Wake Up, America

Sunday, August 31, 2014
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Share Article

What will it take for America to wake up to the increased threat of radical Islam? They are at war with us, long term.

ISIS is the most sophisticated, barbaric and well-financed terrorist group ever. We must eradicate it and other groups if we are to survive.

Why did we not learn from the 9/11 attacks in 2001?


Independent Discussion Guidelines

Even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 1:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Maybe we created ISIS and other problems in the Mideast by our “intervention” there. Going into Afghanistan was not as much a problem as was going into Iraq. Saddam Hussein, as bad a guy as he was, was an area strongman who kept all those crazies in check. When he was out, and we had disbanded his military and police forces, all hell broke loose. The same thing happened in the Balkans when Tito, another strongman, died. We didn’t like Libya’s Khaddafi, so we spent billions of dollars helping some creeps kill him off, and we got Benghazi for our trouble. We supported the concept of the “Arab Spring” and the ouster of Mubarak, and we got the Muslim Brotherhood, another murderous organization. We hate Syria’s Assad, a guy who held his little corner of the world together like his Dad did, so we help out his opposition, and we get ISIS.

Maybe, just maybe, we should get out of the Mideast altogether and adopt a “Fortress America” attitude. Bring the troops home, establish and/or strengthen bases along our borders and seacoasts, and have our troops patrol our ports and airports, inspecting all cargo in detail. If we do not do that or something similar, our “freedoms” may be the death of us yet.

nativeson (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 1:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

While I agree with your statements, I still firmly believe ISIS should be wiped out. Not even Al Qaeda likes them.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 1:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Can we for certain go into the destruction of ISIS and know that’s all we are doing? Do we feel comfortable fighting alongside people such as Al-Qaeda, using the “enemy of my enemy is my friend” attitude? Sure, squashing bothersome pests is always a priority, but, as any good chess player knows, what are the next four (or more) moves beyond that?

I’d be more in line with fighting against ISIS if we resolved that would be the end of it. But we’ve already been there, done that; we said we’d get out of Iraq, did that, and look what’s happened. Are we all on board with sending our troops back in there to get rid of the threat-du-jour?

I’d feel better about it if we used drones. The use of tactical nuclears launched from drones might prove to be a military necessity in such an instance, though, and I’m pretty sure that would be unpopular.

nativeson (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 2:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

get over yourselves, Thorns. This is another of your once-every-two-weeks "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" -- see a therapist or go to your church. Your apocalyptic [& ridiculous] rhetoric -- like "We must eradicate it and other groups if we are to survive[.]" -- resembles the "barbaric" point of view of those you hate.
Sure, easy to say "let's get rid of Isis" -- ya know, bombs and armies won't do it. When will YOU learn from 9/11 attacks??

DavyBrown (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 5:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

There are usually "problems" along the peripheries of empires... nativeson makes good points. We break Saddam, then face Al Qaeda, now even Al Qaeda hates/fears Isis... so we use the Kurds to take down Isis, WHO COMES NEXT? We are the Empire (and EU is an empire of wealth): they are coming for what we have and what we represent. Is the end of our weird logic nativeson's ghoulish "The use of tactical nuclears launched from drones might prove to be a military necessity" ?? A kind of final solution, eh?

DavyBrown (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 5:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Unfortunately, both the middle eastern and western presses confirm the massive genocide by ISIS. Sure we helped create it. So our mea culpa should be "well we are partly responsible so we must sit by and watch these religious zealots destabilize the entire world and kill everyone that does not agree with their ideology"? These Muslim butt heads oppress women, want a totalitarian religious State, and will kill everyone in the way in the name of Allah.
Even "Obama the Apologist" realizes his abject lack of strategy is a mess. We cannot keep blaming Bush for our inability to deal with the realities of a very cruel world.

nomoresanity (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 7:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

One Thorn managed to get the same naive empty-headed rubbish posted on Noozhawk three days ago that two Thorns have now posted here.

My response:

jtieber (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 8:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

How many Thorns does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 8:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Go back to sleep Thorns.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 8:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"We cannot keep blaming Bush ..."

