iran, the United States supported the Iraqi government led by Saddam Hussein against the post-Shah Iranian government. Secret documents that have recently been declassified show that the CIA was fully aware of Iraq’s brutal and illegal use of chemical weapons but still continued to provide intelligence and other forms of political and military support. Pictured is Hussein with Donald Rumsfeld, who personally managed the chemical weapons sales.
#6: Depleted uranium in Gulf War
In the 1991 and 2003 invasions of Iraq, the U.S. military used depleted uranium—a chemically toxic and radioactive waste product of nuclear energy—in armor-piercing munitions. The use of DU has been linked to higher radioactivity, cancer rates, and congenital malformations among Iraqi civilians and U.S. soldiers. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) estimated that the U.S. fired 1,000 to 2,000 metric tons of depleted uranium in 2003.
#7: White phosphorus in Fallujah, 2005
During the murderous assault on Fallujah in 2004, the U.S. military used white phosphorous chemical weapons as part of its campaign to level the Iraqi city, ultimately forcing 300,000 people to flee their homes. Although the Pentagon still officially denies that it used this brutal weapon, they are contradicted by countless eyewitnesses. One Marine who fought in the battle remembered, “I heard the order to pay attention because they were going to use white phosphorus on Fallujah… Phosphorus burns bodies, in fact it melts the flesh all the way down to the bone... I saw the burned bodies of women and children.”
#8: Israeli use of white phosphorous against people of Gaza, 2008-09
In its 2008-2009 massacre of hundreds of civilians in Gaza, Israel extensively used U.S.-made white phosphorous shells to terrorize densely populated areas – a form of collective punishment for daring to defy colonial aggression. Sabah Abu Halima, a Palestinian victim of an Israeli white phosphorous attack, recalled, “The fire was like lava, my family was burnt and their bodies turned to crisps.” Israel also has repeatedly used thousands of cluster bombs, which wreak enormous civilian damage.
#9 Military testing of radioactive chemicals in St. Louis communities, 1953-1954 and 1963-1965
The United States Military conducted top-secret experiments on the citizens of St. Louis, Missouri, for years, exposing them to radioactive compounds without their knowledge or consent. Approximately 10,000 residents of the Pruitt-Igoe public housing complex, primarily poor and Black, were exposed to the most chemicals. The Army told them they were testing harmless smoke screens, but in fact they were testing the chemical for potential use against the Soviet Union.
[h=1]9 times US and partners used chemical weapons and WMDs —and got away with it[/h] [h=2]"International law" only applied to enemies of imperialism[/h]
August 29, 2013
There has been no evidence presented that the Syrian government is responsible for the chemical attack that took the lives of hundreds of civilians. But the U.S. government and Britain claim that their allegations alone give them the moral authority to launch military action, in direct violation of international law. What they leave out is the long history of the U.S. government and its partners using chemical weapons and other weapons of mass destruction—and getting away with it. Here are nine examples:
Modern chemical weapons were first used on a mass scale during World War I, when the imperialist powers of the world sent their soldiers to kill and die in clouds of mustard gas and phosgene to re-divide the world amongst themselves. Germany was the first to use this deadly new weapon, but all sides of the inter-imperialist war joined in. Gas attacks killed 90,000 soldiers and civilians, while being linked to another 1.2 million casualties. Over 10 percent of all chemists in the United States were involved in the production of chemical weapons during the war, and the government ordered 3,000 tons of its own homegrown type of gas.
Facing a heroic uprising staged by the people of Iraq, British colonial authorities authorized the use of chemical weapons against civilian populations, arguing in their “Manual of Military Law” that “the rules of International Law… do not apply in wars with uncivilized States and tribes”. Winston Churchill, then the civilian head of the British air force, stated that he was “strongly in favor of using poisoned gas against uncivilized tribes,” which he argued, “would spread a lively terror.”
In one of the most infamous crimes against humanity, the U.S. government dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 even though top military and political leaders knew that the war was effectively over. Approximately 180,000 people were killed immediately by the bombings, and hundreds of thousands died later of radiation poisoning in the first and only use of nuclear weapons in human history.
Over the course of the Vietnam War the U.S. military dropped over 20 million gallons of a deadly chemical weapon called Agent Orange. This campaign killed or maimed 400,000 Vietnamese and led to 500,000 babies being born with debilitating birth defects, in addition to devastating the economic life of the Vietnamese countryside by destroying all plant life that the chemical contacted.
