James Corbett totally destroys the LIE that Soleimani was responsible for 600 American deaths

a reply to: Willtell

Corbett, this is the same person whom has been backing the Venezuela socialist regime, both Chavez and Maduro, and has been claiming that "the changes the Venezuelans want are really just being pushed by the CIA/U.S...

This Corbett person is among the people in the left who claim the attempt to take Chavez and Maduro from office were only instigated by the CIA/U.S. and not by the people... Which is BS of course...

Once again Corbett sides with a socialist terrorist, this time siding with the Iranian regime...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Corbett is not a leftist. He's a libertarian type.

Your just wrapped up in the left/right paradigm scam.

a reply to: Willtell

Libertarian type my rear... No matter how many times Corbett claims to be a libertarian, if he regurgitates the lies from leftwing dictators and terrorists from socialist countries it makes him a left-winger whom "keeps defending socialist dictators and terrorists from socialist countries."

Westerners like Corbett are similar to the following Iranian journalist. Corbett is in fact regurgitating Iranian propaganda, just like the following Iranian journalist.

Iran: Socialism’s ignored success story

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Yeah, Rand and Ron Paul and the GOP Senator from Utah are all left-wing supporters


That’s how wrong your analysis is



And you're regurgitating the lies of right-wing fascists.

You're on the wrong side of history; the side of the tyrants, colonizers, bigots, and Nazis.

a reply to: Willtell

C'mon man we know governments lie, that's why there are sayings like don't lie cheat and steal, the government doesn't like competition.

You're not going to convince anyone this goverment is corrupt on these boards, most people are too busy lapping up t h e goverment sponsorored cool aid, Its almost as if the programming is so successful as soon as trump is mentioned or even hinted as being involved there is a wave of attacks.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Yeah, Rand and Ron Paul and the GOP Senator from Utah are all left-wing supporters


That’s how wrong your analysis is

Can you excerpt where did I write Ron Paul, the GOP, etc are left-wingers?...

I wrote that CORBETT is not a libertarian as he keeps siding with left-wing dictatorships and makes false excuses for them.

originally posted by: Willtell
And you're regurgitating the lies of right-wing fascists.

You're on the wrong side of history; the side of the tyrants, colonizers, bigots, and Nazis.

ROFLMAO, so claims a LIBERAL/progressive/socialist whom sides every time with the liberal/left-wing groups whom want to suppress the voice of anyone whom disagrees with you...

I would be willing to bet that you are whiter than snow, like the large majority of the real fascists whom want to suppress the opinion of your political opponents, and even want to criminalize your political opponents...

Willtell my friend,

You know nothing. Nobody knows anything. Know you don't know, and others don't know, and come from a humble starting point that you all know nothing together. As one.

a reply to: More1ThanAny1

Suuuure... and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the founder of Iran-backed Iraqi militia Kataib Hezbollah, whom also died together with Suleimani/Soleimani in the attack was also there just to find peace with the world...

A reminder to left-wingers whom are trying to portray Suleimani/Soleimani as an angel, here is what the New Yorker wrote in September 2013 in an article titled "The Shadow Commander."

...
Suleimani took command of the Quds Force fifteen years ago, and in that time he has sought to reshape the Middle East in Iran’s favor, working as a power broker and as a military force: assassinating rivals, arming allies, and, for most of a decade, directing a network of militant groups that killed hundreds of Americans in Iraq. The U.S. Department of the Treasury has sanctioned Suleimani for his role in supporting the Assad regime, and for abetting terrorism. And yet he has remained mostly invisible to the outside world, even as he runs agents and directs operations. “Suleimani is the single most powerful operative in the Middle East today,” John Maguire, a former C.I.A. officer in Iraq, told me, “and no one’s ever heard of him.”
...

www.newyorker.com...

But keep on making up lies about "Suleimani/Soleimani being an angel and not killing hundreds of Americans, whom knows how many of our allied forces, and wounding thousands of Americans and others..."

I seriously cant #ing believe the left is backing Terrorists now.

What in the # is becoming of the USA?

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: More1ThanAny1

Suuuure... and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the founder of Iran-backed Iraqi militia Kataib Hezbollah, whom also died together with Suleimani/Soleimani in the attack was also there just to find peace with the world...

A reminder to left-wingers whom are trying to portray Suleimani/Soleimani as an angel, here is what the New Yorker wrote in September 2013 in an article titled "The Shadow Commander."