Yes we can. And Cheney and Rumsfeld and Libby and Wolfowitz.

Those yellow-cake snorters are the "butterflies" who put us down this alternate timeline of billion$ in the hole, a de-stabilized Iraq, and the accelerated growth of radical Islam.

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 9:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

So, EB, if I understand you correctly, it was Bush that started all this, not Osama and his hijacked flying bombs?

nativeson (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 11:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

So far all isis has done is kill the natives and take over towns in Iraq, Syria, and they talk at hating America. Words are cheap. Look at the few Americans who have joined. They hate us for our freedom. The freedom that allows those with to avoid jail and those without to end up in jail. Look at America jailing mothers who go to work, can't afford child care. Look at America gunning down its own in the street with its military equipped police. Now look at the white Americans with hating on those who hate on them because they don't understand the injustice that occurs in their name daily. Such is the hypocrisy of the Thorns, even if they are right twice a day.

spacey (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 12:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Maybe it's time for California to start distancing itself from the Washington / Wall Street crowd. We don't seem to have a lot of enemies out here. Maybe we're not out toppling governments as much because we don't host an imperialistic financial industry.

The Builderberg group was founded to promote post WWII Atlanticism. California could work with the Asia Pacific region to promote Pacificism, non-imperalistic economic and cultural cooperation. To move in this direction, we would need to weaken our dependence on the US dollar, and through this process, redirect tax revenue from the federal level to the state level.

If ISIS is targeting the US for terrorism, you can bet it will be on the East coast. If we actually see an attack in the West, you can assume it's a false flag, planted to keep us involved. Don't fall for it.

random_kook (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 12:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

@nativeson, no. Here is the statement I was referencing:

"We cannot keep blaming Bush for our inability to deal with the realities of a very cruel world."

I claim that inability is primarily due to critical mis-steps from the get go by Bush et. al. followed my poor execution by the likes of folks like Rumsfeld and Paul Bremmer. That put us down a path which has placed us in the current hole. This was recently covered by PBS Frontline:

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

it's Bilderberg not 'Builderberg' [] but what's your point, random? There should be vigorous dialogue between the EU and USA...we have to cooperate via NATO and choose how to deal with a roguish Russia, etc.
I'm a lot more cynical that you, random, when you write "If we actually see an attack in the West..." and such a reported event really might BE a false flag...see, we living near the core of Empire need dissident attacks and periphery issues to make us feel relevant. If I'm hated, I am.

DavyBrown (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 12:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

MEMO from Richard C. Clarke "Head of Counter Terrorism to G.W. Bush warning of impending attack:

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 1:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Good digging, Clarke was interviewed in that Frontline episode.

Add former "National Security" Advisor Condoleezza Rice to the list of leadership failures.

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 1:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Diana & Don: In retrospect, wouldn't you agree that leaving Saddam Hussein in power and dealing with him the best we can would have been the best solution for all concerned?

Botany (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 2:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Victoria Nuland has the Ukraine situation under control.

random_kook (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 2:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Not to mention Monsanto.

If you need an enemy, then ISIS is a good one. They're scary and easy to hate, but we should be working together with Putin. How else can we expect to deal with Syria and Iran? The Putin fight is stupid. It's all about the price of gas. It's a conflict started by special interests, including the IMF and CIA.

The only reason the EU is involved is because Germany went off nuclear power and now need sh*t tons of natural gas and won't be able to afford to keep paying Russia for the foreseeable future. Just because Putin is macho and homophobic is no reason to be at war with Russia.

On the positive side, coal stocks are up.

random_kook (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 2:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

DavyBrown wrote:
"…cooperate via NATO and choose how to deal with a roguish Russia, etc…"

NATO, just like the USA, is a monstrously aggressive international terror organization. It should have been disbanded more than 30 years ago when the USSR broke up.

Of 248 armed conflicts since World War II, the USA instigated 201, killing between 20 and 30 million people, more than 90% of whom were civilians.

