Deranged Rhino Posted May 23, 2017 Author Posted May 23, 2017 I'm the hypocrite, yet you're the one who's claimed that the Western intelligence agencies abetted the Manchester suicide bomber. Nice job. And yes, I hating Russia and Syria for causing millions of civilian deaths, while you decry the US bombing 70 Syrian soldiers in a battlefield. Nice moral compass. I thought you said I was saying the CIA bombed them? Or did you forget which lie you're trying to run with today. You're so dishonest you cannot even keep your own spin straight. You're slipping, Reek. As for your moral compass, let's truly examine the facts here: * It's a fact, proven in this thread in multiple posts with multiple links that the deep state, through the western IC, is funding, arming, training and sharing intel with ISIS in Syria for the purposes of fighting Assad. * It's a fact you denied this truth for months before suddenly accepting it once the overwhelming amount of evidence has surfaced. You went so far as to say Assad was fighting everyone but ISIS in Syria - which shows how uninformed (or willfully ignorant) you are on this matter. * It is a fact that the US and its allies, through cut outs in the ME including Jordan, Qatar, Israel, Saudi Arbia and the UAE are in a battlefield alliance with ISIS in Syria. You are not bothered by this, in fact you've gone out of your way to say this is a good thing so long as it means killing Russians and Syrians. This has outraged me since the day it was discovered, and continues to be the source of rage. We are working with monsters in Syria to over throw another monster. This is the reality. You pretend as if we're doing it because we care about the civilians on the ground. That's propaganda and a lie that you cannot even back up when pressed on it. If we cared about the people on the ground we wouldn't be actively working to turn their government over to AQ and ISIS who will slaughter as many or more than Assad. You are for working with ISIS and AQ so long as it's a means to an end ... no matter how many little girls have to get blown up in Britain to achieve that goal. That's your moral compass. And a bigger man would be ashamed to hold such views, or at least honest enough to admit them. You made your views quite clear when you celebrated the US committing a war crime during the '16 cease fire - a war crime which directly helped ISIS fighters retake a key region of the AO (a fact you consistently ignore because it is uncomfortable to admit) - because you thought it was good that someone in the US command decided to "pop off" some Russian and Syrian thugs. Your shockingly corrupt moral compass shows everyone who's reading this exactly why the neocon agenda, who's flag you proudly fly, is not only unamerican, it's dangerous and downright shameful especially when its wielded by the dishonest jingoists of the world. Them's the facts. Keep on supporting the battlefield alliance with a group that kills little girls. It's a good look on you.
HappyDays Posted May 23, 2017 Posted May 23, 2017 Said HappyDays, and without even a hint of irony detectable in his voice. Saying "this murder is unsolved" is not a narrative. Saying "multiple people propagating the story have had to walk back their comments" is not a narrative. Saying "it is unlikely, due to lack of evidence, that the DNC murdered one of their staffers" is not a narrative. These are objective facts. Speaking of narrative, what was the motive for this? How does the events that happened line up with the conspiracy theory? So the amazing all-powerful DNC, capable of covering up the murder of a leaker before anyone thought he was a leaker, their grand plan is to shoot him in the back in the middle of a neighborhood. And to not take any of his belongings. I guess they didn't realize that would look suspicious. (A hallmark of every conspiracy is that in the middle of all the grand scheming and planning, the people responsible for the operation are apparently the Three Stooges). There are no e-mail leaks from DNC mentioning Seth Rich by name. There is nothing connecting Seth Rich to these leaks at all other than Julian Assange, who himself didn't say anything until others had come up with the idea first. And the DNC thought they were going to win the election anyways. So they conspired to commit a shoddy murder, to hide embarrasssing emails from becoming public? There weren't any bombshells in those leaks. Nothing worth murdering for. Nothing about the proposed narrative makes sense. Lack of serious motive coupled with lack of serious evidence. Only someone with an agenda would try to push thjs as anything but "unsolved murder." I for one trust the police when they say this was a botched robbery. That actually explains perfectly why nothing was stolen, because robbers don't expect to become murderers. The banal explanation makes a lot of sense. But it wouldn't get Sean Hannity all excited so it can't be true.