...
Suleimani took command of the Quds Force fifteen years ago, and in that time he has sought to reshape the Middle East in Iran’s favor, working as a power broker and as a military force: assassinating rivals, arming allies, and, for most of a decade, directing a network of militant groups that killed hundreds of Americans in Iraq. The U.S. Department of the Treasury has sanctioned Suleimani for his role in supporting the Assad regime, and for abetting terrorism. And yet he has remained mostly invisible to the outside world, even as he runs agents and directs operations. “Suleimani is the single most powerful operative in the Middle East today,” John Maguire, a former C.I.A. officer in Iraq, told me, “and no one’s ever heard of him.”
...

www.newyorker.com...

But keep on making up lies about "Suleimani/Soleimani being an angel and not killing hundreds of Americans, whom knows how many of our allied forces, and wounding thousands of Americans and others..."

A LOT of very strange Jingoistic opinions being spouted these days on sites like this that used to host free-thinking, skeptical individuals. You've literally become a mouthpiece for the rich and famous, I'm embarrassed for you.

Suleimani was a horrible, repressive individual.

But let's just go ahead and assume he killed 3,000 Americans, which is an extremely liberal estimate.

U.S.A.F. have killed +50,000 civilian Shia on their home soil, for geopolitical positioning. How many Shia/Iranian attacks have occurred on U.S.'s home soil for geopolitical positioning? How many innocent women and children have died? ZERO.

Yet Suleimani's a "terrorist."

Now let's imagine a reverse scenario where Iran invaded Canada based on a lie, to get to their maple syrup, killed over 100,000 Canadians/Americans for Maple syrup, and set up permanent installations. Let's imagine some American militia up in Canada threw some burning palm leaves into the Iranian Embassy.

I suppose, according to you, that would give them a right to send predator missiles and kill the highest ranking U.S. General, who was successful fighting Iranians during their invasion of Canada, during a time of relative peace. I suppose that you would consider American's terrorists for fighting off the Iranians occupying Canadian soil, too.

a reply to: Willtell

I'm not sure you realize this, but what you've presented is not FACTS, nor EVIDENCE. It's the opinion of a person you like. Simply saying "there's no evidence" is not evidence that someone lied about the evidence that has previously been provided. That's all corbett does in this video. You labeling it facts or evidence does not make it so.

a reply to: DustDoses

U.S.A.F. have killed +50,000 civilian Shia on their home soil, for geopolitical positioning.

I'm sure you've got proof of that, right? Also, does the US need to lose more forces than it takes out for the war to be just? I mean that's what you're really arguing here by putting numbers up, right? "We've killed more than them so we're the bad guys!" It's a ridiculous premise that sounded good in your head but upon any actual examination crumbles to bits. The winner of the war is almost always the bad guy in your presupposed world of morality.

How many Shia/Iranian attacks have occurred on U.S.'s home soil for geopolitical positioning?

Did you miss the attack on the embassy? Do you not know that an embassy is the sovereign soil of the nation whose embassy it is? In that attack on the embassy, 14 americans were injured and 1 was killed. In retaliation, we killed Soleimani.

How many innocent women and children have died? ZERO.

Soleimani killed 1,500 innocent iranians just a few months ago. Do they not count?

Yet Suleimani's a "terrorist."

How many attacks has the Quds force been responsible for? Who was the commander? So yeah, he was, by definition a terrorist.

Now let's imagine a reverse scenario where Iran invaded Canada based on a lie, to get to their maple syrup, killed over 100,000 Canadians/Americans for Maple syrup, and set up permanent installations.

Ahhh, cute. You had to go back 17 years to find some moral authority. Good job. Was invading iraq wrong? Sure. So would be abandoning it to whoever was the most brutal and able to maintain power. This is where you guys have always struggled, accepting that when you find yourself in a wrong position, you can't just erase it. You have to move forward on the best path possible.

Let's imagine some American militia up in Canada threw some burning palm leaves into the Iranian Embassy.

I suppose, according to you, that would give them a right to send predator missiles and kill the highest ranking U.S. General...

Oh now you're completely changing the analogy to suit your means. Soleimani orchestrated this attack. Mark esper is our equivalent to soleimani. If esper had orchestrated numerous provacative attacks on iranian forces and an attack on an iranian embassy, then yes Iran would be justified in taking him out, at least from their perspective. That's how wars work. Both sides are fighting, that's what makes it a war.

...during a time of relative peace.

It's not peaceful to attack our embassy. Even if you wish it was.

I suppose that you would consider American's terrorists for fighting off the Iranians occupying Canadian soil, too.

