NWS Nieuws & Achtergronden
Discussieer hier diepgaander over de actualiteiten.
Pentagon Not Targeting Islamic State Training Camps
No airstrikes against 60 camps producing 1,000 fighters monthly (Updated)
BY: Bill Gertz
August 28, 2015 4:40 pm
The Pentagon has not conducted airstrikes against an estimated 60 Islamic State (IS) training camps that are supplying thousands of fighters each month to the terror group, according to defense and intelligence officials.
The camps are spread throughout Islamic State-controlled areas of Iraq and Syria and are off limits in the U.S.-led international bombing campaign because of concerns about collateral damage, said officials familiar with planning and execution of the yearlong bombing campaign.
Additionally, the IS (also known as ISIS or ISIL) camps have been so successful that Islamic State leaders are considering expanding the camps to Libya and Yemen. Both states have become largely ungoverned areas in recent years.
The failure to target the training camps with U.S. and allied airstrikes is raising questions among some defense and intelligence officials about the commitment of President Obama and his senior aides to the current anti-IS strategy of degrading and ultimately destroying the terror group.
“If we know the location of these camps, and the president wants to destroy ISIS, why are the camps still functioning?” one official critical of the policy asked.
The camps are regarded by U.S. intelligence analysts as a key element in the terror group’s successes in holding and taking new territory. The main benefit of the training camps is that they are providing a continuous supply of new fighters.
An additional worry of intelligence analysts is that some of the foreign fighters being trained in the camps will eventually return to their home countries in Europe and North America to carry out terror attacks.
A White House spokesman declined to comment on the failure to bomb the terror camps and referred questions to the Pentagon.
Pentagon spokesman Maj. Roger M. Cabiness declined to say why no training camps have been bombed. “I am not going to be able to go into detail about our targeting process,” he said.
Cabiness said the U.S.-led coalition has “hit ISIL [an alternative abbreviation for the Islamic State] with more than 6,000 airstrikes.”
“The coalition has also taken out thousands of fighting positions, tanks, vehicles, bomb factories, and training camps,” he said. “We have also stuck their leadership, including most recently on Aug. 18 when a U.S. military airstrike removed Fadhil Ahmad al-Hayali, also known as Hajji Mutazz, the second in command of the terrorist group, from the battlefield.”
Efforts also are being taken to disrupt IS finances and “make it more difficult for the group to attract new foreign fighters,” Cabiness said in an email.
A Central Command spokesman also declined to provide details of what he said were “operational engagements” against IS training camps.
“Once a target is identified as performing a hostile act, or is part of an obvious hostile force, a training camp for example, we prosecute that target in accordance with the coalition rules of engagement and the law of armed conflict,” the spokesman said.
According to the defense and intelligence officials, one reason the training camps have been off limits is that political leaders in the White House and Pentagon fear hitting them will cause collateral damage. Some of the camps are located near civilian facilities and there are concerns that casualties will inspire more jihadists to join the group.
However, military officials have argued that unless the training camps are knocked out, IS will continue to gain ground and recruit and train more fighters for its operations.
Disclosure that the IS training camps are effectively off limits to the bombing campaign comes as intelligence officials in the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and U.S. Central Command, which is in charge of the conflict, have alleged that senior U.S. officials skewed intelligence reports indicating the U.S. strategy against IS is not working or has been less effective than officials have claimed in public.
The Islamic State controls large parts of Syria and Iraq and has attracted tens of thousands of jihadists in both countries and from abroad. The exact number of fighters is not known but intelligence estimates have indicated the numbers have increased over the past year.
The military campaign, known as Operation Inherent Resolve, appears to be floundering despite a yearlong campaign of airstrikes and military training programs aimed to bolstering Iraqi military forces.
A review of Central Command reports on airstrikes since last year reveals that no attacks were carried out against training camps.
Targets instead included Islamic State vehicles, buildings, tactical units, arms caches, fighting positions, snipers, excavators, mortar and machine gun positions, bunkers, and bomb factories.
The risk-averse nature of the airstrike campaign was highlighted last month by Brig. Gen. Thomas Weidley, chief of staff for what the military calls Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve.
“The coalition continues to use air power responsibly,” Weidley said July 1. “Highly precise deliveries, detailed weaponeering, in-depth target development, collateral damage mitigation, and maximized effects on Daesh, are characteristics of coalition airstrike operation in Iraq and Syria.”
Daesh is another name for the Islamic State.
“The coalition targeting process minimizes collateral damage and maximizes precise effects on Daesh,” Weidley said earlier. “Air crews are making smart decisions and applying tactical patience every day.”
Other coalition spokesman have indicated that targeting has been limited to reaction strikes against operational groups of IS fighters. “When Daesh terrorists expose themselves and their equipment, we will strike them,” Col. Wayne Marotto said May 27.
The military website Long War Journal published a map showing 52 IS training camps and noted that some may no longer be operating because of the U.S.-led bombing campaign.
Bill Roggio, Long War Journal managing editor, said the Islamic State’s training camps are a direct threat to the region and U.S. national security.
“While the vast majority of trainees have been used to fight in local insurgencies, which should be viewed as a threat. Historically jihadist groups have selected a small number of fighters going through their camps to conduct attacks against the West. The Islamic State is most certainly following this model,” he said.
According the map, among the locations in Iraq and Syria where IS is operating training camps are Mosul, Raqqah, Nenewa, Kobane, Aleppo, Fallujah, and Baiji.
The group MEMRI obtained a video of an IS training camp in Nenewa Province, Iraq, dated Oct. 1, 2014.
The video shows a desert outpost with tan tents and around 100 fighters who take part in hand-to-hand combat exercises, weapons training, and religious indoctrination.
Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi, an analyst with the Middle East Forum, in June translated details of IS training purportedly obtained from a manual produced by a pro-IS operative in Mosul named Omar Fawaz.
Among those involved in ideological training for IS jihadists in Iraq is Bahraini cleric Turki Binali, who wrote an unofficial biography of IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Al-Tamimi stated in a blog post June 24.
According to a document thought to be written by Fawaz, training differs for native Iraqis and Syrians as opposed to foreign fighters, who generally are less experienced militarily than the regional trainees.
The document also reveals IS plans to export military manpower abroad, including Libya.
“Sessions for the muhajireen [foreign fighters] brothers last 90 days or more, and at the highest level deal with organization, determination, and intelligence operation, including training on heavy weaponry in addition to comprehensive Sharia sessions and multiple tests,” according to a translation of the document. “Sessions for the Ansar from the people of Iraq and al-Sham range between 30 to 50 days.”
The process begins with an application form and questionnaire regarding education, skills, viewpoints, and whether their backgrounds can be verified.
The training then includes physical fitness, martial arts practice, weapons training, and ideological indoctrination.