'Earth: 248 armed conflicts after WW2; US started 201 (81%), killing 30 million'

So, on average, and considering that the USA's involvement in every one of these 201 conflicts was illegal, the USA has murdered between 350,000 and 500,000 people per year, every year for the past 70 years, and maimed and driven from their homes multiples more.

But *Russia* is "roguish"?

jtieber (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 3:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

jtieber supports Igor Strelsky [aka Girkin] and other Russian "mercenaries" destabilizing eastern Ukraine and has done so in writing at length on other Indy threads. He is ALWAYS vs. USA and NATO, whereas I am at times in disagreement with US policy. Your only point is to defend Russia and Russian Orthodox Christianity.
I don't agree, John, at all that "NATO, just like the USA, is a monstrously aggressive international terror organization." You also hijack this thread which is supposedly about "radical Islam" and its supposed huge threat to the USA, not how evil NATO may be.

DavyBrown (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

My comments generally are intended for those already aware that, particularly regarding international affairs, CNN-NYT-HuffPost-WSJ-ABC-NBC-BBC-WaPo-CBS-MSNBC-NPR et al lie incessantly, as 90% of USA corporate media is controlled by five transnational corporations that make $billions from war.

Regarding Ukraine, the extent of lying from the western corporate media is unprecedented, perhaps, positively, because the USA empire is gasping its last breaths (good riddance to it). From independent media, a selection, about 1% of what I've archived over the past six months, most posted in August:

Ukraine: Nazi NATO Setting the Stage for a Proxy War on Russia

Ukraine - The Bee War

The Beginning of World Shift

[VIDEO - 10:51] Sergei Glazyev: US is militarizing Ukraine to invade Russia

[Six Big Lies About Ukraine: Washington’s Narrative Is Pure Propaganda]

Will the US succeed in breaking Russia to maintain dollar hegemony?...

More than 50,000 U.S.-Backed Troops Are Fighting in Ukraine’s Civil War. Why?

The WAR for Ukraine: What’s the real story?

Washington Piles Lie Upon Lie

Obama’s “Catastrophic Defeat” in Ukraine

jtieber (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 7:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The poster East Beach wrote: “I claim that inability is primarily due to critical mis-steps from the get go by Bush et. al. followed (b)y poor execution by the likes of folks like Rumsfeld and Paul Bremmer..” End of quotes.

Hindsight seems to clarify things, but does it really? I’m not in total disagreement with you, but at the time it did seem as if we were doing the right thing. Now we can say “Maybe we shouldn’t have done that”, but the fact is that few were opposed to the move at the time.

I thought I knew something about the area, so naturally when Iraq became the target, it seemed natural. I knew some war planners, and from what I understood (even though they never said this), it seemed as if we were driving a spearhead between two of the greatest suppliers of weaponry to terrorists—Iran and Syria, some of the most evil of the “Axis of Evil”. I then supposed that after successfully spearheading through Iraq we would pivot and charge the enemies on our right and left flanks. Didn’t happen that way at all.

Probably the main problem is that rather than an “Axis of Evil”, it wound up that we are fighting something more like the “Onion of Evil”, since there are so many layers there, and each time we conquer one group another springs up like a reconstituted Terminator.

I think that politics in general has had a great deal to do with the various seeming failures in that area. If we can stop blaming the other guy or the other party and forge ahead into the future, we might accomplish something. To my mind an actual accomplishment would be to bring all the troops home to do what they are supposed to be doing: defending our borders.

nativeson (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 7:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

interesting, nativeson, yet I also think the Fortress America strategy of 1930s isolationism will not protect us from the follies on the periphery.

DavyBrown (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 8:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The first thing to learn from 9/11 is that Muslims did not do it and the next thing to learn is who did and why they blamed Muslims.

dewdly (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 9:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The lesson to be learned from the financial crisis, the bailouts, the occupy movement, and the statistics about wealth accumulation and its effect on democracy is that the USA does not represent the people who live here. It represents a diminishing few wealthy individuals and special interest groups.

Therefor, none of these wars have anything to do with us. If the entire financial system would have crashed and sent us into depression, it would have been a great liberating event. It could be that catastrophic defeat of the government of the USA may also be a great liberating event for us folks who just live here.

