ISIS are pure evil.

mad muffin

donegal__road wrote: »

In the main, all commodities are traded internationally using the US dollar.

In 2000, Sadam planned to drop the Dollar in favour of the Euro to trade oil.

The US moved on him within 12 months.

In 2011, Gadafi planned to launch the African Dollar, and use it in place of the US petro-dollar to trade oil. The US moved on him within months.


Last year, Iran began swapping oil for commodities such as gold, with India, China and Turkey, instead of using the US dollar.

3 American aircraft carriers moved towards Iran via the Gulf of Oman within a week of this.

Tail Docker wrote: »

I know. I just couldn't be bothered spelling it out for the dummies down the back.

Again. Where is the proof? So us some kind of credible proof?

All I'm hearing so far is an episode of Person of Interest…

mad muffin

partyatmygaff wrote: »

If you can give me five current US Government officials with power who will financially gain by starting and maintaining conflict then maybe we can upgrade the "ISIS is an example of a US Fabrication designed to generate money for Uncle Sam" conspiracy theory from grade A bull**** to fantastical but plausible.

Exactly. They are basically saying the president of the United States is merely a figure head. There are those behind the scenes that are wielding the power. Those in the CIA and NSA that truly control America and the world.

Patrick2010

LorMal wrote: »

This thread is a joke now. Completely overtaken by a small pack of conspiracy theory clowns.
It's all an American plot to make money on arms. There are no atrocities really - its all scaremongering by the 'western media'. The USA and Isreal are behind ISIS. What about the Palestinians? ('what about' are their 2 favourite words). What about Nigeria? What about Saudi beheadings? ......Ad Nauseum. We even have one clown trying to argue that it's part of the conspiracy that the US is NOT putting troops on the ground??? (I really don't know how that works, but anyway..).
CTs travel in packs, quote spurious articles from derided sources and furiously support each other in their delusions. They have ruined the debate on the threads on Gaza as well. (You see it a lot on Boards with the Shinnerbots especially).
Boards mods need to look at this IMHO - every interesting debate ends up being ruined by this juvenile behaviour.
That's me out. I pray for those people on the mountain and I hope that America rescues them.

Well said, the clown doing most of the posting saying ISIS are a grand bunch of lads has been joined by another clown who got bored winding people up on the Malaysian airline thread.
Wouldn't surprise me if they're both a couple of college students who get a laugh out of stirring sh*t on boards.
What would get a reaction on boards they think, "I know, I'll post support of ISIS, that should stir things up nicely"

h2005

mad muffin wrote: »

Despicable.

People like that need to have their passports revoked and if their families are found implicated, deported from wence they came.

Many of them are home grown. Kicking them out of the country may not be possible.

mad muffin

Egginacup wrote: »

How much did Richard Cheney profit from fabricating the beginning of this Iraq debacle?
Halliburton made $39.5 Billion from the war...and continues to do so.

I understand that G.W. Bush only made a paltry $800 million.

Rumsfeld took a tidy sum and continues to receive royalties. You may be asking (or splitting hairs) as to who currently in power stands to profit. Well it's very simple to work out for yourself.

KBR, Halliburton and FLuor made 100's of millions charging the Pentagon 20 bucks for a can of coke for a GI or 100 bucks to service a kilo of laundry. Of course the Pentagon paid up because it wasn't them but the tax payer who was footing the bill. So expensive melarkey this regime-change.

But if you think it's a fantastical conspiracy theory then that's up to you. When it comes to the war industry you have to maximise the money coming IN to the corporations and minimize it going OUT (like benefits, aid and pensions to war cripples/dead and their families).

Show me documents for these figures? I mean you must have seen the documents? How else are you coming up with this?

LorMal

Patrick2010 wrote: »

Well said, the clown doing most of the posting saying ISIS are a grand bunch of lads has been joined by another clown who got bored winding people up on the Malaysian airline thread.
Wouldn't surprise me if they're both a couple of college students who get a laugh out of stirring sh*t on boards.
What would get a reaction on boards they think, "I know, I'll post support of ISIS, that should stir things up nicely"

A lot of the posts seem to happen in the middle of the night when the rest of us need to sleep because we have to get up in the morning. So you are probably right.

donegal__road

mad muffin wrote: »

Again. Where is the proof? So us some kind of credible proof?

All I'm hearing so far is an episode of Person of Interest…

I dont mean to be derailing this thread, but I have been asked to provide proof of an earlier claim I made.


Saddam to drop the Dollar in favour of the Euro

also

*There is a great deal more online on that subject*




Saving the World economy from Gaddafi's Gold Dinar


Gaddafi's plans for a new African gold Dinar would have devastated the Dollar



(the most important issue): Details of the 'Gold for Oil' bartering which is going on at present for Iran's Oil.

Iran can bypass Western sanctions by bartering their oil. In 2012 they started bartering with India, China and Turkey... now Russia are on board. Putin is definitely going all in.

We won't recognize the political landscape in another few years. The crisis will not be allowed to happen, as far as the US oligarchs are concerned, until the middle class has been completely fleeced. The West is living on its fat... for now.









*for the purposes of this thread, the ISIS are beyond evil and should be exterminated.









.

mad muffin

donegal__road wrote: »

I dont mean to be derailing this thread, but I have been asked to provide proof of an earlier claim I made.


Saddam to drop the Dollar in favour of the Euro

also

*There is a great deal more online on that subject*




Saving the World economy from Gaddafi's Gold Dinar


Gaddafi's plans for a new African gold Dinar would have devastated the Dollar



(the most important issue): Details of the 'Gold for Oil' bartering which is going on at present for Iran's Oil.

Iran can bypass Western sanctions by bartering their oil. In 2012 they started bartering with India, China and Turkey... now Russia are on board. Putin is definitely going all in.

We won't recognize the political landscape in another few years. The crisis will not be allowed to happen, as far as the US oligarchs are concerned, until the middle class has been completely fleeced. The West is living on its fat... for now.









*for the purposes of this thread, the ISIS are beyond evil and should be exterminated.









.

Well, after this

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=91668959&postcount=2805

I don't know what to believe anymore.

I think I'll just forget about the Middle East and live in blissful ignorance.

DeadHand

Egginacup wrote: »

Right-thinking people all over the world are revolted by the US backed sickening carnage in Gaza.
You're beloved and benevolent US hasn't halted the sale of a single cartridge in this nauseating butchery.
Great fellows.

This thread is about ISIS, not Gaza. If you wish to discuss Gaza, go to the relevant thread.

I never said the USA was benevolent. They are not. A truly benevolent world power has never and will never exist. The gaining and maintenance of true global power by it's nature does not allow a consistantly benevolent approach. The US is not beloved of me. It has blundered tragically and been a negative influence on other nations many times in history. But the good they have done throughout their history outweighs the evil, in my opinion.

Given the choice between the US or the likes of ISIS being the dominant power in the world, which would you choose?

Your incoherent, mealy mouthed attempts to rationalize the mutilation, torture, rape and murder of innocent men, women and children for simply being who they are has been frankly disgusting.

renegademaster

mad muffin wrote: »

Again. Where is the proof? So us some kind of credible proof?

All I'm hearing so far is an episode of Person of Interest…

demands proof from someone on a forum but will take the word of barry obama and his friends no questions asked lol

mad muffin wrote: »

Show me documents for these figures? I mean you must have seen the documents? How else are you coming up with this?

see above

mad muffin wrote: »

Well, after this

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=91668959&postcount=2805

I don't know what to believe anymore.

I think I'll just forget about the Middle East and live in blissful ignorance.

burying heads in the sand is what's enabling all of this

Dayum

ISIS are evil but so are First World Governments.

mad muffin

renegademaster wrote: »

demands proof from someone on a forum but will take the word of barry obama and his friends no questions asked lol



see above



burying heads in the sand is what's enabling all of this

I'm not taking the word of Obama. I'm just asking, if you are going to post some, let's face it, outlandish accusations. Back it up.

After initially seeing the original photo. The guy so happy, smiling. That little girl. What looked like terror on her face. It affected me like none of the other images. The rest where all dead now. Suffering over. Her suffering was just beginning, set to last for years, if not the rest if her life, until her death.

Then the truth is revealed. Someone taking such an innocent thing and turning it into something so monstrous.

It has shaken me. I can't trust anything anymore. Everything is just lies and deceit. I can't be dealing with that in my life.

unseenfootage

mad muffin wrote: »

I'm not taking the word of Obama. I'm just asking, if you are going to post some, let's face it, outlandish accusations. Back it up.

After initially seeing the original photo. The guy so happy, smiling. That little girl. What looked like terror on her face. It affected me like none of the other images. The rest where all dead now. Suffering over. Her suffering was just beginning, set to last for years, if not the rest if her life, until her death.

Then the truth is revealed. Someone taking such an innocent thing and turning it into something so monstrous.

It has shaken me. I can't trust anything anymore. Everything is just lies and deceit. I can't be dealing with that in my life.

That is just one such incident of deliberately false and misleading news. Here are a few more: http://justpaste.it/ExposedDebunked

Mathew Barber tweeted this earlier:

https://twitter.com/Matthew__Barber/status/498918115984830464 . It's about the false report that IS buried 500 Yazidis alive.

conorhal

unseenfootage wrote: »

That is just one such incident of deliberately false and misleading news. Here are a few more: http://justpaste.it/ExposedDebunked

Mathew Barber tweeted this earlier:

https://twitter.com/Matthew__Barber/status/498918115984830464 . It's about the false report that IS buried 500 Yazidis alive.

In what comes as a shock to nobody, people that get all their information from twitter and crank sites, you not excepted, are frequently wrong.

unseenfootage

conorhal wrote: »

In what comes as a shock to nobody, people that get all their information from twitter and crank sites, you not excepted, are frequently wrong.

Frequently, yes, but not always.

Twitter can, just like boards.ie or facebook or MSM be used to propagate falsehood but it can also be used to refute falsehood.

conorhal

unseenfootage wrote: »

Frequently, yes, but not always.

Twitter can, just like boards.ie or facebook or MSM be used to propagate falsehood but it can also be used to refute falsehood.

The problem being that it's usually difficult to tell the difference, so for all it's faults, a newspaper with an editorial policy is typically more reliable.
Irish RTE reporter Mark Little made a fortune reciently selling his company Storyful which was set up to do exactly that, track down on-line reporting to it's source to provide mainstream media with some kind of editorial confirmation that the source was real and verifyible. Without that kind of journalism, most on line media is just op ed junk.

unseenfootage

conorhal wrote: »

The problem being that it's usually difficult to tell the difference, so for all it's faults, a newspaper with an editorial policy is typically more reliable.
Irish RTE reporter Mark Little made a fortune reciently selling his company Storyful which was set up to do exactly that, track down on-line reporting to it's source to provide mainstream media with some kind of editorial confirmation that the source was real and verifyible. Without that kind of journalism, most on line media is just op ed junk.

I don't know.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/24/isis-women-girls-fgm-mosul-un

Political analysts/freelance journos on twitter figured that this was a lie when Guardian and other News outlets very foolishly ran with this sensationalist story.

Social Media, especially twitter, has changed everything. Nowadays it is ordinary people who have access to the news even before the MSM. On twitter you can get feeds from authorized accounts which are generally trustworthy and in most cases backed up with video and photographic evidences.

conorhal

unseenfootage wrote: »

I don't know.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/24/isis-women-girls-fgm-mosul-un

Political analysts/freelance journos on twitter figured that this was a lie when Guardian and other News outlets very foolishly ran with this sensationalist story.

Social Media, especially twitter, has changed everything. Nowadays it is ordinary people who have access to the news even before the MSM. On twitter you can get feeds from authorized accounts which are generally trustworthy and in most cases backed up with video and photographic evidences.

You're missing the point. Yes newspapers get it wrong, especially an in environment where there are diminishing investigative resources and an increased need to compete for click bait with on line media which doesn’t have an editorial staff or a requirement to fact check a story.
BUT the percentage of times a newspaper gets it's facts wrong tends to be miniscule as compared to internet news sources, and when mainstream media like the guardian does get things wrong it's because it has (as was the case with this report) unquestioningly posted something from an internet site, which is why Mark Little's startup sold for so much, it's a means of outsourcing editorial verification so that newspapers don't get burned by twitter constantly when they do little more then re-tweet junk.

Karl Stein

partyatmygaff wrote: »

With some evidence, name me some current powerful US Government officials who will benefit financially from starting another war. How about just one person, even as a token effort?

I'm not claiming there are a cabal of powerful people plotting a war to benefit from, there may be there may not be, I have no idea. I was highlighting the naivety of your question. You don't need a conspiracy of powerful men when the whole system is set up in such a way that it perpetuates the structures of power all by itself. It's an institutional thing.

And while you're at it, there was that other inconvenient question that doesn't fit in with your theory. I think it had something to do with why the USA isn't jumping at the chance to escalate their military involvement despite a rare show of public support.

My theory?

Playboy

I think people are being overly critical of unseenfootage and Tail Docker. I think they have a very pertinent point in relation to the mainstream Western Media dividing the world up into Good and Evil. I dont know a huge amount about ISIS but I am suspicious of their timely arrival on the news desks of mainstream media. Bad Guys rarely think of themselves as bad guys and I think a bit of critical thinking around who ISIS are, what are their motivations, how did they come about, who is funding them etc is no bad thing.

People get hysterical about groups such as these and start calling for all sorts of military intervention when in fact they know very little about the context this group is operating in. Most of the Western intervention in the Middle East has been nothing short of a disaster for the region and I'm not sure that more direct intervention is what is needed. The Yazidi's should be helped but there are many ways and means to help other than bombs and weapons.

partyatmygaff

Karl Stein wrote: »

I'm not claiming there are a cabal of powerful people plotting a war to benefit from, there may be there may not be, I have no idea. I was highlighting the naivety of your question. You don't need a conspiracy of powerful men when the whole system is set up in such a way that it perpetuates the structures of power all by itself. It's an institutional thing.

I was originally asking renegademaster who was claiming that and named the usual crew from the Bush administration but fell short of naming anyone who has power who might financially benefit from military intervention in Iraq today.

It's not a naive question, just a very simple one. If you can't even name a single powerful US Government official who stands to gain financially from military intervention, how can you expect anyone to do anything but rubbish the "The US government fabricates and encourages conflict to make money" theory? A lot of people make money from wars. Find me even just one of them with the power to influence America's decision to start war.

Unless i'm mistaken, America has been pretty reserved in their response and haven't made any obvious attempts to escalate their involvement. I suppose this "institutional thing" isn't all that deep-rooted.

comongethappy

Playboy wrote: »

I think people are being overly critical of unseenfootage and Tail Docker. I think they have a very pertinent point in relation to the mainstream Western Media dividing the world up into Good and Evil. I dont know a huge amount about ISIS but I am suspicious of their timely arrival on the news desks of mainstream media. Bad Guys rarely think of themselves as bad guys and I think a bit of critical thinking around who ISIS are, what are their motivations, how did they come about, who is funding them etc is no bad thing.

Suspicious?

There is nothing sudden about ISIS.
They have been beheading & crucifying Syrians for a couple of years now.....
Widely reported in the media.

Their origins & funding, widely known & reported also.

That it hasn't crossed your personal radar is hardly cause for suspicion.

People get hysterical about groups such as these and start calling for all sorts of military intervention when in fact they know very little about the context this group is operating in.

Does it matter in what context they behead people?

The establishment of a new caliphate... That's the context.

I'd love your opinion on what context they remove a Syrians head from their body falls into?

The Yazidi's should be helped but there are many ways and means to help other than bombs and weapons.

Such as?

Infini

Not sure if this got posted yet but this just popped up on google news

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/08/12/child-holding-severed-head-photograph-is-proof-of-threat-from-isis-john-kerry/

Seriously this is just beyond messed up. Honestly this kind of insanity should be simply removed via an international UN occupation force at this point the sheer messed up acts of this region just go on and on.

Playboy

comongethappy wrote: »

Suspicious?

There is nothing sudden about ISIS.
They have been beheading & crucifying Syrians for a couple of years now.....
Widely reported in the media.

Their origins & funding, widely known & reported also.

That it hasn't crossed your personal radar is hardly cause for suspicion.

It's suspicious that the media coverage and notoriety of the group has all of sudden become the dominant news story. I have been aware of the group but only in a peripheral way until now like most people.

comongethappy wrote: »

Does it matter in what context they behead people?

The establishment of a new caliphate... That's the context.

I'd love your opinion on what context they remove a Syrians head from their body falls into?

Such as?

Why is it you need to reduce such a complex issue to single fact? Obviously beheading is abhorrent act of violence but I dont buy into the story that people are just crazy bloodthirsty lunatics. People always have what they think are valid reasons for doing what they do. If butchery and cruelty is the prerogative of this group then I think we need to understand how and why we have arrived at such an extreme situation.

unseenfootage

comongethappy wrote: »

Does it matter in what context they behead people?

The establishment of a new caliphate... That's the context.

I'd love your opinion on what context they remove a Syrians head from their body falls into?




Such as?

The beheading started some time back.

Context does matter. A beheading done in the course of battle is not quite the same as a beheading done during the course of a crime, such as the punishment meted out by Mexican drug cartels.

Yes, beheadings are particularly brutal but not more than say, a bomb dropped from a drone bomber or a fighter jet, or barrel bombs dropped from helicopters that dismembers and shreds to smithereens its victims, indiscriminately at times.

As far as I know, IS is not the only group in the region who behead their enemies. There are well documented cases of other groups doing it. It is important to note that this punishment is only done on the battlefield. I have not come across ordinary criminals being beheaded.

The crucifixions are not proper crucifixions where a person is nailed alive to a cross. The victim is first executed and then "crucified," in public, usually at the Town square. This is done to deter other would be criminals from any evil intentions. Crucifixions are for certain classes of crimes, such as rape or highway robbery which have elements of terrorism against civilians.

Without minimizing the brutality of IS, there are far worse acts of brutality and violence that occur in Syria. Assad's crimes, from the forced starvation, rapes, torture, massacres, barrel bombs are well documented and witnessed

IS however, gets the lions share of attention because of their Islamic credentials and their threat to the tyrants who rule over the middle East as well as their threat to Israel.

tallus

unseenfootage wrote: »

The beheading started some time

Yes, beheadings are particularly brutal but not more than say, a bomb dropped from a drone bomber or a fighter jet, or barrel bombs dropped from helicopters that dismembers and shreds to smithereens its victims, indiscriminately at times.

As far as I know, IS is not the only group in the region who behead their enemies. There are well documented cases of other groups doing it. It is important to note that this punishment is only done on the battlefield. I have not come across ordinary criminals being beheaded.

Personally I think there's a huge distinction in dropping a bomb on an area miles away from you where you don't have to look face to face at the person you are killing and or maiming compared to physically beheading an individual with your own hand. The end result may be the same, but as far as I'm concerned, it has to take a serious a degree of out and out inhumanity to physically cut someone's head off.
I'm not saying I agree with bombing either, far from it, but there's a distinction. You don't appear to be making that connection.

unseenfootage

conorhal wrote: »

You're missing the point. Yes newspapers get it wrong, especially an in environment where there are diminishing investigative resources and an increased need to compete for click bait with on line media which doesn’t have an editorial staff or a requirement to fact check a story.
BUT the percentage of times a newspaper gets it's facts wrong tends to be miniscule as compared to internet news sources, and when mainstream media like the guardian does get things wrong it's because it has (as was the case with this report) unquestioningly posted something from an internet site, which is why Mark Little's startup sold for so much, it's a means of outsourcing editorial verification so that newspapers don't get burned by twitter constantly when they do little more then re-tweet junk.

Not all online sources are created equal.

Case in point Eliot Higgins http://bit.ly/1oH8hBs aka Brown Moses, who through his coverage on the Syrian conflict has managed to carve himself a career with MSM.

There are literally dozens of qualified journos or political analysts who get their info from authorized sources and who do the necessary verification online in a similar fashion. I agree that there is a lot of junk on twitter, which is why many seasoned tweeps don't retweet unless tweets are cross checked and verified. Of course there is always room for error, but with the constant flow of info from multiple sources these are usually caught in good time and rectified.

unseenfootage

tallus wrote: »

Personally I think there's a huge distinction in dropping a bomb on an area miles away from you where you don't have to look face to face at the person you are killing and or maiming compared to physically beheading an individual with your own hand. The end result may be the same, but as far as I'm concerned, it has to take a serious a degree of out and out inhumanity to physically cut someone's head off.
I'm not saying I agree with bombing either, far from it, but there's a distinction. You don't appear to be making that connection.

Many modern Europeans think that it is barbaric to slaughter a chicken but are perfectly okay with buying chicken nuggets at the local Tesco supermarket and taking it home to eat. There is a huge disconnect between our clinical and sanitized feeding patterns and what actually happens in the abattoirs and food factories.

Likewise, people think that it is acceptable to execute a criminal with an electric shock or a lethal injection but barbaric to do so by beheading. Yet, beheading, actually causes death much faster, since the spine and windpipe is severed within seconds.

tallus

I give up. A chicken doesn't have the same sense of self as a human does. It's not really a valid comparison.
I stand by my comment that it takes a cold blooded type of individual to ch someone's head off. If you want to talk about chickens why not start a thread.

comongethappy

Playboy wrote: »

I think we need to understand how and why we have arrived at such an extreme situation.

I'm unsure who "we" are?

"We" aren't the ones cutting a homicidal swathe across Iraq & Syria.

I don't feel any guilt about this tragedy befalling Iraq, the blame lies with the man whose hand wield the gun/clever.

I'm not sure what sitting down with these guys & talking to them about their motivations achieves?

I doubt there is much to rationalise & "understand" about the gents below?

I wonder was this Iraqi soldier saying: C'mon guys, let's "understand" each other here
(Viewer discretion advised)
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-JwhUYtgvvO0/U51u9cdxc4I/AAAAAAAABqE/AOrYVnZwP7I/s1600/beheading+iraqi+soldier.JPG