Thought Police
#21
(09-17-2012, 02:45 PM)Dickie Billericay Wrote: Has anybody in the camel loving world even watched this ridiculous POS?



A couple of hebephrenic third graders could have made a better movie. News stories are saying this farce cost $5 million! I think somebody put about $4.99 million in his bank defrauding pocket. "Springtime for Muhammed" would be a better name, and the plot is the same. Sieg heil baby!
I think that the only thing more ridiculous than that movie is the fact that some many people got pissed about it.
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Reply
#22
Quote: I think that the only thing more ridiculous than that movie is the fact that some many people got pissed about it.

Anyone wants to try the same hand with Jews, Blacks, Gays, Latinos etc and see how it pans out?Big GrinRolleyes
A.A Mole University
B.A London Institute of Applied Research
B.Sc Millard Fillmore
M.A International Institute for Advanced Studies
Ph.D London Institute of Applied Research
Ph.D Millard Fillmore
Reply
#23
Quote:Video: The Real Reason Petraeus Resigned
November 10, 2012 By Kris Zane



It was just a coincidence that the attack on the Benghazi consulate occurred on the anniversary of 9/11. We were told that it was really a “protest turned violent” over an anti-Islam video that had exactly seventeen views on YouTube, being uploaded two months before, averaging less than one view per day.

CIA director David Petraeus towed the party line and parroted this ludicrous YouTube story, backing up Obama in testimony to Congress.

At least until we found out that there was no protest.

At least until we found out that Obama had known it was a terrorist act in less than an hour with emails going directly to the White House Situation Room.

At least until we found out that the Obama administration had a live drone feed of the entire seven hour attack.

Then we found out the two former SEALS and then CIA operatives Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were told to repeatedly “stand down” and not help Ambassador Chris Stevens and the other Americans. But they disobeyed a direct order and went anyway, saving over twenty Americans, but paying with their lives.

Petraeus towed the party line with the video but refused to fall on the sword and say the CIA gave this stand down order, thus implicating that it was Obama who had denied help to both the consulate and CIA annex which later came under attack.

And when you cross a Chicago thug like Obama, payback is swift and lethal.

Petraeus needed to be taken out—but after the election—and before he was scheduled to testify under oath this time to Congress about what he knew about Benghazi.

Petraeus’ resignation had nothing to do with an affair. In fact, the affair had been over for months. The FBI had been investigating literally thousands of emails that Petraeus had sent to his former paramour, biographer Paula Broadwell, for longer than that and could have dropped the guillotine months before if they wanted to.

It was rather about paybacks and keeping the American people in the dark about the real reason Petraeus had to be kept quiet about Benghazi: gunrunning. Gunrunning of tens of thousands of Libyan weapons to the al-Qaeda-linked Syrian rebels.
Reply
#24
Reply
#25
"Jill Kelley" = Lebanon-born Gilberte Khawam, allegedly Maronite Catholic. This story gets crazier and crazier.

Quote:Petraeus Love Triangle Part Of Benghazi Cover-up
November 15, 2012 By Kris Zane



We know David Petraeus heroically served this country for four decades.

We know his alleged mistress Paula Broadwell graduated with honors at West Point and was an exemplary officer, going on to military and later academic excellence.

The only person we know little about is the “other woman”—Jill Kelley—the woman who supposedly received threatening emails from Broadwell. Who brought the whole sordid Petraeus/Broadwell affair down in a crash.

Would it surprise you to know she may not be an American citizen?

Would it surprise you to know she arrived in the United States in the 1970s from Lebanon?

Would it surprise you to know she is in debt to the tune of $4 million dollars from giving lavish parties at her mansion for top military brass?

Would it surprise you to know her twin sister is in bed with the Democrat party and is also deeply in debt?

How convenient, when we find out Broadwell was singing like a bird about what really happened in Benghazi. How convenient when Petraeus was about to spill the beans to Congress—under oath this time.

Then the American people would have found out that Nobel Laureate Barack Obama had a secret CIA prison in Benghazi that was probably torturing apprehended terrorists. That Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty had indeed called for help and requested specifically Delta Force, and Barack Hussein Obama told them to “stand down.”

So Petraeus and Broadwell had to be stopped.

By any means necessary.

Can you say “treason,” America?
Reply
#26
Rice has gone beyond Hanlon's Razor ("Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.").

We've reached the point where we can rule out mere stupidity, at least as the sole cause. Once is a mistake, twice is intentional.

Clearly this woman is not just an idiot, but a malicious, marxist idiot bent on destroying America.

Quote:Glamor Girl Susan Rice Has Blood On Her Hands
December 4, 2012 By Kris Zane



They say history repeats itself.

This is best illustrated by the life of Glamor Magazine’s 2009 nominee for woman of the year, Susan Elizabeth Rice.

In the late 1990s, Rice was working for Bill Clinton as the Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs. The African continent was hers to rule, and she put her foot down on the necks of her rivals on more than one occasion.

One such foot to the neck was in regards to a little-known terrorist by the name of Osama Bin Laden. In the late 1990s, Bin Laden was living in Khartoum, Sudan. Although the Sudanese government was engaged in a long and bloody civil war, their intelligence service, the Mukhabarat, was exemplary and knew all about the terrorist activities of Bin Laden. They wanted to give the information to the United States and at one point wanted to turn him over.

Who overruled this? Who plugged her ears and refused to hear about Bin Laden?

Susan Elizabeth Rice.

How history has repeated itself is that Rice blamed bad CIA intelligence for not listening to the Sudanese. The CIA had wrongly stated that Sudan was sponsoring terrorism, so Rice refused to hear.