Regardless, it's still a bad idea to go to war with Russia. Let this government grind itself down fighting ISIS. In the end, we'll finally have our great depression, and maybe after that, rebirth. I hope I'm around to see it.

random_kook (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 9:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Regarding my earlier point that the increasing tempo of support for terror regimes all over the world (cannibals in Syria, ISIS wherever useful, neo-Nazis and oligarch private armies in Ukraine) by the "USA empire of chaos, destruction, and death" is a sign of the desperation of a dying empire — the post I excerpt below nicely summarizes the current well-deserved fall of the west versus the rise of the east.

In my opinion, the best way for an individual in the USA to prepare is the same as what a majority of the planet (BRICS, Shanghai Cooperation Organization [SCO], non-aligned nations, etc) is now doing:

• In all ways possible, reduce dependency on the US dollar

The Great Uncoupling


"...When the Berlin wall fell, Russia and China became "quasi-capitalist" societies ...Western corporations, began to rely on cheap Chinese goods to drive their economies, and endless supplies of Russian natural resources to feed their production. Over time, the West accumulated huge trade deficits with the East, and more importantly huge debts to cover it. The debts were financed by the East.

"Now China is on the verge of becoming the largest economy in the world. Similarly, Russia is the great energy warehouse for Europe. Both have highly developed space programs, defence programs, and technology in general…

"The United States reaction to the Ukraine crisis has been to financially act against Russia. However, that has suited Russia's purpose. It's given Russia the reason it needed to secure itself from financial instability. It also gave Russia the excuse it needed to take the next major step in the "Gold War" - namely, *isolate the indebted countries of the West from the demographic market places of the East.* Russia and China immediately started this process by creating, in a sense, a sheltered monetary union between themselves…

"The lesson to learn from these actions is quite simple: Now that Russia and China have the West in an indebted position they aim to starve Western production of markets… They will lend, etc to the developing world…The currency involved with their IMF will be the Chinese Yuan - not the US dollar. Their primary market will be the BRIC countries - which also have the largest demographic markets for consumption of goods.

*The West will be faced with a limited market for its goods - a market dominated by heavily indebted countries, whose debt is primarily owed to the East, and whose populations are the fastest aging in the world*…"

jtieber (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2014 at 9:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

There were 9/11 attacks in 2001? Gosh! I must have forgot that as my life revolves around my Facebook and I-phone 24/7. Oh Look! The Kardashian's have posted Party pic's on Twitter! I was so preoccupied with my PED and swilling down my Starbucks Coffee...ah, were we at War with some-no-name, far flung Muslim Country? Oh look I received a Hashtag to a Vapid Party!

dou4now (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 12:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

DavyBrown: While isolationism in and of itself might not be total protection, what we are doing presently is obviously not working. We need a re-ordering of priorities, a sort of “Back to Basics” thrust, even though I know that those entrusted with leadership no longer think this way

I am an old idealist and it seems to me that our present strategy does not “form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence” but there has been entirely too much push to “promote the general Welfare” (in its more 'modern' form). In the Declaration of Independence, the clause “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” has been minimized to “pursuit of happiness”, and even those three words have been changed from Jefferson’s original meaning of property ownership into x-box games, sexual licentiousness, general perversions, some vague concepts of “self-esteem”, etc. ad nauseum.

John Adams argued with Thomas Jefferson about the phrase “all men are created equal”, because it is obvious that we are not. That we could be, by being more “dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal” would take a whole lot more magnanimity than has been displayed since any of those words were written.

The very concept of “Manifest Destiny” most certainly does not amplify our better nature, but brings about the most imperialistic of designs. In order to correct the problems that arise, those in power stack yet more problems atop them in the hopes that something “new” will work. The newest problem lies in looking for a “strategy” to defeat ISIS---the Manifest Destiny people want boots on the ground in Syria, or large-scale airstrikes and Tomahawk missiles fired into Syrian territory---and then what?