After a week of training, jihadists with special abilities are selected and placed in units. The units include special forces, air defense, sniper units, a “caliphate army,” an “army of adversity,” and administrative units for those capable of using electronic devices and accounting.
“The rest are distributed in fronts and camps after the end of the military camp training according to where they are needed,” the report said, noting that all graduates are tested in Sharia at the conclusion of their training.
The New York Times reported Tuesday that the Pentagon inspector general is investigating allegations that military officials doctored intelligence reports in an attempt to present more optimistic accounts of the U.S. military’s efforts in the conflict.
The probe was triggered by a DIA analyst who stated that Central Command officials were improperly rewriting intelligence assessments prepared for policy makers, including President Obama.
The Daily Beast reported Wednesday that senior military and intelligence officials inappropriately pressured U.S. terrorism analysts to alter estimates of the strength of the Islamic State to portray the group as weaker.
Central Command, on its website, stated that in the year since the Iraq operation began on Aug. 7, 2014, a total of 6,419 air strikes were carried out.
Targets damaged or destroyed include 119 tanks, 340 Humvees, 510 staging areas, 3,262 buildings, 2,577 fighting positions, 196 oil infrastructure targets, and 3,680 “other” targets not further identified.
Bron
Kampen niet aanvallen vanwege mogelijke "collateral damage"?
Maar targets in steden vernietigen mag wel?
[ Bericht 1% gewijzigd door #ANONIEM op 30-08-2015 19:10:34 ]
No airstrikes against 60 camps producing 1,000 fighters monthly (Updated)
BY: Bill Gertz
August 28, 2015 4:40 pm
The Pentagon has not conducted airstrikes against an estimated 60 Islamic State (IS) training camps that are supplying thousands of fighters each month to the terror group, according to defense and intelligence officials.
The camps are spread throughout Islamic State-controlled areas of Iraq and Syria and are off limits in the U.S.-led international bombing campaign because of concerns about collateral damage, said officials familiar with planning and execution of the yearlong bombing campaign.
Additionally, the IS (also known as ISIS or ISIL) camps have been so successful that Islamic State leaders are considering expanding the camps to Libya and Yemen. Both states have become largely ungoverned areas in recent years.
The failure to target the training camps with U.S. and allied airstrikes is raising questions among some defense and intelligence officials about the commitment of President Obama and his senior aides to the current anti-IS strategy of degrading and ultimately destroying the terror group.
“If we know the location of these camps, and the president wants to destroy ISIS, why are the camps still functioning?” one official critical of the policy asked.
The camps are regarded by U.S. intelligence analysts as a key element in the terror group’s successes in holding and taking new territory. The main benefit of the training camps is that they are providing a continuous supply of new fighters.
An additional worry of intelligence analysts is that some of the foreign fighters being trained in the camps will eventually return to their home countries in Europe and North America to carry out terror attacks.
A White House spokesman declined to comment on the failure to bomb the terror camps and referred questions to the Pentagon.
Pentagon spokesman Maj. Roger M. Cabiness declined to say why no training camps have been bombed. “I am not going to be able to go into detail about our targeting process,” he said.
Cabiness said the U.S.-led coalition has “hit ISIL [an alternative abbreviation for the Islamic State] with more than 6,000 airstrikes.”
“The coalition has also taken out thousands of fighting positions, tanks, vehicles, bomb factories, and training camps,” he said. “We have also stuck their leadership, including most recently on Aug. 18 when a U.S. military airstrike removed Fadhil Ahmad al-Hayali, also known as Hajji Mutazz, the second in command of the terrorist group, from the battlefield.”
Efforts also are being taken to disrupt IS finances and “make it more difficult for the group to attract new foreign fighters,” Cabiness said in an email.
A Central Command spokesman also declined to provide details of what he said were “operational engagements” against IS training camps.
“Once a target is identified as performing a hostile act, or is part of an obvious hostile force, a training camp for example, we prosecute that target in accordance with the coalition rules of engagement and the law of armed conflict,” the spokesman said.
According to the defense and intelligence officials, one reason the training camps have been off limits is that political leaders in the White House and Pentagon fear hitting them will cause collateral damage. Some of the camps are located near civilian facilities and there are concerns that casualties will inspire more jihadists to join the group.
However, military officials have argued that unless the training camps are knocked out, IS will continue to gain ground and recruit and train more fighters for its operations.
Disclosure that the IS training camps are effectively off limits to the bombing campaign comes as intelligence officials in the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and U.S. Central Command, which is in charge of the conflict, have alleged that senior U.S. officials skewed intelligence reports indicating the U.S. strategy against IS is not working or has been less effective than officials have claimed in public.
The Islamic State controls large parts of Syria and Iraq and has attracted tens of thousands of jihadists in both countries and from abroad. The exact number of fighters is not known but intelligence estimates have indicated the numbers have increased over the past year.
The military campaign, known as Operation Inherent Resolve, appears to be floundering despite a yearlong campaign of airstrikes and military training programs aimed to bolstering Iraqi military forces.
A review of Central Command reports on airstrikes since last year reveals that no attacks were carried out against training camps.
Targets instead included Islamic State vehicles, buildings, tactical units, arms caches, fighting positions, snipers, excavators, mortar and machine gun positions, bunkers, and bomb factories.
The risk-averse nature of the airstrike campaign was highlighted last month by Brig. Gen. Thomas Weidley, chief of staff for what the military calls Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve.
“The coalition continues to use air power responsibly,” Weidley said July 1. “Highly precise deliveries, detailed weaponeering, in-depth target development, collateral damage mitigation, and maximized effects on Daesh, are characteristics of coalition airstrike operation in Iraq and Syria.”
Daesh is another name for the Islamic State.
“The coalition targeting process minimizes collateral damage and maximizes precise effects on Daesh,” Weidley said earlier. “Air crews are making smart decisions and applying tactical patience every day.”
Other coalition spokesman have indicated that targeting has been limited to reaction strikes against operational groups of IS fighters. “When Daesh terrorists expose themselves and their equipment, we will strike them,” Col. Wayne Marotto said May 27.
The military website Long War Journal published a map showing 52 IS training camps and noted that some may no longer be operating because of the U.S.-led bombing campaign.
Bill Roggio, Long War Journal managing editor, said the Islamic State’s training camps are a direct threat to the region and U.S. national security.
“While the vast majority of trainees have been used to fight in local insurgencies, which should be viewed as a threat. Historically jihadist groups have selected a small number of fighters going through their camps to conduct attacks against the West. The Islamic State is most certainly following this model,” he said.
According the map, among the locations in Iraq and Syria where IS is operating training camps are Mosul, Raqqah, Nenewa, Kobane, Aleppo, Fallujah, and Baiji.