During the 1980-1988 war between Iraq and Iran, the United States supported the Iraqi government led by Saddam Hussein against the post-Shah Iranian government. Secret documents that have recently been declassified show that the CIA was fully aware of Iraq’s brutal and illegal use of chemical weapons but still continued to provide intelligence and other forms of political and military support. Pictured is Hussein with Donald Rumsfeld, who personally managed the chemical weapons sales.
In the 1991 and 2003 invasions of Iraq, the U.S. military used depleted uranium—a chemically toxic and radioactive waste product of nuclear energy—in armor-piercing munitions. The use of DU has been linked to higher radioactivity, cancer rates, and congenital malformations among Iraqi civilians and U.S. soldiers. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) estimated that the U.S. fired 1,000 to 2,000 metric tons of depleted uranium in 2003.
During the murderous assault on Fallujah in 2004, the U.S. military used white phosphorous chemical weapons as part of its campaign to level the Iraqi city, ultimately forcing 300,000 people to flee their homes. Although the Pentagon still officially denies that it used this brutal weapon, they are contradicted by countless eyewitnesses. One Marine who fought in the battle remembered, “I heard the order to pay attention because they were going to use white phosphorus on Fallujah… Phosphorus burns bodies, in fact it melts the flesh all the way down to the bone... I saw the burned bodies of women and children.”
In its 2008-2009 massacre of hundreds of civilians in Gaza, Israel extensively used U.S.-made white phosphorous shells to terrorize densely populated areas – a form of collective punishment for daring to defy colonial aggression. Sabah Abu Halima, a Palestinian victim of an Israeli white phosphorous attack, recalled, “The fire was like lava, my family was burnt and their bodies turned to crisps.” Israel also has repeatedly used thousands of cluster bombs, which wreak enormous civilian damage.
The United States Military conducted top-secret experiments on the citizens of St. Louis, Missouri, for years, exposing them to radioactive compounds without their knowledge or consent. Approximately 10,000 residents of the Pruitt-Igoe public housing complex, primarily poor and Black, were exposed to the most chemicals. The Army told them they were testing harmless smoke screens, but in fact they were testing the chemical for potential use against the Soviet Union.
A syrian life is worth as much as an israeli life. There. Easypeasy. And haven't they been killing each other all over the place over stupid things like what stupid religion they stupidly are for pretty much millenia? And I'm the one who makes the impression I want war? Right.
No, I can't tell what kind of camera was used, but it appeared to be filmed at a news conference open to the media since he was standing in front of a standard media background. Any kind of video camera would work. You could do a better job with an iPhone even. It wouldn't have to skip like that, that is an edit. It is where something was clipped and then edited back together. Probably, if I wanted to look, there would be a non-edited version floating around on the internet somewhere.
I read lips. There are several places where the lips do not quite match what he is saying, and the audio is slowed down a bit.
There are obvious edits. The one at 5 seconds is very obvious.
Mr Natural Health man? I already don't think he's credible. In the interest of wanting to read both sides of the story I looked up "How do they detect sarin gas" and found this: http://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/what-are-chemical-weapons-and-how-do-they-work-1.1428229
Oh dear god. sigh. I'll go brush my teeth and if I survive maybe we can continue this chat another day.
Ignoring this point for now.
AND -- Infowars, Muir? Really? With the twilight zone theme and everything?
Last edited:
I'm glad you got that out....you know that you typed that...it will be good for you....good for your soul
When you dig into it you find that the violence is usually stoked by the same people
Well that's my point. How do you know it wasn't filmed on a mobile?
Yeah...there mst surely be another copy of a talk like that. Lets hope that it sees the light of day....i don't know what kind of crowd are they at the 'washington institute'. Are they the kind of crowd to be happy to show that stuff?
Oh so you are not only skilled at editing but you are a lip reader too? I hope you are not wasting your talents. You should work for the intelligence services with that kind of skill set
What matters is what is being said, not whether bits have been cut out.
You realise it only needs the saudis or the US or israel to hand some chemical weapons to the mercenaries they are paying to fight in syria, right?
I looked at the link you posted...what aspect of it were you drawing my attention to?
Lol no it doesn't kill you stone dead unless you ingest it in a large enough portion for example the kind of doses of it you find in rat poison. Killing peoiple dead wouldn't work at all would it? you'd have people dropping dead and people would be up in arms. No they want to get rid of it because it is an industrial byproduct, but in a way that the public won't notice, so they hit you with low but constant doses
oh don't worry you can just skip forward passed the darkly humourous twilight zone bit
Look, I have no love for Alex Jones and infowars, and all its gimmicky video editing. However, the content itself and the point the video is trying to make is not wrong. If you have a few news channels on your cable or satellite provider and you flip through them at different times of the day, you can sometimes catch the same script on a different news station. I noticed it myself a few times, entirely by accident. It makes sense, though, given that many of these channels are in fact owned by the same network.