grinreaper Posted May 23, 2017 Posted May 23, 2017 Guess we'll just wait for Wikileaks/Assange to release evidence that Seth Rich was the leaker. They should easily be able to produce this evidence. So far Rod Wheeler and Fox News have had to walk back what they said. That leaves fringe players like Alex Jones and Julian Assange to pick up the slack. At best we're back where we started - an unsolved mystery. And a host of people trying to push a narrative before there is real evidence of anything. Do you not read what other people write when responding to you? Assange can not, I repeat NOT come out and say who gave him the information. If he did that it would turn WikiLeaks into WikiLeak. I think that you understand that and are just using that position to further your narrative.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 23, 2017 Author Posted May 23, 2017 ************************************************************* That nod has gotten way more play than justified IMHO. It looks to me like every other tape-delayed interviewee taking a question and formulating a response. It has, and it alone is proof of nothing. But taken in the context of the interview, it says a lot. He was not pushed into talking about Seth Rich in that interview, he went there willingly. Do some research into body language cues and how they're helpful in interrogation. There's a lot out there. Over the last several days I've read several articles saying the story has been "debunked". They never say how or why, just that it is "debunked".Since the police have arrested no one for shooting Seth twice in the back and took nothing in a "botched robbery attempt", how can we say definitely one way or the other? Said HappyDays, and without even a hint of irony detectable in his voice. Speaking of narrative, what was the motive for this? How does the events that happened line up with the conspiracy theory? Is that an honest question? If it turns out Seth Rich gave Podesta's emails to Wikileaks instead of the "Russians hacking them" it blows EVERYTHING you've been told out of the water. It destroys the narrative that the Russians "hacked" the election, it severely undercuts the entire collusion meme, it ends up making the MSM look foolish along with the DNC, the Clinton campaign on top of opening up serious charges against key people inside the establishment all through DC. Nothing about the proposed narrative makes sense. Lack of serious motive coupled with lack of serious evidence. It makes a lot of sense. You just don't like what it's saying. Saying there's no motive completely exposes your agenda here, HappyDays. You're a good drone.
HappyDays Posted May 23, 2017 Posted May 23, 2017 Do you not read what other people write when responding to you? Assange can not, I repeat NOT come out and say who gave him the information. If he did that it would turn WikiLeaks into WikiLeak. I think that you understand that and are just using that position to further your narrative. Right, Assange can't just come out and say it. But he can make symbolic nods during an interview that his closest followers would recognize. Sure. Also Seth Rich was dead sooooooo why is Assange sitting on it? It doesn't matter anymore. The leaker is dead. Or if it does matter why he is answering the question in a way that leads his followers to think Seth Rich was the leaker? Like every conspiracy theory this one is a bundle of inconsistencies.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 23, 2017 Author Posted May 23, 2017 Right, Assange can't just come out and say it. But he can make symbolic nods during an interview that his closest followers would recognize. Sure. Also Seth Rich was dead sooooooo why is Assange sitting on it? It doesn't matter anymore. The leaker is dead. Or if it does matter why he is answering the question in a way that leads his followers to think Seth Rich was the leaker? Like every conspiracy theory this one is a bundle of inconsistencies. The bolded shows us how little you understand about how Wikileaks operates.