The group MEMRI obtained a video of an IS training camp in Nenewa Province, Iraq, dated Oct. 1, 2014.
The video shows a desert outpost with tan tents and around 100 fighters who take part in hand-to-hand combat exercises, weapons training, and religious indoctrination.
Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi, an analyst with the Middle East Forum, in June translated details of IS training purportedly obtained from a manual produced by a pro-IS operative in Mosul named Omar Fawaz.
Among those involved in ideological training for IS jihadists in Iraq is Bahraini cleric Turki Binali, who wrote an unofficial biography of IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Al-Tamimi stated in a blog post June 24.
According to a document thought to be written by Fawaz, training differs for native Iraqis and Syrians as opposed to foreign fighters, who generally are less experienced militarily than the regional trainees.
The document also reveals IS plans to export military manpower abroad, including Libya.
“Sessions for the muhajireen [foreign fighters] brothers last 90 days or more, and at the highest level deal with organization, determination, and intelligence operation, including training on heavy weaponry in addition to comprehensive Sharia sessions and multiple tests,” according to a translation of the document. “Sessions for the Ansar from the people of Iraq and al-Sham range between 30 to 50 days.”
The process begins with an application form and questionnaire regarding education, skills, viewpoints, and whether their backgrounds can be verified.
The training then includes physical fitness, martial arts practice, weapons training, and ideological indoctrination.
After a week of training, jihadists with special abilities are selected and placed in units. The units include special forces, air defense, sniper units, a “caliphate army,” an “army of adversity,” and administrative units for those capable of using electronic devices and accounting.
“The rest are distributed in fronts and camps after the end of the military camp training according to where they are needed,” the report said, noting that all graduates are tested in Sharia at the conclusion of their training.
The New York Times reported Tuesday that the Pentagon inspector general is investigating allegations that military officials doctored intelligence reports in an attempt to present more optimistic accounts of the U.S. military’s efforts in the conflict.
The probe was triggered by a DIA analyst who stated that Central Command officials were improperly rewriting intelligence assessments prepared for policy makers, including President Obama.
The Daily Beast reported Wednesday that senior military and intelligence officials inappropriately pressured U.S. terrorism analysts to alter estimates of the strength of the Islamic State to portray the group as weaker.
Central Command, on its website, stated that in the year since the Iraq operation began on Aug. 7, 2014, a total of 6,419 air strikes were carried out.
Targets damaged or destroyed include 119 tanks, 340 Humvees, 510 staging areas, 3,262 buildings, 2,577 fighting positions, 196 oil infrastructure targets, and 3,680 “other” targets not further identified.
Bron
Kampen niet aanvallen vanwege mogelijke "collateral damage"?
Maar targets in steden vernietigen mag wel?
[ Bericht 1% gewijzigd door #ANONIEM op 30-08-2015 19:10:34 ]
Dat is voor het eerst dat ze zich druk maken om collateral damage.
Op woensdag 24 sept. 2008 schreef Danny het volgende:
Dagonet doet onaardig tegen iedereen. Je bent dus helemaal niet zo bijzonder als je denkt...
Mijn grootste bijdrage aan de FP.
Dagonet doet onaardig tegen iedereen. Je bent dus helemaal niet zo bijzonder als je denkt...
Mijn grootste bijdrage aan de FP.
Een MO dat continu in brand staat is dan ook erg winstgevend voor de VS. En het houdt Europa op z'n tenen, iets waar de VS ook al jaren om vragen.
Waarom zou dat zijn?quote:Op zondag 30 augustus 2015 19:15 schreef J0kkebr0k het volgende:
Volgens mij willen de machthebbers binnen de coalitie IS helemaal niet slopen.
Oh, kunnen legio redenen zijn.quote:
Dit zou er o.a. eentje kunnen zijn:
The Company Getting Rich Off the ISIS War
For the Middle East, the growth of the self-proclaimed Islamic State has been a catastrophe. For one American firm, it’s been a gold mine.
The war against ISIS isn’t going so great, with the self-appointed terror group standing up to a year of U.S. airstrikes in Syria and Iraq.
But that hasn’t kept defense contractors from doing rather well amidst the fighting. Lockheed Martin has received orders for thousands of more Hellfire missiles. AM General is busy supplying Iraq with 160 American-built Humvee vehicles, while General Dynamics is selling the country millions of dollars worth of tank ammunition.
SOS International, a family-owned business whose corporate headquarters are located in New York City, is one of the biggest players on the ground in Iraq, employing the most Americans in the country after the U.S. Embassy. On the company’s board of advisors: former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz—considered to be one of the architects of the invasion of Iraq—and Paul Butler, a former special assistant to Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld.
The company, which goes by “SOSi,” says on its website that the contracts it’s been awarded for work in Iraq in 2015 have a total value of more than $400 million. They include a $40 million contract to provide everything from meals to perimeter security to emergency fire and medical services at Iraq’s Besmaya Compound, one of the sites where U.S. troops are training Iraqi soldiers. The Army awarded SOSi a separate $100 million contract in late June for similar services at Camp Taji. The Pentagon expects that contract to last through June 2018.
A year after U.S. airstrikes began targeting the so-called Islamic State in Iraq, there are 3,500 U.S. troops deployed there, training and advising Iraqi troops. But a number that is not discussed is the growing number of contractors required to support these operations. According to the U.S. military, there are 6,300 contractors working in Iraq today, supporting U.S. operations. Separately, the State Department is seeking janitorial services, drivers, linguists, and security contractors to work at its Iraqi facilities.
While these numbers pale in comparison to the more than 163,000 working in Iraq at the peak of the Iraq War, they are steadily growing. And with the fight against ISIS expected to take several years, it also represents a growing opportunity for defense, security, and logistics contractors, especially as work in Afghanistan begins to dry up.
“It allows us to maintain the facade of no boots on the ground while at the same time growing our footprint,” said Laura Dickinson, a law professor at George Washington University whose recent work has focused on regulating private military contractors.
Today, Afghanistan still represents a booming business for civilian contractors. In the latest quarterly report from U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East, there were 30,000 civilian contractors working in Afghanistan in April. But those numbers are steadily falling. For example, in April 2014, there were more than 60,000 contractors working there.
Meanwhile, from supporting weapons sales to the Iraqi government to providing base security, contractor work in Iraq is on the rise.
SOSi is also providing a handful of high-level advisors to work with the Iraqi Ministry of Defense and the Iraqi Kurdish regional government. In late June, the company won a $700,000 contract to provide a small group of security assistance mentors and advisors for one year. The contract could be extended for an additional four years for a total of $3.7 million.
The requirements for the job are posted on SOSi’s career site, and include “one year or more of experience working with Iraqi [Ministry of Defense] officials.”
