"NATO is harbouring the Islamic State"

Obama rejected France request of NATOs article 5. So there aint going to be a NATO coalition against ISIS. Probably for a very good reason. I doubt the US would like to see ISIS whiped out.

In stead Obama said that France will recieve intel on ISIS targets within Syria. I dont know if this rings a bell to any of you.... But What kind of intel do you think the US who support ISIS will give the French? Probably wouldnt give them any good intel on ISIS targets.



As a side note.

How do we know that the US, UK and the French have not been bombing Syrian rebels who attack ISIS?

How the hell would we be able to tell who is who?? All we see is something that blows up With a news commontator saying these are ISIS targets. That is all we get to go on.

EDIT:

The US have also used Russian drone cam fottage to state that they (the US) have been bombing Syrian oil storges and oil transport-trucks. Have enobody noticed this yet? The US used Russian drone fottage to tell you what they "The US " have bombed.

US drone target cam is not even anytihng like the Russians. Unless the Russians are useing US drone cams to show us what they bomb.

a reply to: Willtell

think i'm gonna throw up...

It's things like these that make me want to get anal probed on Alpha Centauri. Just for sport.

Great thread and info'.

a reply to: intrptr

Conquering Empires always say that while destroying 'civilizations'. NATO is the threat to world peace, not some guys in pick up trucks in the desert. The war on terror gobbles nation after nation claiming it is fighting "terror".

To the victor goes the spoils.

So when they finish clearing the land for re-transforming, and have removed all traces of religious icons an previous history, they will be able to build their new world. They will establish the one true religion, and create a whole new pack of lies to feed the future generations as history.

We had better start teaching our children the true story of Yesterday Land, because I don't think Tomorrow Land is going to be a dream land for most of us. Unless we count nightmares as dreams.

a reply to: Willtell

Here’s the link where they talk about Obama stopping 75 percent of the ISIS bomb targets

You know why don't you?

Due to an Obama administration policy that is aimed to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, U.S. military pilots who have returned home from the fight against the Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq have definitively stated they were unable to obtain clearance to launch strikes and in turn were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their weaponry on terror targets, The Washington Free Beacon reports.

"Despite U.S. strikes being the most precise in the history of warfare, conducting strike operations in the heavily populated areas where ISIL hides certainly presents challenges. We are fighting an enemy who goes out of their way to put civilians at risk. However, our pilots understand the need for the tactical patience in this environment. This fight against ISIL is not the kind of fight from previous decades."

www.newsmax.com...

So what is wrong with keeping civilians alive, seems people are angry when we kill civilians in war...but now it seems they are angry we aren't killing civilians just to get at ISIS...what a strange world we live in.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Yeah, the initial truth is coverd up With some politically correct propaganda. That is exactly what it is.

The importance of the gas pipeline is that it would create competition for Russia's pipeline to Western Europe. Russia currently enjoys a near monopoly on natural gas exports which is why the banksters and oil companies want this so badly as to destabilize entire nations in pursuit of the almighty $.

Turkey was the last to join NATO and it was for this very reason along with substantial material support being dangled as bait. If things blow up it will be Russia trying to wipe out Turkey, that's my prediction anyway. Notice how the Ukraine sits on the map strategically blocking access to Turkey, this is a big chess match they are playing.

Good stuff Willtell

The picture becomes clearer by the day.

Turkey and and "our" other allies will shortly have a lot of explaining to do if truth becomes popular.(Yea right).

Syria and Russia need to occupy and control the border of Turkey and other "supplier" states pronto, and then we will see ISIS shrivel like a cancer without a blood supply. Unfortunately, like a cancer, it never really goes away.

I wonder if ISIS and co. know that they are just pawns in this game as well? To be used and discarded or "re-branded and relaunched" again in the future like every other terrorist org. has been in the past. Idiots, evil idiots, the terrorist orgs., their sponsors the lot....

We really need to get away from our addiction to black gold..desperately. Then there would be one less excuse for mayhem.

a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

Why exactly do people believe Israel is funding ISIS or is behind them?

Is there anything real to it but the pathological hate as the legacy nazis left for us?

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Willtell

Here’s the link where they talk about Obama stopping 75 percent of the ISIS bomb targets

You know why don't you?

Due to an Obama administration policy that is aimed to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, U.S. military pilots who have returned home from the fight against the Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq have definitively stated they were unable to obtain clearance to launch strikes and in turn were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their weaponry on terror targets, The Washington Free Beacon reports.

"Despite U.S. strikes being the most precise in the history of warfare, conducting strike operations in the heavily populated areas where ISIL hides certainly presents challenges. We are fighting an enemy who goes out of their way to put civilians at risk. However, our pilots understand the need for the tactical patience in this environment. This fight against ISIL is not the kind of fight from previous decades."

www.newsmax.com...

So what is wrong with keeping civilians alive, seems people are angry when we kill civilians in war...but now it seems they are angry we aren't killing civilians just to get at ISIS...what a strange world we live in.

Do you know how many civilians Obama has already killed through drones?


We don’t believe Obama is really interested in saving civilians he’s interested in saving ISIS

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Willtell

Here’s the link where they talk about Obama stopping 75 percent of the ISIS bomb targets

You know why don't you?

Due to an Obama administration policy that is aimed to prevent civilian deaths and collateral damage, U.S. military pilots who have returned home from the fight against the Islamic State (ISIS) in Iraq have definitively stated they were unable to obtain clearance to launch strikes and in turn were blocked from dropping 75 percent of their weaponry on terror targets, The Washington Free Beacon reports.