GG Posted May 23, 2017 Posted May 23, 2017 I thought you said I was saying the CIA bombed them? Or did you forget which lie you're trying to run with today. You're so dishonest you cannot even keep your own spin straight. You're slipping, Reek. As for your moral compass, let's truly examine the facts here: * It's a fact, proven in this thread in multiple posts with multiple links that the deep state, through the western IC, is funding, arming, training and sharing intel with ISIS in Syria for the purposes of fighting Assad. * It's a fact you denied this truth for months before suddenly accepting it once the overwhelming amount of evidence has surfaced. You went so far as to say Assad was fighting everyone but ISIS in Syria - which shows how uninformed (or willfully ignorant) you are on this matter. * It is a fact that the US and its allies, through cut outs in the ME including Jordan, Qatar, Israel, Saudi Arbia and the UAE are in a battlefield alliance with ISIS in Syria. You are not bothered by this, in fact you've gone out of your way to say this is a good thing so long as it means killing Russians and Syrians. This has outraged me since the day it was discovered, and continues to be the source of rage. We are working with monsters in Syria to over throw another monster. This is the reality. You pretend as if we're doing it because we care about the civilians on the ground. That's propaganda and a lie that you cannot even back up when pressed on it. If we cared about the people on the ground we wouldn't be actively working to turn their government over to AQ and ISIS who will slaughter as many or more than Assad. You are for working with ISIS and AQ so long as it's a means to an end ... no matter how many little girls have to get blown up in Britain to achieve that goal. That's your moral compass. And a bigger man would be ashamed to hold such views, or at least honest enough to admit them. You made your views quite clear when you celebrated the US committing a war crime during the '16 cease fire - a war crime which directly helped ISIS fighters retake a key region of the AO (a fact you consistently ignore because it is uncomfortable to admit) - because you thought it was good that someone in the US command decided to "pop off" some Russian and Syrian thugs. Your shockingly corrupt moral compass shows everyone who's reading this exactly why the neocon agenda, who's flag you proudly fly, is not only unamerican, it's dangerous and downright shameful especially when its wielded by the dishonest jingoists of the world. Them's the facts. Keep on supporting the battlefield alliance with a group that kills little girls. It's a good look on you. And you conveniently use USAs involvement in Syria, as tantamount support of ISIS, even though there's zero evidence of direct support (other than from intercept or consortium news, who get their news from RT) Or your now forgotten claims that USAs main beef with Syria is a phantom gas pipeline. Or your now forgotten claims about US involvement in Yemen You have been nothing but a Putin and Assad apologist, and do it disgustingly under the guise that USA is the warmongering party whether in Syria or Ukraine. Because only on your world is an email of support for Ukrainian government is worse than using artillery to bomb civilians and foreign airlines. Only in your world is bombing 70 military in a war zone is worse than bombing ambulance convoys. Funny how up in arms you got about US promoting WWIII with a proposed no fly zone in Syria, but are fully on board with Russia's no fly zone in Syria. Have we settled on who the true hypocrite is? And yes, I have no problems defending neocons, because none of this crap would be happening if the US didn't high tail out of Iraq.
HappyDays Posted May 23, 2017 Posted May 23, 2017 "If it turns out Seth Rich gave Podesta's emails to Wikileaks instead of the "Russians hacking them" it blows EVERYTHING you've been told out of the water. It destroys the narrative that the Russians "hacked" the election, it severely undercuts the entire collusion meme, it ends up making the MSM look foolish along with the DNC, the Clinton campaign on top of opening up serious charges against key people inside the establishment all through DC." Okay so finding out that Seth Rich is the leaker would be a HUGE story. I mean like you said it would change everything aboht the way you see the world. AND JULIAN ASSANGE IS SITTING ON EVIDENCE THAT THIS IS TRUE. So... Why is he hiding it? Seth Rich is already dead. Surely there is no better moment than now to release the evidence. There's a pattern in conspiracies like this - the information is always promised to come out later. Rod Wheeler has evidence coming TOMORROW... until he doesn't. Kim Dotcom is going to release an email conversation he had with Seth Rich TOMORROW. Why the wait? Real breaking news just breaks, it doesn't ask you to visit the blog/channel/whatever tomorrow. I'm shocked, absolutely shocked, that there rubes who keep falling for this crap. Alex Jones is a millionaire! That blows my mind! He has to keep apologizing to companies in response to lawsuits he lost, but people keep on believing him and his ilk and giving them money. So far you have one - ONE - piece of evidence, and it's Julian Assange nodding. I mean holy crap dude. I wish I could givs you some perspective on how nuts this all is but I can't because your brain isn't listening. It doesn't matter if every single piece of the story falls apart one by one, which has already begun to happen. You need this so badly to be true. It's funny to me that when this story broke, the conspiracy narrative was that the Washington Post breaking Russia story was an attempt to cover it up. No one ever thought maybe it was the other way around? Maybe there's a reason Fox News suddenly drudged up noted liar Rod Wheeler on the same day that a breaking story about Trump and Russia broke? In search of some grand conspiracy you've missed the obvious one sitting right in front of your nose. The bolded shows us how little you understand about how Wikileaks operates. Stop making me ask you for a follow up, just post your full thought and let me digest it. This is another hallmark of conspiracy theorists, you all talk in this cryptic "riddle me this" way. Just come out with it. What is your point? How does Wikileaks operate in a way that excuses Assange not coming right out and saying that Seth was the leaker? Keep this in mind too DR. It can be both true that there is a deep state intent on waging an information war AND that Seth Rich was simply tragically murdered in a botched robbery. You can accept that conspiracies happen without latching on to every single conspiracy theory. There actually is no evidence that Seth Rich was murdered by the DNC. Heck even IF the bombshell news came out that he was the leaker that STILL wouldn't prove that the DNC murdered him. This is the problem with conspiracy theories, they fill in all the blanks well in advance. So I feel confident in saying there is ZERO evidence that the DNC murdered Seth Rich. If you want to accept a nod as evidence of him being the leaker, be my guest. I can't stop you. But this isn't the part of a CSI episode where you piece everything together from a few loose threads on a corkboard. This is reality.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 23, 2017 Author Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) And you conveniently use USAs involvement in Syria, as tantamount support of ISIS, even though there's zero evidence of direct support (other than from intercept or consortium news, who get their news from RT) False. Plenty of first hand links in this thread prove that. Read them for yourself. Or your now forgotten claims that USAs main beef with Syria is a phantom gas pipeline. Or your now forgotten claims about US involvement in Yemen I haven't forgotten either of those topics. But they're irrelevant to this discussion, Reek. You have been nothing but a Putin and Assad apologist, and do it disgustingly under the guise that USA is the warmongering party whether in Syria or Ukraine. There's your calling card. If someone objects to the neocon agenda of endless war and working with groups that blow up little girls, they MUST be Putin and Assad apologists. Between the two of us, I'm the only one who's interviewed now over 50 soldiers who've been deployed in country and deal with the realities on the ground every day. The difference between us is I know what's happening on the ground in Syria from the people who are there. You, clearly, either do not know or don't care. Keep on thinking I'm apologizing for Putin simply because I express outrage over my government working with people who blow up little girls. Freedom of thought and speech aren't to be tolerated in a fascist regime, I know. You're losing this badly, Reek. Because only on your world is an email of support for Ukrainian government is worse than using artillery to bomb civilians and foreign airlines. Only in your world is bombing 70 military in a war zone is worse than bombing ambulance convoys. Funny how up in arms you got about US promoting WWIII with a proposed no fly zone in Syria, but are fully on board with Russia's no fly zone in Syria. Nothing I've ever said... all you got are lies now, Reek. Have we settled on who the true hypocrite is? We have, Reek. It's you. The guy who has nothing but lies and distortion to try to spin the attention away from his own shameful, and dangerous world views. The same guy who claims regime change is simply wishing better lives for people on the ground... even if that means turning them over to ISIS and AQ death squads, or blowing up little girls at a concert. Because you just hate the Russians, any alliance that serves your goal is justified. That's who you're siding with, Reek. Own it. Stop running from it. And yes, I have no problems defending neocons, because none of this crap would be happening if the US didn't high tail out of Iraq. Your inability to admit an error in judgment is not a surprise, Reek. Edited May 23, 2017 by Deranged Rhino
Foxx Posted May 23, 2017 Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) "If it turns out Seth Rich gave Podesta's emails to Wikileaks instead of the "Russians hacking them" it blows EVERYTHING you've been told out of the water. It destroys the narrative that the Russians "hacked" the election, it severely undercuts the entire collusion meme, it ends up making the MSM look foolish along with the DNC, the Clinton campaign on top of opening up serious charges against key people inside the establishment all through DC." Okay so finding out that Seth Rich is the leaker would be a HUGE story. I mean like you said it would change everything aboht the way you see the world. AND JULIAN ASSANGE IS SITTING ON EVIDENCE THAT THIS IS TRUE. So... Why is he hiding it? Seth Rich is already dead. Surely there is no better moment than now to release the evidence. There's a pattern in conspiracies like this - the information is always promised to come out later. Rod Wheeler has evidence coming TOMORROW... until he doesn't. Kim Dotcom is going to release an email conversation he had with Seth Rich TOMORROW. Why the wait? Real breaking news just breaks, it doesn't ask you to visit the blog/channel/whatever tomorrow. I'm shocked, absolutely shocked, that there rubes who keep falling for this crap. Alex Jones is a millionaire! That blows my mind! He has to keep apologizing to companies in response to lawsuits he lost, but people keep on believing him and his ilk and giving them money. So far you have one - ONE - piece of evidence, and it's Julian Assange nodding. I mean holy crap dude. I wish I could givs you some perspective on how nuts this all is but I can't because your brain isn't listening. It doesn't matter if every single piece of the story falls apart one by one, which has already begun to happen. You need this so badly to be true. It's funny to me that when this story broke, the conspiracy narrative was that the Washington Post breaking Russia story was an attempt to cover it up. No one ever thought maybe it was the other way around? Maybe there's a reason Fox News suddenly drudged up noted liar Rod Wheeler on the same day that a breaking story about Trump and Russia broke? In search of some grand conspiracy you've missed the obvious one sitting right in front of your nose. Stop making me ask you for a follow up, just post your full thought and let me digest it. This is another hallmark of conspiracy theorists, you all talk in this cryptic "riddle me this" way. Just come out with it. What is your point? How does Wikileaks operate in a way that excuses Assange not coming right out and saying that Seth was the leaker? Keep this in mind too DR. It can be both true that there is a deep state intent on waging an information war AND that Seth Rich was simply tragically murdered in a botched robbery. You can accept that conspiracies happen without latching on to every single conspiracy theory. There actually is no evidence that Seth Rich was murdered by the DNC. Heck even IF the bombshell news came out that he was the leaker that STILL wouldn't prove that the DNC murdered him. This is the problem with conspiracy theories, they fill in all the blanks well in advance. So I feel confident in saying there is ZERO evidence that the DNC murdered Seth Rich. If you want to accept a nod as evidence of him being the leaker, be my guest. I can't stop you. But this isn't the part of a CSI episode where you piece everything together from a few loose threads on a corkboard. This is reality. you understand that there is not a shred of evidence of any Russian hacking and/or collusion, right? and because there is not, wouldn't logic seem to dictate that this might possibly be a cover story? wikileaks cant divulge any of their sources, ever. no matter the circumstance. if they did they could never be trusted to conceal a source again. someone else said it a little ways back. if wikileaks divulged a source, they would become known as wikileak. Edited May 23, 2017 by Foxx
GG Posted May 23, 2017 Posted May 23, 2017 Just because you interviewed the soldiers on the ground doesn't mean you can see the whole picture, as your two year tirade has shown. The pipeline is fully germane to the topic, because two years ago it was your explanation of the US involvement Syria. Well what happened? Or how the Deep State war heated up with the pending coronation, and then your story conveniently changed with Trumps election. Or as has been explained many times that this is not a bilateral conflict, and USAs involvement means some support of unsavory people, like it has been throughout the history of the US. Or how you claim to have read the entirety of PATRIOT act, but can't provide a single passage that created new curbs on freedom. Must be nice to live in a tinfoil world that's fed with anti-American propaganda that you buy hook line and sinker. I'm under no pretense that everything that USA does is good. But I also know that it's an easy decision to differentiate between USA and Russia and its proxies. But keep up with your cute gifs. Vlad must love them
Deranged Rhino Posted May 23, 2017 Author Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) Just because you interviewed the soldiers on the ground doesn't mean you can see the whole picture, as your two year tirade has shown. The pipeline is fully germane to the topic, because two years ago it was your explanation of the US involvement Syria. Well what happened? (It's not, the topic is you claiming I said the CIA bombed Manchester) Or how the Deep State war heated up with the pending coronation, and then your story conveniently changed with Trumps election. (Story did not change.) Or as has been explained many times that this is not a bilateral conflict, and USAs involvement means some support of unsavory people, like it has been throughout the history of the US. (I've been the one describing it as a Proxy war for three years now. ISIS is our proxy in Syria as is AQ.) Or how you claim to have read the entirety of PATRIOT act, but can't provide a single passage that created new curbs on freedom. (A lie) Must be nice to live in a tinfoil world that's fed with anti-American propaganda that you buy hook line and sinker. (A burn) I'm under no pretense that everything that USA does is good. But I also know that it's an easy decision to differentiate between USA and Russia and its proxies. (Nonsense that's off topic) But keep up with your cute gifs. Vlad must love them It's okay, Reek. You've shown your true colors today. All you have left are lies. The first step is to admit you have a philosophical problem. You support blindly any alliance that creates more dead Russians. That's your goal. No matter how many little girls get blown up in the process. Edited May 23, 2017 by Deranged Rhino
meazza Posted May 23, 2017 Posted May 23, 2017 Sorry Greg but you consistently get your ass handed to you in this thread
Deranged Rhino Posted May 23, 2017 Author Posted May 23, 2017 Sorry Greg but you consistently get your ass handed to you in this thread Yeah but you're Canadian. Your opinion only counts as half a vote.
GG Posted May 23, 2017 Posted May 23, 2017 It's okay, Reek. You've shown your true colors today. All you have left are lies. The first step is to admit you have a philosophical problem. You support blindly any alliance that creates more dead Russians. That's your goal. No matter how many little girls get blown up in the process. More dead Russians means more live and happier persons across the world. I'll take that trade any day.
reddogblitz Posted May 23, 2017 Posted May 23, 2017 More dead Russians means more live and happier persons across the world. I'll take that trade any day. Hey GG, the 1970s called. They want their foriegn policy back.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 23, 2017 Author Posted May 23, 2017 More dead Russians means more live and happier persons across the world. I'll take that trade any day. This is one of the saddest things ever written on this message board. I truly hope you find peace one day. I take back the reek gifs, you're much more broken than he ever was.
GG Posted May 24, 2017 Posted May 24, 2017 This is one of the saddest things ever written on this message board. I truly hope you find peace one day. I take back the reek gifs, you're much more broken than he ever was. History doesn't lie.
Benjamin Franklin Posted May 24, 2017 Posted May 24, 2017 Wait what? I watched the video of the dirtbag Assange. Setting aside his serious credibility issues, you put your faith in that movement of his head? Good "proof" little buddy! Now I'm on board with the Seth Rich conspiracy.
GoBills808 Posted May 24, 2017 Posted May 24, 2017 Wait what? I watched the video of the dirtbag Assange. Setting aside his serious credibility issues, you put your faith in that movement of his head? Good "proof" little buddy! Now I'm on board with the Seth Rich conspiracy. Fox News had to retract their story; didn't meet editorial standards. CRIME Statement on coverage of Seth Rich murder investigation Published May 23, 2017Fox News On May 16, a story was posted on the Fox News website on the investigation into the 2016 murder of DNC Staffer Seth Rich. The article was not initially subjected to the high degree of editorial scrutiny we require for all our reporting. Upon appropriate review, the article was found not to meet those standards and has since been removed. We will continue to investigate this story and will provide updates as warranted.
Recommended Posts