Russia is a Syrian ally, always has been since the days of the Czar, and that has to do with their warm-water port there. So are we prepared to fight yet another war against Russian client-states with them arming Syrian AND “rebel” Ukrainians with their latest technology?

No, I really think we need to withdraw and re-group while re-thinking this “globalism”, which is looking increasingly Orwellian. Besides, it looks as if we should at least begin to clean up our own house before criticizing and/or attempting to clean other people’s houses.

nativeson (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 5:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm also an old idealist, native, and can agree with your comment disparaging the new "Manifest Destiny people [who] want boots on the ground in Syria, or large-scale airstrikes and Tomahawk missiles fired into Syrian territory---and then what? "
First Saddam, then Al Q, then Isis...then what?
Agree nativeson that some "regrouping" is in order, and Obama's doing that [and getting heavy criticism for it]. There are now the NEO neo-cons, whose resurgence is led by the ol fool Cheney, John McCain, and even Hilary Clinton is involved...this BS about a more "muscular" foreign policy...what, kick a little more a**, keep selectively slaughtering them via illegal drone strikes? Killing the US citizen Aw Awlaki, horrible though he was, was illegal and not allowed under the US Constitution.
My back to basics thrust would keep the pivot to Asia, but strengthen NATO and force our allies there to pay up... move in more airforce planes to Ramstein Air Base, send more tanks to practice at Grafenwoehr... regroup, but stand taller and act more assertively. See the comments of Rasmussen of NATO.

DavyBrown (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 6:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Grow the "f" up EB. Obama has zero strategy for anything. He is so overwhelmed that it is comical.
Bush was an idiot. So was Carter and his 20% inflation. Every president inherits from his list of predecessors and from history.
If the job is too big for Obama he should not have run for the office. The idiotic excuse his administration claimed during the first two years "we did not know it was this bad" made them the only thinking people in the US that did not know things were this messed up.

nomoresanity (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 8:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Doesn't anyone remember the Alamo?

random_kook (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 10:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Our military involvement in the Middle East is not now and never has been in American interests. Most indefensible is our complicity in the establishment of a base for Zionist world government.

dewdly (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 11:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

troll dewdly back up to his antics; keep fishing.

DavyBrown (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 11:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)


We would do well to remember the Alamo, just as Europe should remember Charles Martel.

dewdly (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 11:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Lookiee Doody just laid a giant turd! Light a match jackass!

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 11:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

agree H-G, s/he's stuck in 732 CE at the معركة بلاط الشهداء‎ (ma'arakat Balâṭ ash-Shuhadâ - Battle of the Palace of Martyrs).

DavyBrown (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Thorns ask: "Why did we not learn from the 9/11 attacks in 2001?"
Why did we not learn to take advantage of modern Arab and Moslem governments trying to assist right after 9/11? Why did we not figure out WHO attacked? Why did we attack Iraq when 19 of the 21 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia?
But mainly, why did we not see that until we force a Two-State solution to the Israel-West Bank/Gaza situation we will still foment fringe Muslim terrorists to attack??
from another threat:
“When the U.S. Senate voted 100–0 on July 17 to support Israel unconditionally, the U.S.A. became complicit in these Israeli massacres.” see

DavyBrown (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 12:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Let's not forget that good ol' Ronnie Reagan helped various governments including Saudi Arabia crush dissent and reform movements in the 1980s, leaving a vacumn for religious extremists to fill.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 1:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"There was no arms-for-hostage deal". -Ronald Reagan-

billclausen (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 1:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)


Muslim terrorism is what Israel uses to extract billions of dollars of aid and the use of our military and intelligence services in the Middle East. They will never accept a two-state solution because they cannot use peace.