"Despite U.S. strikes being the most precise in the history of warfare, conducting strike operations in the heavily populated areas where ISIL hides certainly presents challenges. We are fighting an enemy who goes out of their way to put civilians at risk. However, our pilots understand the need for the tactical patience in this environment. This fight against ISIL is not the kind of fight from previous decades."

www.newsmax.com...

So what is wrong with keeping civilians alive, seems people are angry when we kill civilians in war...but now it seems they are angry we aren't killing civilians just to get at ISIS...what a strange world we live in.

Do you know how many civilians Obama has already killed through drones?


We don’t believe Obama is really interested in saving civilians he’s interested in saving ISIS

I agree with you on the civilians killed in drone strikes.. hundreds...thousands maybe? We'll never know.

The problem, isn't an Obama problem though, because I believe the next president will keep the drone strikes going, whether it be Clinton or Cruz or Bush or Trump. That's the problem.

a reply to: Willtell

The war on terrorism is a distraction, and while the motives are there to control the resources in the middle east.



Peace

Old story .. old topics .. all public knowledge .. not even hidden anymore.

Anyone with some background knowledge can see the writing on the wall.

We been discussing long enough.. for decades.

Maybe we all should turn into "freedom fighters" and blow up the pipeline and burn all oil, so we don't have to worry about it.

50 years from now, they will look back and say .. Why did they kill each other over oil? That's when fusion energy will be the primary source of energy consumption.

Stupid energy problems.

You didn't know that the whole war is over a pipeline?

www.selfiesforsyria.com...

You didn't know that Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey finance Daesh directly?

www.selfiesforsyria.com...

a reply to: Nikola014

Mate, have you not seen how many dual nat. zionists are in his team?
It's like with the US, people blame the govs not the nation.
Same applies to Israel, it's the gov not the people.
Stop with the complex already. Please.

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

Why exactly do people believe Israel is funding ISIS or is behind them?

Is there anything real to it but the pathological hate as the legacy nazis left for us?

I agree there are a lot of people that are anti-Israel, but I don't think it has anything to do a with a learned hatred passed down by the Nazis.

Israel, by its own actions, like the US, is responsible for the hatred many people may feel towards them.

originally posted by: jimmyx
Obama busted?????......for what???.....once I saw that, the OP's cred plummeted. to think Obama has that type of control in the middle east is ludicrous.

Yeah, I'm gonna have to agree. To think Obama runs the show in the ME is ridiculous.

If we're going to focus on western gov'ts running the show then why are we only focusing on a president that has max 8 years "in charge" and not at the people who don't have to suffer term limits or even elections?

You wanna know why? Because they want you to focus on Obama and then when he's gone you can focus on the next guy, meanwhile there "they" are, in the shadows, pulling the strings.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Bombing hospitals is ok, bombing oil tankers with possible civilians a no, no. Got it.

Explains why ISIS has gained position for the past few years.

Now we know and knowing is half the battle. Got to get tough, Yo Joe!

Here are detailed OP-ED’s on the FOI report written by the Pentagon DIA where they admit the creation of ISIS was predicted and would be used to destabilize Assad


medium.com...

medium.com...

Pentagon report predicted West’s support for Islamist rebels would create ISIS

Foreseeing ISIS

As I reported on May 22nd, the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document obtained by Judicial Watch under Freedom of Information confirms that the US intelligence community foresaw the rise of ISIS three years ago, as a direct consequence of the support to extremist rebels in Syria.

Anti-ISIS coalition knowingly sponsored violent extremists to ‘isolate’ Assad, rollback ‘Shia expansion’

This is fairly well known since the pentagon report has been out for a while now.

The MSM has completely ignored this devastating FOI document

Interesting post OP. Truthfully, I can't easily find a reason to doubt the gist of it.

originally posted by: supamoto
a reply to: Nikola014

Mate, have you not seen how many dual nat. zionists are in his team?
It's like with the US, people blame the govs not the nation.
Same applies to Israel, it's the gov not the people.
Stop with the complex already. Please.

OK.
Can you explain why you believe Israel has direct involvement? And, just to clear the air, for some reason that I can't completely explain, I tend to just skip any post that has the word "Zionist". I believe it's because for some reason, at least in the recent past, I have come to almost consider the term to be used almost exclusively with vitriol. (Vitriolically? Is that a word? it didn't trigger a spell checker red squiggly...)

That being said, I can't say with honesty that it's the reason. I assume that the term means Jews or Christians that believe that the nation of Israel should exist. I'll look it up when I get a moment.

I also believe Palestine should have a state, and assume Palestinians believe the same, along with a huge percentage of people alive today. That may not be the case, and if it isn't (surely not), and would like to know, simply for MY benefit

And I do not want to drift the thread, so if you believe answering would cause it to happen, then just skip this part of the question). I'd just like to know what you (and anybody else) would use the term Zionist in a manner that somehow feels "vitriolic" to me (and as I stated above, I cannot put into words why I believe that, but I somehow believe it commonly is used that way) . Why should a Jewish state NOT exist? Have Jews not historically been one of the most mistreated group of people in the entire world? They were slaves in ancient Egypt, is that not correct? The Holocaust? And just so you are informed, if you are going to say that the holocaust didn't happen, for God's sake just don't bother to answer. I'm not Jewish, but damn sure believe it happened. And would not easily be convinced to believe otherwise

I'm asking this simply because I would really like to know, so please don't take offense at it. Meaning that I am asking because I truly would like to know, and not as a remark or challenge to Islam, DEFINATELY not as some flavor of racist remark.

What say you?