And you've summed it up brilliantly. You don't understand war and sides. You don't understand right and wrong. You only have a tenative grasp on perspective and it only allows you to view things from an anti-american one.

But before I get too far off, I have to ask, why should americans be fighting off iranians on canadian soil? Shouldn't the americans stay out of the business of others? If so, shouldn't Iran? Why is iran constantly heckling the US? Why are they always trying to cause problems? They even just nabbed a diplomat from the UK. What did the UK do? I guess my real question is, why do you view Iran as innocent and america as guilty when reality is so much more complex than that?

I honestly don't follow your post. You're saying from one side of your mouth

"shouldn't Americans stay out of the business of others"

Then from the other

"Soleimani killed 1,500 innocent iranians just a few months ago. Do they not count?"


Instead of thinking independently, you've become a mouth piece for the ruling class through manufactured political ideologies.


How about instead of Iran, we got after Pakistan's secret service ISI, who gave direct funding to the 911 hijackers and sheltered Bin Laden? How about we bomb the # out of the actual source of state sponsored terrorism, the house of Saud, who funded Al Qaeda, Afghan Taliban, and pretty much all forms of Salafist Jihadism?

You know, folks who have actually killed innocent Americans? Haven't really thought this one through, have you. Nor did the guy that pretty much destabilized the entire planet in an effort to win favor for his upcoming trial...

Bottom line, Iran has just as much business bombing the # out of North America as the U.S. has bombing the # out of the ME. That is, none at all.

originally posted by: DustDoses
I honestly don't follow your post. You're saying from one side of your mouth

"shouldn't Americans stay out of the business of others"

Then from the other

"Soleimani killed 1,500 innocent iranians just a few months ago. Do they not count?"


Instead of thinking independently, you've become a mouth piece for the ruling class through manufactured political ideologies.


How about instead of Iran, we got after Pakistan's secret service ISI, who gave direct funding to the 911 hijackers and sheltered Bin Laden? How about we bomb the # out of the actual source of state sponsored terrorism, the house of Saud, who funded Al Qaeda, Afghan Taliban, and pretty much all forms of Salafist Jihadism?

You know, folks who have actually killed innocent Americans? Haven't really thought this one through, have you. Nor did the guy that pretty much destabilized the entire planet in an effort to win favor for his upcoming trial...

Bottom line, Iran has just as much business bombing the # out of North America as the U.S. has bombing the # out of the ME. That is, none at all.

So you think rocket attacks on military bases and Embassy attacks should be ignored because other people have attacked Americans too?
Hmm, I think it's you who have not really thought things through... you've jumped to some conclusions about the link to the impeachment, though - which gave away your motives for believing Iran should be allowed to act with impunity. You're just another leftist who now supports Iran and terrorism because you see those things as a lesser evil to the US President.

a reply to: Willtell

100+ ppl want you banned (censored) for questioning the Pentagon "official story"???

WTF happened??

The TV mind control is very powerful.
Scary.

a reply to: Willtell

Don’t the American people ever LEARN?

The few that have are targeted as Conspiracist. Good luck
trying to convince anyone that's deluded by the beast of
politics and religion.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DustDoses
I honestly don't follow your post. You're saying from one side of your mouth

"shouldn't Americans stay out of the business of others"

Then from the other

"Soleimani killed 1,500 innocent iranians just a few months ago. Do they not count?"


Instead of thinking independently, you've become a mouth piece for the ruling class through manufactured political ideologies.


How about instead of Iran, we got after Pakistan's secret service ISI, who gave direct funding to the 911 hijackers and sheltered Bin Laden? How about we bomb the # out of the actual source of state sponsored terrorism, the house of Saud, who funded Al Qaeda, Afghan Taliban, and pretty much all forms of Salafist Jihadism?

You know, folks who have actually killed innocent Americans? Haven't really thought this one through, have you. Nor did the guy that pretty much destabilized the entire planet in an effort to win favor for his upcoming trial...

Bottom line, Iran has just as much business bombing the # out of North America as the U.S. has bombing the # out of the ME. That is, none at all.

So you think rocket attacks on military bases and Embassy attacks should be ignored because other people have attacked Americans too?
Hmm, I think it's you who have not really thought things through... you've jumped to some conclusions about the link to the impeachment, though - which gave away your motives for believing Iran should be allowed to act with impunity. You're just another leftist who now supports Iran and terrorism because you see those things as a lesser evil to the US President.

You're just another millennial who watches too much YouTube. So we bombed an Iranian general because a mob of protestors burned our embassy with palm branches.