Again, with the Benghazi attack, Rice has blamed the CIA for feeding bad information to her: that it was the CIA and not her who pointed the finger towards an obscure anti-Muslim YouTube video and subsequent “protest turned violent.”

Like her boss, she likes to blame others for her mistakes.

Susan Rice is in effect partly responsible for 9/11.

She let Osama Bin Laden get away.

She truly has blood on her hands.
Reply
#27
Quote:Susan Rice is in effect partly responsible for 9/11.

She let Osama Bin Laden get away.

She truly has blood on her hands.

You mean as in "The Lusitania carried ammunition to supply to Germany's enemies after all"?
And "I only heard about those awful Germans sinking that precious ship and its precious civilian passengers after all"?
Ah, the irony...
A.A Mole University
B.A London Institute of Applied Research
B.Sc Millard Fillmore
M.A International Institute for Advanced Studies
Ph.D London Institute of Applied Research
Ph.D Millard Fillmore
Reply
#28
(10-28-2012, 02:53 AM)WilliamW Wrote: According to our friends in Canada (why do we have to go to Canada to get the truth?), Stevens was shipping chemical weapons to Syria to setup Assad, intending to make it appear he was using them against the rebels. The Russians got wise and let Stevens know, through the Turkish ambassador, that the jig was up (so to speak). The Russians do not want Syria de-stabilized, so they are using Iranian-backed forces to protect their interests. Thus Obama wrote off Stevens to prevent exposure of the true mission.

The hidden real truth about Benghazi

Excuse me while I give myself a pat on the back. You read it here first, wayyyy back in October of 2012. Read the linked article again (or for the first time) and see what the Obamunistas are really up to.

Quote:Could it be that Russia obtained unmistakable surveillance footage of the anti-Assad “rebels” being shown how to load chemical payloads onto missiles inside Turkey near the border of Syria? Weapons, of course, that were shipped from Libya by the CIA in conjunction with various Muslim Brotherhood rebel groups. If so, such weapons could be used as a “false flag” type of operation—one that would be implemented to “set-up” Assad by making it appear that he was using these weapons on forces dedicated to his overthrow.

The blowback by the international community would be swift and punishing, and the entirety of the civilized world would be demanding his overthrow. NATO would then be used to expedite his ouster...
Reply
#29
Quote:Could it be that Russia obtained unmistakable surveillance footage of the anti-Assad “rebels” being shown how to load chemical payloads onto missiles inside Turkey near the border of Syria? Weapons, of course, that were shipped from Libya by the CIA in conjunction with various Muslim Brotherhood rebel groups. If so, such weapons could be used as a “false flag” type of operation—one that would be implemented to “set-up” Assad by making it appear that he was using these weapons on forces dedicated to his overthrow.

The blowback by the international community would be swift and punishing, and the entirety of the civilized world would be demanding his overthrow. NATO would then be used to expedite his ouster...


Looks like the blowback is in Obama's face. The Russians called bullshit on Obummer and now he's being shown for the lying fool he really is.

Quote:Russia's Game in Syria
by John Hayward
6 Sep 2013

A day after Obama's slobbering sycophants at NBC News ran a hilarious article about the Community-Organizer-In-Chief "dominating" the black-belt KGB man with his imposing body language, the world knows Putin kicked Obama's butt sideways at their summit meeting. "Putin overwhelms Obama at the Sulky Summit," snarks Bloomberg News, citing an even more damning article in the French paper Le Figaro entitled "Syria: G-20 Trapped By Putin."

Putin bounced forth from the summit to announce that Russia would provide Syria with a missile shield if Obama attacked them. Russian forces are making a lot of strange moves in the region, including a warship currently en route to Syria with some sort of "special cargo." Russia dropped an exhaustive 100-page report claiming the rebels used chemical weapons before Assad on the United Nations, which is taking the report seriously. Meanwhile, the Russians are sneering at the comparatively thin case against Assad. (I'm inclined to think Assad's regime is guilty of the big "red line" chem weapons attack, but Obama's people haven't really been putting their backs into proving it.)

What's the Russian game plan here? Is Obama on the verge of starting World War Three? Maybe - these things do have a way of spiraling out of control once the shooting starts, and frankly the hapless incompetents of the Obama Administration make it seem like Syria is escalating out of control before a single American bomb drops. There's no compelling sense that Team Obama has any plans to handle unpleasant contingencies, outside of Obama's personal political escape plan of getting gullible Republicans to sign off on a military authorization so he can blame everything that goes wrong on them.

But I don't think Putin's boys are planning to shoot at Americans when Operation Stalemate gets under way. No, they'll be shooting at the Syrian rebels. They've got a well-established case against them for using WMD. They can throw Obama's foolish, reckless "red line" rhetoric right back in his face. (Remember, in the "red line" speech he now insists he didn't give, Obama explicitly said he'd call for action against anyone who uses WMD in Syria.) If the Russians or Russian-backed regime forces in Syria capture a couple of rebel units with gas shells, it's game over.

The long game is for Putin to show prospective Russian client states around the world that they're much better off seeking an alliance with him than with the Empty Chair. Putin looks like the sober statesman; Obama's a bumbling fool whose ego demands a war, because otherwise his "credibility" is shot. The Russians are way ahead in the "credibility" sweepstakes at the moment, and that should scare the heck out of everyone. If the Russians intervened on Assad's behalf in Syria right now, they'd have a larger international coalition than Obama would, especially since the French just announced they want to wait for the UN inspectors to finish their work. It's not good at all for the American President to look like an amateur, while Vladimir Putin comes off like a pro.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  CHE Fires Writer for Non-PC Thought Herbert Spencer 3 11,098 05-15-2012, 01:11 PM
Last Post: ham

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)