One of the job’s duties is to “prepare and deliver briefings to senior military officials on the status of the Iraqi staff, systems, programs and transition progress.”
The company will provide one advisor to the Iraqi Kurdish regional government, and five to the Iraqi government in Baghdad, according to Frank Helmick, a retired lieutenant general who served three tours of duty in Iraq between 2003 and 2011 and is now vice president for Mission Solutions at SOSi.
“These positions are very important. They are not just translators,” Helmick said. “They are advising at the levels where decisions are made.”
For the most part, they are Iraqi-Americans with security clearances, he said.
During his second tour in Iraq between 2008 and 2009, Helmick was in charge of all the manning, training, and equipping of the Iraqi security forces, so today’s mission is a familiar one.
“I’ve been going back and forth to Iraq for the last two-plus years as a businessman, which is very, very different than going as a military guy, but a lot of the same people I worked with in uniform are still there today,” he said in an interview with The Daily Beast.
He acknowledged that contractors are playing a key supportive role in Iraq.
“Contractors thicken the U.S. presence,” Helmick said. “If soldiers are sent there to advise and train, they don’t have to send people to cook their food, wash their clothes or secure themselves. Contractors can do that. We allow the U.S. or coalition military to focus on their core competency.”
SOSi is not the only company that has been on contract to provide high-level advisors to the government in Iraq. ABM, also headquartered in New York, posted a job listing for a “Security Assistance Mentor and Advisor,” who would work directly with senior Iraqi counterterrorism officials.
The position entailed providing “direct assistance to the Prime Minister’s Counter Terrorism Advisor to lead and guide the development of institutional capabilities for the Iraqi Counter Terrorism Service in order to provide security and facilitate good governance,” according to the company’s job description, which has recently been taken down. A company spokesman said ABM is no longer on the contract.
But some other company will invariably fill the breach. From providing meals to strategic advice, contractors are built into today’s military operations to help defeat the Islamic State. The fact is, the U.S. can no longer go to war—or even on an advise and assist mission—without them.
“We’re resting a large part of the success of this mission on contractors,” said Sean McFate, a professor at the National Defense University and the author of The Modern Mercenary: Private Armies and What They Mean for World Order.
But the role of civilian contractors on the battlefield remains controversial, partly because waste, fraud and abuse became rampant in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last decade. The Commission on Wartime Contracting, a bipartisan review board created by Congress in 2008, estimated that between $31 billion and $60 billion was lost to contract waste and fraud in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And security contractors continue to face particular scrutiny after a series of abuses over the last several years. Particularly damaging to the industry’s reputation was the 2007 Nisour Square shooting when guards working for Blackwater fatally shot 17 civilians.
Because of these scandals, there is now increased oversight of civilian contractors at the national and international level, said Dickinson. For example, the Pentagon has made numerous internal changes to improve the way contractors are vetted and used.
Helmick said he’s watched the contractor scene in Iraq change from when he first visited in 2003 to today. For example, he says, the ratio of contractors to U.S. servicemembers is down to less than one to one, at least for SOSi. At the peak of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, contractors outnumbered U.S. troops. While SOSi may have lowered their ratio to remain competitive, based on the Pentagon’s own statistics, it appears contractors outnumber U.S. troops in Iraq today.
Today’s business environment is more competitive, Helmick said. “There are a lot of companies vying for this work.”
William Beaver, the editor-in-chief of DangerZoneJobs.com, said the market’s grown more competitive because there is a large pool of experienced contractors thanks to the last 14 years of war. There are also a large number of combat veterans who have left the military, but are looking for ways to work overseas again, he said.
This has led to a considerable drop in salaries, according to Beaver.
But one thing that hasn’t changed is the lack of transparency around these contracts. There is no central public database for finding out who’s doing this work, so it’s only possible to get a scattershot view, without much context, from searches on FedBizOps.com, the Pentagon’s daily contract announcements and various job boards.
For example, it is unclear whether any contractors are supporting the 935 U.S. and coalition military personnel as they vet and train moderate Syrian rebels.
What is known is that contractors are integral to the teams that operate surveillance drones and analyze the hours of video footage collected, providing the military with the information it needs to target Islamic State fighters on the battlefield in Syria and Iraq. While these contractors are not based overseas—and therefore not included in any official tallies—they are directly supporting the mission to defeat the Islamic State. )
From the very beginning, U.S. military commanders have warned that the war against the Islamic State will be a long one. SOSi’s contract for services at Camp Taji may be due to expire in 2018, but it seems certain that it and companies like it will continue to find business as this fight rages on.
Bron: http://www.thedailybeast.(...)of-the-isis-war.html
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door #ANONIEM op 30-08-2015 19:43:48 ]
IS is één van de grootste False Flags uit de geschiedenis. De VS krijgt al jaren weinig publieke steun om zich te mengen in oorlogsgebieden. Voornamelijk sinds de blamage in Irak, "the war on terror" is een prima dekmantel om gewoon door te gaan met de plannen die stammen uit de jaren '90. Met een beetje gezond verstand kan je toch inzien dat IS niet het doelwit is in het Midden-Oosten.
If you are ready to wake up, you are going to wake up.
If you're not you are going to stay pretending that you are just a poor little me.
If you're not you are going to stay pretending that you are just a poor little me.
Overigens spreekt het artikel in de OP de titel enigszins tegen.
quote:“The coalition has also taken out thousands of fighting positions, tanks, vehicles, bomb factories, and training camps,” he said. “We have also stuck their leadership, including most recently on Aug. 18 when a U.S. military airstrike removed Fadhil Ahmad al-Hayali, also known as Hajji Mutazz, the second in command of the terrorist group, from the battlefield.”
En heb je ook maar het minste aan argumentatie om die vrij idiote stelling te onderbouwen?quote:Op zondag 30 augustus 2015 19:55 schreef Izzy73 het volgende:
IS is één van de grootste False Flags uit de geschiedenis. De VS krijgt al jaren weinig publieke steun om zich te mengen in oorlogsgebieden. Voornamelijk sinds de blamage in Irak, "the war on terror" is een prima dekmantel om gewoon door te gaan met de plannen die stammen uit de jaren '90. Met een beetje gezond verstand kan je toch inzien dat IS niet het doelwit is in het Midden-Oosten.
Meer dan genoeg, maar dat is aan jou niet besteed. Slaap kindje slaap .....quote:
[..]
En heb je ook maar het minste aan argumentatie om die vrij idiote stelling te onderbouwen?
If you are ready to wake up, you are going to wake up.
If you're not you are going to stay pretending that you are just a poor little me.
If you're not you are going to stay pretending that you are just a poor little me.