By the way, if you read the description, you'd note that the entire news clip reel was actually taken from the Conan O'Brien show. It's actually a stint he does every once in a while poking fun at the 'news repeaters' called The Media Reacts. This isn't something grafted together by Alex Jones & Co. You can find the links to some of the same content on the Conan's youtube channel right here and here.
Last edited:
[MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION]
White phosphorous shells/bombs are not classed as a chemical weapon or a WMD. It is classed as an conventional incendiary and is covered under an annex of the Geneva Convention called Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects. The restriction on this is to not use them on civilians. The goal of incendiaries is to burn things, not poison them with chemicals.
DU is not a chemical weapon or a WMD, it is used for hardened armor and penetrators. It is toxic, but so is lead and a lot of other things. The point is to shoot through things with a really hard bullet, not poison it with DU shavings.
Mustard gas on the other hand IS a chemical weapon because the point of it is to poison things with the chemical. It is a very horrible weapon because unlike DU or a white phosphorus bomb, you can't see it coming and won't know you've been infected until maybe hours later when your skin starts bubbling off. The only clue is that it smells like garlic or horseradish, and moderate doses will not kill you - only make you wish that it had. Most casualties of it had a very long and agonizing death.
White phosphorous shells/bombs are not classed as a chemical weapon or a WMD. It is classed as an conventional incendiary and is covered under an annex of the Geneva Convention called Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects. The restriction on this is to not use them on civilians. The goal of incendiaries is to burn things, not poison them with chemicals.
DU is not a chemical weapon or a WMD, it is used for hardened armor and penetrators. It is toxic, but so is lead and a lot of other things. The point is to shoot through things with a really hard bullet, not poison it with DU shavings.
Mustard gas on the other hand IS a chemical weapon because the point of it is to poison things with the chemical. It is a very horrible weapon because unlike DU or a white phosphorus bomb, you can't see it coming and won't know you've been infected until maybe hours later when your skin starts bubbling off. The only clue is that it smells like garlic or horseradish, and moderate doses will not kill you - only make you wish that it had. Most casualties of it had a very long and agonizing death.
No, I don't want war, I have no particular love for either the israelis or the syrians, either, and considering the fact people are suicide bombing each other and having civil wars all the time in various portions of the middle east due to sectarian violence, I'd have to say there is somebody other than only jews and americans and rich corporations causing it.
Last I heard the sunnis and shiits and god knows who else were plenty busy killing one another.
Yes Muir, I both edit videos and read lips. You've got a problem with this? Too bad.
Yes it very much matters what parts were cut out, you can cut out parts of what is not said and edit it back together to have a completely different message. Duh.
If something is filmed on a mobile it decreases in quality but does not jump in the same manner as it would with an edit.
You realize that whoever really used the nerve gas, whether it was syria or the syrian rebels, can say whatever they want? Of course the syrian government wouldn't admit to it if they did, and of course the rebels will try to get the US involved. And as far as I can tell from my remote vantage point, the US is damned if we do, damned if we don't get involved. My choice would be don't.
Last I heard the sunnis and shiits and god knows who else were plenty busy killing one another.
Yes Muir, I both edit videos and read lips. You've got a problem with this? Too bad.
Yes it very much matters what parts were cut out, you can cut out parts of what is not said and edit it back together to have a completely different message. Duh.
If something is filmed on a mobile it decreases in quality but does not jump in the same manner as it would with an edit.
You realize that whoever really used the nerve gas, whether it was syria or the syrian rebels, can say whatever they want? Of course the syrian government wouldn't admit to it if they did, and of course the rebels will try to get the US involved. And as far as I can tell from my remote vantage point, the US is damned if we do, damned if we don't get involved. My choice would be don't.
Last edited:
Here's an article about the lobbyist at the washington institute:
http://www.businessinsider.com/top-...-with-iran-sink-sub-illicit-false-flag-2012-9
Who said anything about the jews? I said the israelis which is to mean the people who run israel. The people who run israel are the central bankers who also run the US
When you understand that they also own the 4 biggest oil companies it becomes clearer hwo they could create so much havoc in the middle east
I have explained already the dynamic at work in the aarab world and how the cabal have bought some members of OPEC such as saudi arabia and qatar
I read lips to and he said what he said. I have posted an article covering it above
I think he pretty clearly explains his views in the unbroken passages of speech
Doesn't editing take place after the filming?