Yet the Saudis infiltrated one of our bases ON OUR SOIL In FLA AND KILLED AMERICANS.

Where's the response?

No, you know what, let's go after the guy who supposedly ordered a hundred men to light branches with bics.

You know nothing about geopolitical, you're an ideologue. You have no capacity to think Independently.

originally posted by: DustDoses

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: More1ThanAny1

Suuuure... and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the founder of Iran-backed Iraqi militia Kataib Hezbollah, whom also died together with Suleimani/Soleimani in the attack was also there just to find peace with the world...

A reminder to left-wingers whom are trying to portray Suleimani/Soleimani as an angel, here is what the New Yorker wrote in September 2013 in an article titled "The Shadow Commander."

...
Suleimani took command of the Quds Force fifteen years ago, and in that time he has sought to reshape the Middle East in Iran’s favor, working as a power broker and as a military force: assassinating rivals, arming allies, and, for most of a decade, directing a network of militant groups that killed hundreds of Americans in Iraq. The U.S. Department of the Treasury has sanctioned Suleimani for his role in supporting the Assad regime, and for abetting terrorism. And yet he has remained mostly invisible to the outside world, even as he runs agents and directs operations. “Suleimani is the single most powerful operative in the Middle East today,” John Maguire, a former C.I.A. officer in Iraq, told me, “and no one’s ever heard of him.”
...

www.newyorker.com...

But keep on making up lies about "Suleimani/Soleimani being an angel and not killing hundreds of Americans, whom knows how many of our allied forces, and wounding thousands of Americans and others..."

A LOT of very strange Jingoistic opinions being spouted these days on sites like this that used to host free-thinking, skeptical individuals. You've literally become a mouthpiece for the rich and famous, I'm embarrassed for you.

Suleimani was a horrible, repressive individual.

But let's just go ahead and assume he killed 3,000 Americans, which is an extremely liberal estimate.

U.S.A.F. have killed +50,000 civilian Shia on their home soil, for geopolitical positioning. How many Shia/Iranian attacks have occurred on U.S.'s home soil for geopolitical positioning? How many innocent women and children have died? ZERO.

Yet Suleimani's a "terrorist."

Now let's imagine a reverse scenario where Iran invaded Canada based on a lie, to get to their maple syrup, killed over 100,000 Canadians/Americans for Maple syrup, and set up permanent installations. Let's imagine some American militia up in Canada threw some burning palm leaves into the Iranian Embassy.

I suppose, according to you, that would give them a right to send predator missiles and kill the highest ranking U.S. General, who was successful fighting Iranians during their invasion of Canada, during a time of relative peace. I suppose that you would consider American's terrorists for fighting off the Iranians occupying Canadian soil, too.

Have you forgotten that Saddam Hussein was horrifically brutal toward the Shiite Arabs, who were and remain the vast majority of Iraqis? Remember how Saddam deliberately dried out the Mesopotamian marshes to punish Shiite Arabs?

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Remember how he and the Sunni Arabs in Iraq — 20 percent of the population — kept a tight grip on power from 1968-2003? After he became dictator in 1979, at least 250,000 Iraqis — mostly Shiites and Kurds — were killed by his security forces, and that’s a conservative estimate.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

As many as 180,000 Shiites and Kurds might have been killed in the 1991 uprising.

Wikipedia: “Saddam's security forces entered the cities, often using women and children as human shields, where they detained and summarily executed or ‘disappeared’ thousands of people at random in a policy of collective responsibility. Many suspects were tortured, raped, or burned alive.”

And don’t forget the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed in both the Iran-Iraq war and the first Gulf War, most of them Shiite cannon fodder forced to fight for a regime they feared and hated.

Then in 2003, foolish and ill-advised though it was, Bush 43 ordered the overthrow of Saddam, and the Shiites and Kurds have controlled their own territories ever since.

Do you think the Shiites and Kurds would prefer that we’d never intervened and left Saddam in power? You leftists are extraordinarily naive and tend to ignore historical facts that don’t jibe with your anti-Americanism. You lack perspective.

originally posted by: muzzleflash
a reply to: Willtell

100+ ppl want you banned (censored) for questioning the Pentagon "official story"???

WTF happened??

The TV mind control is very powerful.
Scary.

Pardon? I'm struggling to find these "100+ ppl" who want the Op banned (censored) here. Can you show me more than 3? Lies and hyperbole don't make a good argument... Or are you so sensitive that someone disagreeing with you equates to them trying to censor you?