Haha, je denkt dat de VS het goed voor heeft met het MO en de mensen daar vredig wil laten leven. Gekkie, Amerika zorgt voor Amerikanen. Alles wat een minimale bedreiging is en niet-amerikaans schieten ze zonder poespas aan gort. De Republikeinen willen een aardig groot land als Iran met 81 miljoen inwoners aanvallen omdat het een bedreiging zou vormen, terwijl het MO nu al op haar wenken schudt vanwege het vele geweld. Kom, laten we Iran ook nog in chaos storten. De grootste schurkenstaat van de 21ste eeuw. Alleen duizenden zware kernwapens houden zoiets afzijdig uit je land. Het is wat dat betreft goed dat Noord-Korea een machtig land als China als buur heeft anders was Uncle Sam al lang binnen gevallen. China is ook de reden dat het huidige regime van Noord-Korea nog bestaat aangezien het zich aan de zijde van Noord-Korea schaarde toen ze de oorlog dreigden te verliezen en zonder dat iemand het zag aankomen Mao Zedong zo'n 700.000 militairen naar het Koreaanse schiereiland stuurde, anders was het al in de jaren 50 gevallen. Tijdens die oorlog verloren 180.000 Chinese militairen het leven maar ze vochten praktisch in hun eentje de oorlog uit tegen de VS en een waslijst aan andere Westerse landen. Wat denk je dat de reden is dat 60 jaar later een wapenstilstand geldt tussen de twee korea's (draw/gelijkspel) en niet meer dan dat?
Niet te spreken over dat ze onder andere verantwoordelijk zijn voor de dood van een democratisch gekozen Chileense president omdat hij Amerikaanse bedrijven als AT&T benadeelde. Bijna alle grote conflicten na WOII daar zijn de VS de katalysator van. Smerig land. We zetten liever een meedogenloze regime op de troon die een puppet is dan een democratisch gekozen president die het volk dient.
[ Bericht 10% gewijzigd door galileo2020 op 30-08-2015 20:49:11 ]
Niet te spreken over dat ze onder andere verantwoordelijk zijn voor de dood van een democratisch gekozen Chileense president omdat hij Amerikaanse bedrijven als AT&T benadeelde. Bijna alle grote conflicten na WOII daar zijn de VS de katalysator van. Smerig land. We zetten liever een meedogenloze regime op de troon die een puppet is dan een democratisch gekozen president die het volk dient.
[ Bericht 10% gewijzigd door galileo2020 op 30-08-2015 20:49:11 ]
Het is controlled opposition idd. Trainingskampen in Turkije, Jordanië en het Arabisch schiereiland, wapens via dezelfde partijen maar vooral via Qatar. Waar die aanval op de Amerikaanse ambassade in Libië om te doen was trouwens. Dat was het hoofdkwartier voor het doorsluizen van wapens van Qatar naar Syrië. Dan dingen als dat ze duizenden gepantserde humvees in de schoot geworpen krijgen. Of de grote hoeveelheden TOW raketten die de VS rechtsreeks aan "gematigde rebellen" levert die dan prompt overlopen naar Is en Nusra. enz. enz.quote:
IS is één van de grootste False Flags uit de geschiedenis. De VS krijgt al jaren weinig publieke steun om zich te mengen in oorlogsgebieden. Voornamelijk sinds de blamage in Irak, "the war on terror" is een prima dekmantel om gewoon door te gaan met de plannen die stammen uit de jaren '90. Met een beetje gezond verstand kan je toch inzien dat IS niet het doelwit is in het Midden-Oosten.
Het hoofddoel is nog steeds Syrië te slopen. Mijn voorspelling is dat we daarna chaos en burgeroorlog oid in Libanon krijgen en daarna alsnog Iran. (en uiteindelijk Rusland)
Don't try and blame me for your games
Your games are death
My world is light, the angels fill my eyes
With every breath
Your games are death
My world is light, the angels fill my eyes
With every breath
Die kampen staat grotendeels onder leiding van de CIA.quote:Kampen niet aanvallen vanwege mogelijke "collateral damage"?
Maar targets in steden vernietigen mag wel?
En die willen niet gebarbequed worden
bivd kijkt met u mee.
Ik ken de BNW-wetten. Geen probleem verder. Geloof in waar je je goed bij voelt.quote:Op zondag 30 augustus 2015 20:14 schreef Izzy73 het volgende:
[..]
Meer dan genoeg, maar dat is aan jou niet besteed. Slaap kindje slaap .....
https://snowdenarchive.cj(...)tfZz-8-00&a=d&cl=CL2quote:
[..]
En heb je ook maar het minste aan argumentatie om die vrij idiote stelling te onderbouwen?
https://snowdenarchive.cj(...)tfZz-8-00&a=d&cl=CL1
bivd kijkt met u mee.
Omdat de bron je niet aanstaat is het meteen BNW?quote:
[..]
Gooi dat dan gewoon in BNW man... Scheelt zoveel nodeloos gelul...
Saoedi-Arabië speelt ook een grote rol in deze. Maar wat precies het hoofddoel is blijft moeilijk. Gas, olie, NAVO-belangen wie weet, Syrië speelt in ieder geval een sleutelrol bij de belangen van de VS.quote:
[..]
Het is controlled opposition idd. Trainingskampen in Turkije, Jordanië en het Arabisch schiereiland, wapens via dezelfde partijen maar vooral via Qatar. Waar die aanval op de Amerikaanse ambassade in Libië om te doen was trouwens. Dat was het hoofdkwartier voor het doorsluizen van wapens van Qatar naar Syrië. Dan dingen als dat ze duizenden gepantserde humvees in de schoot geworpen krijgen. Of de grote hoeveelheden TOW raketten die de VS rechtsreeks aan "gematigde rebellen" levert die dan prompt overlopen naar Is en Nusra. enz. enz.
Het hoofddoel is nog steeds Syrië te slopen. Mijn voorspelling is dat we daarna chaos en burgeroorlog oid in Libanon krijgen en daarna alsnog Iran. (en uiteindelijk Rusland)
Hoeveel bommen heeft de "Coalition of The Willing" inmiddels gepropt daar? Vele duizenden maar geen enkele op konvooien van IS die 100-en km's woestijnen doorkruisen en IS trainingskampen, de bommen zijn vooral gericht op de infrastructuur in Syrië en Irak. IS blijft immer gestaag oprukken. (zeggen ze
)
If you are ready to wake up, you are going to wake up.
If you're not you are going to stay pretending that you are just a poor little me.
If you're not you are going to stay pretending that you are just a poor little me.
Zou op zich een goeie reden zijn, maar de strekking van het verhaal: ja.quote:
[..]
Omdat de bron je niet aanstaat is het meteen BNW?
Ze aanwezige grondtroepen krijgen de bommen keurig waar ze die hebben willen, dus dat doen ze wel goed. En ze zijn enthousiast over de luchtsteun die ze krijgen bij offensieven.quote:
Maar hebben jullie nou de indruk dat die coalitie nou ook echt iets uitvoert tegen IS?