Yes the rebels will try and justify US interference because that is what they are being paid to do
Why would assad hand his enemies a smoking gun? Do you think he has a death wish?
http://www.businessinsider.com/top-...-with-iran-sink-sub-illicit-false-flag-2012-9
Who said anything about the jews? I said the israelis which is to mean the people who run israel. The people who run israel are the central bankers who also run the US
When you understand that they also own the 4 biggest oil companies it becomes clearer hwo they could create so much havoc in the middle east
I have explained already the dynamic at work in the aarab world and how the cabal have bought some members of OPEC such as saudi arabia and qatar
I read lips to and he said what he said. I have posted an article covering it above
I think he pretty clearly explains his views in the unbroken passages of speech
Doesn't editing take place after the filming?
Yes the rebels will try and justify US interference because that is what they are being paid to do
Why would assad hand his enemies a smoking gun? Do you think he has a death wish?
We do know, there were no WMD's found and all the initial claims of their existence have since been proven to be false
have a look at the following article which explains the finding of the british chilcott inquiry: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/...-before-invasion-that-iraq-had-no-active-wmd/
Yes it is an inside joke amongst the assembled members of the media elite, that's why they all have a good ol belly laugh....they know there were no wmd's, bush knew it, i know it, dr kelly and the other UN weapons inspectors knew it, the only person who doesn't know it is you
Oh wow, now look at this:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/us_did_find_iraq_wmd_AYiLgNbw7pDf7AZ3RO9qnM
Wikileaks says there were WMDs in Iraq, muir... now go ahead and dismiss wikileaks as propaganda.
-You are probably not going to pay attention to the fact that they are quoting wikileaks and look at the whole New York Times thing.
-You are going to change the subject and throw more articles from websites with names like Resistance Now and Natural News and The Non-Sheep Absolute Unquestionable Truth Report.
This is not even my point, I am getting sucked into this ridiculous thread... I need to stop now.
Phospohorus undergoes a chemical reaction. it is a chemical weapon. Whether a weapon is a weapon of massed destruction depends on how it is used. if you dump enough of anything it will be a weapon of mass destruction
But i feel you are rather missing the point. A group of people are trying to make a moral case that they should be allowed under international law to go into another country and start bombing it because they claim that countries government has gassed its own people
I am showing the hypocrisy of that by showing the various atrocities committed by the countries who are trying to make a moral case by showing that they HAVE NO MORALS
Not to mention the fact that how can bombing the shit out of a country be a way of making right a moral wrong done to the people who will suffer from the bombing?
There is currently a massive refugee crisis as syrians are fleeing their country terrified that the US and israel are going to unleash all their expensive high tech ordinance on them
Chemicals burn as well.
They WERE used on civilians
DU was not needed to peirce the iraqi armour. DU was used to litter iraq with radiactive waste that is continuing to distort the DNA of the people there even today. It is difficult to imagine a more dirty weapon
You cannot see the radiation from the DU dust. it kills long after the initial explosion
Last edited:
We knew they had some chemical weapons because the US sold those to them. this has been declassified: http://www.storyleak.com/cia-files-us-aided-saddam-chemical-attacks/
The pretext used to scare the public was that the iraqis could launch wmd's against europe in 45 minutes. Not only would the small amount of chemicals that were found (which everyone knew were there before the war) that are mentioned in the article you posted a link to be ineffective but also the iraqis lacked the missile capability to send a chemical payload to europe
It was all lies and it was revealed to be lies
We knew he had some gas that he used against the kurds and the iranians but these were not a threat to the west
The UN is very clear. it says you cannot wage war on a country unless it attacks you first
Iraq did not attack the USA. The USA claimed it had 'WMD's' which is a vague term designed to scare the public
The UN weapons inspectors did not find anything that would be a threat to the west
This did not stop the US from waging war though
Once the US had invaded they did not find any weaponry that would have been a threat to the west and much of the revolutionary guards weaponry had been trashed in the first iraq war
1. This doesn't mean that Syria is the same thing, which is supposed to be what you're talking about. 2 million Syrians have been displaced. They have definitively found evidence that Sarin gas has been used. The regime has a history of suppressing uprisings with extreme violence and widespread slaughter of civilians.
2. I'm DEFINITELY not arguing that Iraq was justified. But you would go so far as to defend Saddam Hussein as an alright guy just trying to make his way in a cruel cruel world until the evil Americans stormed in and wrecked his utopia. HUMAN BEINGS are violent animals-- they always have been... less so now because of how soft we are in the west.
3. You have posted so many half-truths and ridiculous youtube videos that you don't even understand that I am willing to trust George Bush more than you-- and this has nothing to do with my own personal political views and everything to do with the way you argue your points.
And for crying out loud Sarin IS NOT the same thing as toothpaste!!!
That looks like the same exact video, and it was posted a year ago. Yes, edits are made after the filming, that is where you get the jumpiness, because parts are cut out and the person has moved a bit. If this video is indeed factual then it is awful, but it looks fake -- or at least heavily edited -- to me. So now you're a lip reader too, huh? But it is okay when you do it, is it but all suspicious when I do? phhbt. I'd at least like to know more about who this Patrick Clawson actually is and how much influence (if any) he actually has.
I don't know why assad would do that but when I search for information there are completely conflicting reports. ("You're lying!" "No, YOU'RE lying!" "No, you're lying!" "No, you're lying!") However, I find it difficult to believe that conflict in Syria has been manufactured solely by banking cabals and Israel. One organization I do have some trust and respect for, MSF, had this to say:
http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/news/article.cfm?id=6884&cat=voice-from-the-field
This is a quote from the article about the sort of thing that has apparently been happening in Syria for the past 20 years:
- See more at: http://www.doctorswithoutborders.or...cat=voice-from-the-field#sthash.86N41B1V.dpuf
There's BEEN a refugee crisis in Syria. That is not new and started before the US threatened strikes.
I don't know why assad would do that but when I search for information there are completely conflicting reports. ("You're lying!" "No, YOU'RE lying!" "No, you're lying!" "No, you're lying!") However, I find it difficult to believe that conflict in Syria has been manufactured solely by banking cabals and Israel. One organization I do have some trust and respect for, MSF, had this to say:
http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/news/article.cfm?id=6884&cat=voice-from-the-field
This is a quote from the article about the sort of thing that has apparently been happening in Syria for the past 20 years:
- See more at: http://www.doctorswithoutborders.or...cat=voice-from-the-field#sthash.86N41B1V.dpuf
There's BEEN a refugee crisis in Syria. That is not new and started before the US threatened strikes.
Last edited:
I said the government has lied to take us into war before. You said they hadn't lied so i proved that they had
I am making the point again after that detour that the government has lied once so why could it not be possible that they are doing it again?
1.Good it wasn't and neither is syria.
2. Syria has not attacked the US or Israel
3. The UN has not given the US or Israel permission to go to war
4. There is no proof that the assad regime has gassed its own people
5. it would make no sense for the assad regime to gas its own people as that would hand their enemies the perfect excuse
6. the western powers have a long precendent of false flags for example the iraq war and the gulf of tonking incident in vietnam
Where? what is a half truth? What is ridiculous about the youtube videos?
More fool you
If you evaluate how much you trust someone by how they argue their points rather than from waht they are saying then i think that is a really bad approach
I did not say it was
The article said that the UK company that sold what Kerry has called 'chemical weapons' to the syrians was in fact FLOURIDE. It sold syria the same stuff that your government puts in your drinking water
The point being that if flouride is a chemical weapon as kerry says it is then your government is launching a chemical weapons attack against the american public
Yes so what has that got to do with the fact that the guy clearly suggests that the US carry out a false flag. Why are you running so hard from what is staring you in the face?
The article also quotes him. Note how there has been no legal action after a year. Don't you think that if a news publication had misquoted soemone to stitch them up as saying something as damning as that the USA should orchestrate a false flag to go to war? Don't you think they would be sued???
I think everyone has a certain ability to read lips yeah
I thought it funny that you were claiming all sorts of skills neded to try and discredit a film that is perfectly legitimate
Now you're on the right track! yeah chase that one up
edit:
Patrick Clawson is the director of research at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), an inside-the-beltway Middle East policy institution that was originally spun off from the “pro-Israel” American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Clawson frequently appears in the press and in congressional hearings as a Mideast expert pressing a hawkish line on Iran.
http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/p...lawson_Patrick
You are aware that MSF is funded by wallstreet aren't you?
The carnage is bad though that the banker paid mercenaries have brought to syria
Last edited:
Even with the weapons what did Iraq have to do with 911. Nothing. They were from Saudi Arabia. Should we bomb them then? I always though it was convenient how 911 went down. It seem so pre packaged. They had all the answers didn't they....
Patrick Clawson is the director of research at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), an inside-the-beltway Middle East policy institution that was originally spun off from the “pro-Israel” American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Clawson frequently appears in the press and in congressional hearings as a Mideast expert pressing a hawkish line on Iran.
http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Clawson_Patrick
http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Clawson_Patrick
Yeah they even said before the attacks in their paper 'project for a new american century' that to achieve their policy objectives in the middle east they would need a new 'pearl harbour'....how convenient that shortly after that paper was published they got one!