Periodic blood baths in Gaza are designed to show would-be critics and bleeding hearts that Israel under the Likud is triumphant and there is no power to stop them. That's the message. You are wasting your time talking about "land for peace" and a "two-state solution" - both are as meaningless as "the peace process". When someone asked Netanyahu about the "peace process", he said "the what?" and everyone laughed.

dewdly (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 2:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Take that fire extinguisher and aim it at the ***base*** of the flames. As Obama said, "The Sunnis need to feel invested." What have they got to lose anymore? Their fellow Sunnis in ISIS are offering them their ticket back to former glory, and slaughtering the few hundreds or thousands who refuse. By simply attacking ISIS, we're attacking the Sunnis' only hope, guaranteeing recruitment of replacement fighters. Sunnis should be offered territory and half the northern oil fields. Then they'll have second thoughts about ISIS, never before.

atomic_state (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 5:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Partition Iraq already!

atomic_state (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 5:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

IMHO I am NOT 'wasting [my] time talking about "land for peace" and a "two-state solution" ' -- the other "solutions" have been tried and found wanting, mene mene tekel upharsin, therefore
NEGOTIATE, return to the 1967 borders, have Abbas run a new West Bank State without Hamas involvement, Netanyahu to squelch HIS fanatic yahoos... other socalled solutions involve extensive killing and death, and including deaths for kids.

DavyBrown (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 5:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"mene mene tekel upharsin"

Written on the wall of the room in which the Czar Nicholas, Alexandra, their four daughters and their son were murdered. A nice Jewish touch telling you who the murders were.

dewdly (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 8:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Troll meltdown. Priceless!

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 9:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)


Israel doesn't need to negotiate. There is no pressure from any quarter to do so. They don't want peace; they want power.

dewdly (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2014 at 10:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

ISIS and Israel are two sides of the same coin.

random_kook (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 10:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

ISIS is busy fighting all of Israel's enemies and making fake beheading videos to get people riled up for the invasion of our military.

We will not be wiping out ISIS if we invade, we would be filling a vacuum and installing western IMF friendly leaders.

The Thorns and anybody who is supporting a US military invasion over some videos with plastic knives and mannequins purported to be beheadings are some of the most gullible folks on earth.

loonpt (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 10:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If Americans are gullible what is an American president who gives his imprimatur to everything from 9/11 to phony beheadings?

dewdly (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 3:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Phony beheadings"? Is that like the phony killings in IV that you CT morons were bleating about a few months ago? You and your ilk have no credibility. Just stfu already.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 4:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes, Herschel, when somebody has a very sharp knife sawed against their neck several times it causes major arteries to erupt and there is gushing and sometimes even shooting blood.

In these ridiculous fake beheading videos, the guy saws at the victims necks for several seconds and there is no blood and no penetration of the neck - the knife is obviously plastic or rubber - the video then fades to black and a mannequin is presented as proof of the beheading. So they aren't really even beheading videos, because they don't actually show a beheading and on top of that one would surmise that no beheading actually occurred at least as presented.

There is a good comparison video out there of James Foley from the beheading video and from some of his interviews and you can tell by the looks and mannerisms that it clearly isn't even the same person. This is likely because, although I can't be sure, apparently he was killed a year ago. The evidence was presented to the UN back then by the perpetrators. However since nobody actually pays attention to these things, they decided to wait and use his death, turn it into a Hollywood version at the right time when they wanted to turn up the propaganda machine on ISIS.

Of course, the problem is, nobody out there wants to watch something called a "beheading video". I went several weeks without watching it and had no desire to do so, until I saw a lot of evidence that it had been faked and when I did it was just like I thought, a really bad Hollywood film with some post-production effects.

loonpt (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 4:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Phoney beheadings, phoney WMD's, phoney wars, phoney money.

random_kook (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 4:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Loon, for a stoner, alleged surfer you sure act like an expert on just about everything even beheadings. Oh if just the sheeple would listen. Btw what is your take on your beloved leader Ron Paul having to bribe people to vote for him during the 2012 Iowa caucus?