Say what?
En de voorraad bommen en granaten man, die mag straks weer worden aangevuld.
Bijkomend voordeel is dat je alle nieuwe speeltjes mag uitproberen in het echie, en vette reclamefilmpjes kan maken voor op de volgende wapenbeurs.
http://www.janes.com/
Bijkomend voordeel is dat je alle nieuwe speeltjes mag uitproberen in het echie, en vette reclamefilmpjes kan maken voor op de volgende wapenbeurs.
http://www.janes.com/
bivd kijkt met u mee.
sinterklaaskapoentje
Wie komt er alle jaren...
Een hele rits aan links, maar wat moet ik lezen dan?quote:
Sommige gaan over Canada enz
:')
Ja, maar eigenlijk laten ze die grondtroepen maar lekker aanmodderen. Af en toe helpen ze wat met een precisiebombardementje, maar IS écht pijn doen lijkt amper te gebeuren.quote:
[..]
Ze aanwezige grondtroepen krijgen de bommen keurig waar ze die hebben willen, dus dat doen ze wel goed. En ze zijn enthousiast over de luchtsteun die ze krijgen bij offensieven.
Het heeft allemaal met elkaar te maken, wat wil je precies weten?quote:
[..]
Een hele rits aan links, maar wat moet ik lezen dan?
Sommige gaan over Canada enz
niet doorvertellen maar er is ook een searchknop.
bivd kijkt met u mee.
sinterklaaskapoentje
Wie komt er alle jaren...
Er werd gevraagd om bewijs dat IS een grote false flag zou zijnquote:
[..]
Het heeft allemaal met elkaar te maken, wat wil je precies weten?
niet doorvertellen maar er is ook een searchknop.
:')
Die indruk heb ik in elk geval niet.quote:
Maar hebben jullie nou de indruk dat die coalitie nou ook echt iets uitvoert tegen IS?
Vroeger zag je de bommen live vallen. Nu zie je niks. Vallen ze überhaupt wel
"The only sight worse than a sad dwarf is a very sad dwarf"
"Met dubbel s welteverstaan"
"Met dubbel s welteverstaan"
Af-en-toe is wel dag in, dag uit, in zowel Syrië als Irak. Daarbij zijn de grondtroepen niet veel beter bewapend dan ISIS zelf, die zich ook nog eens fel verzetten.quote:
[..]
Ja, maar eigenlijk laten ze die grondtroepen maar lekker aanmodderen. Af en toe helpen ze wat met een precisiebombardementje, maar IS écht pijn doen lijkt amper te gebeuren.
Say what?
Op 10 september 2001 wordt het konijnenhol opengetrokken.quote:
[..]
Er werd gevraagd om bewijs dat IS een grote false flag zou zijn
Op 11 september 2001 wordt er een bommetje in geflikkerd.
quote:1. Rumsfeld Announces 2.3 Trillion Dollars Missing from Pentagon | CBS News (Sept 10th, 2001)
Daarna is het nauwelijks bij te houden, maar het staat er allemaal in.quote:The next morning the Pentagon is hit in the exact location where budget analysts were trying to track down the missing money, killing analysts and destroying records.
Als je een document zoekt waarin staat "laten we een terreurgroep in moslimland starten" dan kun je lang zoeken.
Maar er staat genoeg in om aan te tonen dat Al-Qaida in feite Al-CIAda heette.
Daarna wordt er nog wat heen en weer geschoven met titels en namen van groepen, en IS is geboren.
En wij onthouden toch alleen het laatste wat we horen, so who gives a fuck.
bivd kijkt met u mee.
sinterklaaskapoentje
Wie komt er alle jaren...
Geen hits op Al-CIAdaquote:
[..]
Op 10 september 2001 wordt het konijnenhol opengetrokken.
Op 11 september 2001 wordt er een bommetje in geflikkerd.
[..]
[..]
Daarna is het nauwelijks bij te houden, maar het staat er allemaal in.
Als je een document zoekt waarin staat "laten we een terreurgroep in moslimland starten" dan kun je lang zoeken.
Maar er staat genoeg in om aan te tonen dat Al-Qaida in feite Al-CIAda heette.
Daarna wordt er nog wat heen en weer geschoven met titels en namen van groepen, en IS is geboren.
En wij onthouden toch alleen het laatste wat we horen, so who gives a fuck.
Was wel grappig geweest
:')
Als je een uurtje of wat tijd neemt voor die site begrijp de de indeling, en kun je makkelijker filteren wat je graag wil lezen.quote:
[..]
Geen hits op Al-CIAda
Was wel grappig geweest
Tip, bij vermelding als bijvoorbeeld CAN voor Canada betekent dat niet dat het over Canada gaat, maar dat het deels is "gedeeld" met Canada.
bivd kijkt met u mee.
Je kunt via de link hieronder zelf teruglezen wat ze iedere dag aangevallen hebben:quote:
https://www.dvidshub.net/(...)rt=date#.VeNcXZfGVau
Ben benieuwd hoeveel trainingskampen jij vindt.
[ Bericht 13% gewijzigd door #ANONIEM op 30-08-2015 21:43:33 ]
1. ISIS heeft geen 'trainingskampen' (meer), sinds de luchtaanvallen al helemaal nietquote:
[..]
Je kunt via de link hieronder zelf teruglezen wat ze iedere dag aangevallen hebben:
https://www.dvidshub.net/(...)rt=date#.VeNcXZfGVau
Ben benieuwd hoeveel trainingskampen jij vindt.
2. Ergens bombarderen in de woestijn waar geen grondtroepen zijn is kansloos, niemand kan er dan van profiteren.
3. Ze bombarderen veel munitiedepot's, voertuigen, infrastructuur, olieshit. In Raqqa waren een tijdje terug bijna dagelijks bombardementen, puur om ISIS te verzwakken terwijl ze in het noorden strijd moesten leveren. Die strijd hebben ze verloren, dus effectief was het wel.
Say what?
Ik reageerde vooral op de post over 9/11 en Al-CIAda.quote:
[..]
Je kunt via de link hieronder zelf teruglezen wat ze iedere dag aangevallen hebben:
https://www.dvidshub.net/(...)rt=date#.VeNcXZfGVau
Ben benieuwd hoeveel trainingskampen jij vindt.
quote:
[..]
Geen hits op Al-CIAda
Was wel grappig geweest
Harvard Unversity researcher:
America Created Al-Qaeda and the ISIS Terror Group
Much like Al Qaeda, the Islamic State (ISIS) is made-in-the-USA, an instrument of terror designed to divide and conquer the oil-rich Middle East and to counter Iran’s growing influence in the region.
The fact that the United States has a long and torrid history of backing terrorist groups will surprise only those who watch the news and ignore history.
The CIA first aligned itself with extremist Islam during the Cold War era. Back then, America saw the world in rather simple terms: on one side, the Soviet Union and Third World nationalism, which America regarded as a Soviet tool; on the other side, Western nations and militant political Islam, which America considered an ally in the struggle against the Soviet Union.
The director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan, General William Odom recently remarked, “by any measure the U.S. has long used terrorism. In 1978-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism – in every version they produced, the lawyers said the U.S. would be in violation.”
During the 1970′s the CIA used the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt as a barrier, both to thwart Soviet expansion and prevent the spread of Marxist ideology among the Arab masses. The United States also openly supported Sarekat Islam against Sukarno in Indonesia, and supported the Jamaat-e-Islami terror group against Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in Pakistan. Last but certainly not least, there is Al Qaeda.
Lest we forget, the CIA gave birth to Osama Bin Laden and breastfed his organization during the 1980′s. Former British Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, told the House of Commons that Al Qaeda was unquestionably a product of Western intelligence agencies. Mr. Cook explained that Al Qaeda, which literally means an abbreviation of “the database” in Arabic, was originally the computer database of the thousands of Islamist extremists, who were trained by the CIA and funded by the Saudis, in order to defeat the Russians in Afghanistan.
America’s relationship with Al Qaeda has always been a love-hate affair. Depending on whether a particular Al Qaeda terrorist group in a given region furthers American interests or not, the U.S. State Department either funds or aggressively targets that terrorist group. Even as American foreign policy makers claim to oppose Muslim extremism, they knowingly foment it as a weapon of foreign policy.
The Islamic State is its latest weapon that, much like Al Qaeda, is certainly backfiring. ISIS recently rose to international prominence after its thugs began beheading American journalists. Now the terrorist group controls an area the size of the United Kingdom.
In order to understand why the Islamic State has grown and flourished so quickly, one has to take a look at the organization’s American-backed roots. The 2003 American invasion and occupation of Iraq created the pre-conditions for radical Sunni groups, like ISIS, to take root. America, rather unwisely, destroyed Saddam Hussein’s secular state machinery and replaced it with a predominantly Shiite administration. The U.S. occupation caused vast unemployment in Sunni areas, by rejecting socialism and closing down factories in the naive hope that the magical hand of the free market would create jobs. Under the new U.S.-backed Shiite regime, working class Sunni’s lost hundreds of thousands of jobs. Unlike the white Afrikaners in South Africa, who were allowed to keep their wealth after regime change, upper class Sunni’s were systematically dispossessed of their assets and lost their political influence. Rather than promoting religious integration and unity, American policy in Iraq exacerbated sectarian divisions and created a fertile breading ground for Sunni discontent, from which Al Qaeda in Iraq took root.
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) used to have a different name: Al Qaeda in Iraq. After 2010 the group rebranded and refocused its efforts on Syria.
There are essentially three wars being waged in Syria: one between the government and the rebels, another between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and yet another between America and Russia. It is this third, neo-Cold War battle that made U.S. foreign policy makers decide to take the risk of arming Islamist rebels in Syria, because Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, is a key Russian ally. Rather embarrassingly, many of these Syrian rebels have now turned out to be ISIS thugs, who are openly brandishing American-made M16 Assault rifles.
America’s Middle East policy revolves around oil and Israel. The invasion of Iraq has partially satisfied Washington’s thirst for oil, but ongoing air strikes in Syria and economic sanctions on Iran have everything to do with Israel. The goal is to deprive Israel’s neighboring enemies, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Palestine’s Hamas, of crucial Syrian and Iranian support.
ISIS is not merely an instrument of terror used by America to topple the Syrian government; it is also used to put pressure on Iran.
The last time Iran invaded another nation was in 1738. Since independence in 1776, the U.S. has been engaged in over 53 military invasions and expeditions. Despite what the Western media’s war cries would have you believe, Iran is clearly not the threat to regional security, Washington is. An Intelligence Report published in 2012, endorsed by all sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies, confirms that Iran ended its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Truth is, any Iranian nuclear ambition, real or imagined, is as a result of American hostility towards Iran, and not the other way around.
America is using ISIS in three ways: to attack its enemies in the Middle East, to serve as a pretext for U.S. military intervention abroad, and at home to foment a manufactured domestic threat, used to justify the unprecedented expansion of invasive domestic surveillance.
By rapidly increasing both government secrecy and surveillance, Mr. Obama’s government is increasing its power to watch its citizens, while diminishing its citizens’ power to watch their government. Terrorism is an excuse to justify mass surveillance, in preparation for mass revolt.
The so-called “War on Terror” should be seen for what it really is: a pretext for maintaining a dangerously oversized U.S. military. The two most powerful groups in the U.S. foreign policy establishment are the Israel lobby, which directs U.S. Middle East policy, and the Military-Industrial-Complex, which profits from the former group’s actions. Since George W. Bush declared the “War on Terror” in October 2001, it has cost the American taxpayer approximately 6.6 trillion dollars and thousands of fallen sons and daughters; but, the wars have also raked in billions of dollars for Washington’s military elite.
In fact, more than seventy American companies and individuals have won up to $27 billion in contracts for work in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan over the last three years, according to a recent study by the Center for Public Integrity. According to the study, nearly 75 per cent of these private companies had employees or board members, who either served in, or had close ties to, the executive branch of the Republican and Democratic administrations, members of Congress, or the highest levels of the military.
In 1997, a U.S. Department of Defense report stated, “the data show a strong correlation between U.S. involvement abroad and an increase in terrorist attacks against the U.S.” Truth is, the only way America can win the “War On Terror” is if it stops giving terrorists the motivation and the resources to attack America. Terrorism is the symptom; American imperialism in the Middle East is the cancer. Put simply, the War on Terror is terrorism; only, it is conducted on a much larger scale by people with jets and missiles
bivd kijkt met u mee.
Potverdrie, er staat gewoon dat een echte Harvard University researcher dit heeft gezegd 
Nu ik het behorende plaatje van de CIA letters die vervormde naar een boze moslim heb gezien ben ik helemaal van het gelijk van mannenkokengewoonbeter overtuigd
Nu ik het behorende plaatje van de CIA letters die vervormde naar een boze moslim heb gezien ben ik helemaal van het gelijk van mannenkokengewoonbeter overtuigd
Vraag het hem zelf, of vraag het Harvard.quote:
Potverdrie, er staat gewoon dat een echte Harvard University researcher dit heeft gezegd
Nu ik het behorende plaatje van de CIA letters die vervormde naar een boze moslim heb gezien ben ik helemaal van het gelijk van mannenkokengewoonbeter overtuigd
Hij heeft gelukkig zijn email erbij gezet.
Garikai Chengu is a research scholar at Harvard University.
Contact him on (even weggelaten, weet niet of email hierbij mag staan)
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door mannenkokengewoonbeter op 30-08-2015 22:25:30 ]
bivd kijkt met u mee.
En hij is niet de enige researcher daar die na toch best wel grondige research heeft gepubliceerd.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:16:12 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
Ow, en ik geloof dat ze bij Harvard research en publicaties best serieus nemen, zeker als je geloofwaardigheid er voor de rest van je carriere van afhankelijk is.
bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:15:41 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:15:29 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:15:18 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:15:07 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:14:54 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:14:45 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:14:27 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:14:13 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:13:59 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:13:46 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:13:27 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:13:15 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door Specularium op 30-08-2015 23:12:42 ]bivd kijkt met u mee.
Idd.quote:Op zondag 30 augustus 2015 19:08 schreef Dagonet het volgende:
Dat is voor het eerst dat ze zich druk maken om collateral damage.
Tijdens al die drone strikes bekommeren ze zich niet om een paar burgerslachtoffers meer of minder.
De bedoeling is ook om die lui op een later stadium uit te schakelen. Niet bij de eerste stop al.
Naturheilmittel
Maar dan heb je ook watquote:
Holy shit, iemand heeft bookmarks gespaard.
mompelt iets over regenachtige zondagmiddag.
bivd kijkt met u mee.
quote:
Holy shit, iemand heeft bookmarks gespaard.
inderdaad
Het komt neer op:quote:
Wie gaat die ellendige lappen tekst nou lezen
Amerikaanse veiligheidsdiensten zijn dom en hebben foute mensen wapens gegeven in een (burger)oorlog en dat is verkeerd gegaan en uit de hand gelopen. Dat is ongeveer de samenvatting van 30 jaar foreign policy van de VS dus geen idee hoe dat anno 2015 nog schokkend is.
Schokkender zijn al die conspiracy verhaaltjes er omheen, het vergt wat moeite om het allemaal te linken aan de vrijmetselaars, tempeliers, Rockefeller, Hitler, protocols of zion, Rothschild en de antichrist maar by god het gaat deze lui lukken.
Mensen die graag willen weten hoe het zit.quote:
Wie gaat die ellendige lappen tekst nou lezen
En sorry Specularium, die spoilers was ik niet opgekomen, zal er voortaan rekening mee houden.
bivd kijkt met u mee.
Dat gaat inderdaad regelmatig fout met die gekke wapens inderdaad. En verder dan een hoop BNW geneuzel.quote:
[..]
Het komt neer op:
Amerikaanse veiligheidsdiensten zijn dom en hebben foute mensen wapens gegeven in een (burger)oorlog en dat is verkeerd gegaan en uit de hand gelopen. Dat is ongeveer de samenvatting van 30 jaar foreign policy van de VS dus geen idee hoe dat anno 2015 nog schokkend is.
Schokkender zijn al die conspiracy verhaaltjes er omheen, het vergt wat moeite om het allemaal te linken aan de vrijmetselaars, tempeliers, Rockefeller, Hitler, protocols of zion, Rothschild en de antichrist maar by god het gaat deze lui lukken.
mannenkokengewoonbeter had ook een topic geopend waar hij beweerde dat CNN dezelfde vrouw voor 2 verschillende zaken geinterviewd had, en liet foto's zien van de 2 vrouwen: het waren verschillende vrouwen. Ik neem deze man dus niet serieus, ondanks dat ik wel geloof dat het een goede kok kan zijn.
Ik geloof niet dat ze dat deden?quote:
het vergt wat moeite om het allemaal te linken aan de vrijmetselaars, tempeliers, Rockefeller, Hitler, protocols of zion, Rothschild en de antichrist maar by god het gaat deze lui lukken.
bivd kijkt met u mee.
vergeet de boodschapper, lees de info, check de genoemde bronnen, meer kan ik je niet geven.quote:
[..]
Dat gaat inderdaad regelmatig fout met die gekke wapens inderdaad. En verder dan een hoop BNW geneuzel.
-knip- Ik neem deze man dus niet serieus, -knip-.
bivd kijkt met u mee.
Grootste debacle is nog altijd de onderlinge verdeeldheid en onmacht van de VN, hier kunnen strijdende partijen mooi van blijven profiteren. De 'burgeroorlog' in Syrië is een proxyoorlog tussen Iran en de Golfstaten, tussen het 'westen' en het 'oosten', tussen de VS en Rusland. Iedereen probeert zijn invloed te behouden of uit te breiden.
Say what?
Non-binding resolutions, wat verwacht je dan?quote:
Grootste debacle is nog altijd de onderlinge verdeeldheid en onmacht van de VN, -knip-
En zelfs over die term hebben ze maanden vergaderd.
bivd kijkt met u mee.
Je verwacht t niet he?quote:
SOS International, a family-owned business whose corporate headquarters are located in New York City, is one of the biggest players on the ground in Iraq, employing the most Americans in the country after the U.S. Embassy. On the company’s board of advisors: former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz—considered to be one of the architects of the invasion of Iraq—and Paul Butler, a former special assistant to Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld.
al 50 jaar kom je die namen elke keer weer tegen in de US politics en nu in t bedrijfsleven...
Are we not savages, innately destined to maim and kill?
Blame it on the environment, heredity or evolution: we're still responsible
Our intelligence may progress at geometric rates
Yet socially we remain belligerent neonates
Blame it on the environment, heredity or evolution: we're still responsible
Our intelligence may progress at geometric rates
Yet socially we remain belligerent neonates
je zit hier in NWS, niet in het speelhonkquote:
IS is één van de grootste False Flags uit de geschiedenis. De VS krijgt al jaren weinig publieke steun om zich te mengen in oorlogsgebieden. Voornamelijk sinds de blamage in Irak, "the war on terror" is een prima dekmantel om gewoon door te gaan met de plannen die stammen uit de jaren '90. Met een beetje gezond verstand kan je toch inzien dat IS niet het doelwit is in het Midden-Oosten.
Maar hij heeft wel gelijk, kijk maar in alle voorgaande spoilers.quote:
[..]
je zit hier in NWS, niet in het speelhonk
Begin hier en werk dan omlaag, en als de teksten te lang zijn kijk dan de video's in een van de laatste spoilers.
Een losse greep uit de gigantische voorraad beschikbare informatiequote:
Harvard Unversity researcher:
America Created Al-Qaeda and the ISIS Terror Group
[ Bericht 24% gewijzigd door mannenkokengewoonbeter op 31-08-2015 10:32:40 ]
bivd kijkt met u mee.
|
|
| Forum Opties | |
|---|---|
| Forumhop: | |
| Hop naar: | |