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 4:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Our government and media have systematically destroyed their own credibility to the point where nothing they pronounce can be taken at face value. We have no way of knowing if the beheadings are real or not, so the rational assumption is that they are fake, just like the WMDs.

random_kook (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 4:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The State Department was careful to hedge with the standard promise of an "investigation" to verify the beheading, but Obama doesn't wait for an investigation assuring the public that it's absolutely true with the subtext that to doubt it is to be a conspiracy theorist.

dewdly (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 5:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Herschel, that's your problem is that you have this notion that people need to be an "expert" on something in order to have an opinion about it. It doesn't take an "expert" in anything to know what happens when you cut major arteries, in fact you can simply ask an expert yourself. Certainly it doesn't take an expert to realize that when you cut your neck you bleed. I'm pretty sure that is common knowledge for most 3 and 4 year olds who have ever had an "owie". But if it's really that difficult for you to think for yourself, why not find an expert and show them the beheading video and watch them laugh their ass off at how dumb it is and that the media is actually passing this off to people as real.

As far as Ron Paul "bribing" "people" "to vote for him" as usual you get your facts wrong. Nobody bribed anybody to vote for Ron Paul, somebody in the Ron Paul campaign allegedly bribed an Iowa legislator to support him for some unknown reason. There was no good reason for it and to this day it is unknown for certain who actually bribed him and it is very unfortunate Ron Paul is getting his name dragged in it. My bets are on Jesse Benton, that guy is seen by many Paul supporters as a bit slimey and he was in position to do so.

loonpt (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 5:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)


No, it's more like the phony 9/11 stories because its purpose is clear. Actually it serves three purposes - first, to divert attention away from Gaza; second, to make the public hate and fear Muslims; and three, to justify American military intervention, drone strikes, and support of any action Israel wants to take.

dewdly (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 8:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Phony beheadings"? Is that like the phony killings in IV that you CT morons were bleating about a few months ago? You and your ilk have no credibility. Just stfu already.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
September 3, 2014 at 4:08 p.m

I would like to address the above comment to the dialogue, that while elliptical, has tremendous meaning.

Loonpt himself was beheaded while on holiday to Iraq five years ago. The person posting as "Loonpt" is actually Osama Bin Laden, who escaped the Americans by hiding under a camel carcass until the troops left.

The plot thickens....let me break the code. Osama/Obama. Saddam Hussain/Barack Hussain Obama. Barack/Iraq. Notice the similarities in these names, and Volok talks about a clock.

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
September 4, 2014 at 1:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
September 4, 2014 at 3:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Thanks for the code dolphin, also Joe "Biden" his time. And we had the election shill R-money with his side kick Paul Ryan (Rand Paul stand-in).

I think the writers have sense of humor.

Joe Biden looks like he's going to run on the "Gates of Hell" platform in 2016. With a few more beheading videos, he might get some traction.

random_kook (anonymous profile)
September 4, 2014 at 7:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

54'40" or fight!!!

Walter (anonymous profile)
September 6, 2014 at 3:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Botany: CIA asset wasnegotiating with Saddam Hussein in 2001, and reporting his attempts to avoid war at any cost. She also leaked intelligence from a high-level state dept. source that vans were arriving at the WTC in the middle of the night for two weeks prior to 9/11 and driiving to basement levels. She was arrested with no charges filed against her and held for 4 years, and the US government failed in its attempt to have her declared mentally incompetent.
HW Bush's first connection to the CIA was in 1953: According to a CIA internal memo dated November 29, 1975, Bush’s original oil company, Zapata Petroleum, began in 1953 through joint efforts with Thomas J. Devine, a CIA staffer who had resigned his agency position that same year to go into private business. The ’75 memo describes Devine as an “oil wild-catting associate of Mr. Bush.” - See more at:

Prescott Bush worked for Brown Brothers Harriman, one of Hilter's financers and money launderers, prosecuted for aiding the enemy. Nazi intelligence officers were placed in CIA jobs at the end of WWII.

14noscams (anonymous profile)
September 6, 2014 at 5:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

What we learned from the 9/11 false front is that there are a sufficient number of people like the Thorns whose intelligence is closer to flatworms than sheep, and they're a much greater threat to the rest of us than any terrorists, including those who work for the US government.

14noscams (anonymous profile)
September 6, 2014 at 6:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Why do flatworms threaten you and your right to free sex, no scams? Spirochetes maybe, but flat worms?

JarvisJarvis (anonymous profile)
September 6, 2014 at 6:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: