LA RAM FAN
Diamond Member
- Mar 1, 2008
- 49,979
- 17,363
- 2,250
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Missed the point to promote your bias. How parochial of you. Or is your post a pathetic attempt at deflection?Yup, the U.S. would never collude with Islamist groups.
The Curtis Culwell Center attackThere was a large wikileaks dump on these connections. But moreover, has isis ever attacked America or Israel?
Think!
So, you think those attacks were isis?The Curtis Culwell Center attackThere was a large wikileaks dump on these connections. But moreover, has isis ever attacked America or Israel?
Think!
University of California, Merced
San Bernardino shooting
Shooting of Philadelphia police officer
Orlando nightclub shooting
Ohio State University attack
As for Israel;
All ISIS inspired attacks, it's how they function outside of their direct areas of control.
Nope, ISIS hasn't attacked either county in any way shape or form........
The Curtis Culwell Center attackThere was a large wikileaks dump on these connections. But moreover, has isis ever attacked America or Israel?
Think!
University of California, Merced
San Bernardino shooting
Shooting of Philadelphia police officer
Orlando nightclub shooting
Ohio State University attack
As for Israel;
All ISIS inspired attacks, it's how they function outside of their direct areas of control.
Nope, ISIS hasn't attacked either county in any way shape or form........
So you think those attacks were false flags? Okay dud.So, you think those attacks were isis?The Curtis Culwell Center attackThere was a large wikileaks dump on these connections. But moreover, has isis ever attacked America or Israel?
Think!
University of California, Merced
San Bernardino shooting
Shooting of Philadelphia police officer
Orlando nightclub shooting
Ohio State University attack
As for Israel;
All ISIS inspired attacks, it's how they function outside of their direct areas of control.
Nope, ISIS hasn't attacked either county in any way shape or form........
OK, dude.
Where would they bomb them?The Curtis Culwell Center attackThere was a large wikileaks dump on these connections. But moreover, has isis ever attacked America or Israel?
Think!
University of California, Merced
San Bernardino shooting
Shooting of Philadelphia police officer
Orlando nightclub shooting
Ohio State University attack
As for Israel;
All ISIS inspired attacks, it's how they function outside of their direct areas of control.
Nope, ISIS hasn't attacked either county in any way shape or form........
As for Israel, ISIS knows that Israel would bomb the crap out of them, so it better not start up with them.
In the same areas that we do and that Syria, Iraq and the Russians do, in their strongholds. Duh.Where would they bomb them?The Curtis Culwell Center attackThere was a large wikileaks dump on these connections. But moreover, has isis ever attacked America or Israel?
Think!
University of California, Merced
San Bernardino shooting
Shooting of Philadelphia police officer
Orlando nightclub shooting
Ohio State University attack
As for Israel;
All ISIS inspired attacks, it's how they function outside of their direct areas of control.
Nope, ISIS hasn't attacked either county in any way shape or form........
As for Israel, ISIS knows that Israel would bomb the crap out of them, so it better not start up with them.
Missed the point to promote your bias. How parochial of you. Or is your post a pathetic attempt at deflection?Yup, the U.S. would never collude with Islamist groups.
Nice rationalization, you must practice on a continual basis.Missed the point to promote your bias. How parochial of you. Or is your post a pathetic attempt at deflection?Yup, the U.S. would never collude with Islamist groups.
Do you even know what parochial means? If you do, you would realize that it's an inappropriate term for the dynamic you are trying to characterize. I have actaully widened the debate rather than narrowing it.
Do you know what pathetic means? Pathetic would be not noting that the U.S. has allied itself with Islamists and Wahabis when it served U.S. interests.
So, far from a deflection, it presents facts which are perhaps to difficult for your naive little brain to process given your severe case of cognizant dissonance.
Yes we have allied with different groups at different times when it serves our national security. ISIS does not serve our national security in any way shape or form, care to try again?Nice rationalization, you must practice on a continual basis.Missed the point to promote your bias. How parochial of you. Or is your post a pathetic attempt at deflection?Yup, the U.S. would never collude with Islamist groups.
Do you even know what parochial means? If you do, you would realize that it's an inappropriate term for the dynamic you are trying to characterize. I have actaully widened the debate rather than narrowing it.
Do you know what pathetic means? Pathetic would be not noting that the U.S. has allied itself with Islamists and Wahabis when it served U.S. interests.
So, far from a deflection, it presents facts which are perhaps to difficult for your naive little brain to process given your severe case of cognizant dissonance.
Yes we have allied with different groups at different times when it serves our national security. ISIS does not serve our national security in any way shape or form, care to try again?Nice rationalization, you must practice on a continual basis.Missed the point to promote your bias. How parochial of you. Or is your post a pathetic attempt at deflection?Yup, the U.S. would never collude with Islamist groups.
Do you even know what parochial means? If you do, you would realize that it's an inappropriate term for the dynamic you are trying to characterize. I have actaully widened the debate rather than narrowing it.
Do you know what pathetic means? Pathetic would be not noting that the U.S. has allied itself with Islamists and Wahabis when it served U.S. interests.
So, far from a deflection, it presents facts which are perhaps to difficult for your naive little brain to process given your severe case of cognizant dissonance.
That's why we're bombing ISIS strongholds and using drones to take out their leaders....... Got it.......Yes we have allied with different groups at different times when it serves our national security. ISIS does not serve our national security in any way shape or form, care to try again?Nice rationalization, you must practice on a continual basis.Missed the point to promote your bias. How parochial of you. Or is your post a pathetic attempt at deflection?Yup, the U.S. would never collude with Islamist groups.
Do you even know what parochial means? If you do, you would realize that it's an inappropriate term for the dynamic you are trying to characterize. I have actaully widened the debate rather than narrowing it.
Do you know what pathetic means? Pathetic would be not noting that the U.S. has allied itself with Islamists and Wahabis when it served U.S. interests.
So, far from a deflection, it presents facts which are perhaps to difficult for your naive little brain to process given your severe case of cognizant dissonance.
Of course, initially in Syria, ISIS served the interests of the U.S., the Saudis (et al) and the Turks. ISIS were the strongest force that faced the Syrian Government.
That's why we're bombing ISIS strongholds and using drones to take out their leaders....... Got it.......Yes we have allied with different groups at different times when it serves our national security. ISIS does not serve our national security in any way shape or form, care to try again?Nice rationalization, you must practice on a continual basis.Missed the point to promote your bias. How parochial of you. Or is your post a pathetic attempt at deflection?
Do you even know what parochial means? If you do, you would realize that it's an inappropriate term for the dynamic you are trying to characterize. I have actaully widened the debate rather than narrowing it.
Do you know what pathetic means? Pathetic would be not noting that the U.S. has allied itself with Islamists and Wahabis when it served U.S. interests.
So, far from a deflection, it presents facts which are perhaps to difficult for your naive little brain to process given your severe case of cognizant dissonance.
Of course, initially in Syria, ISIS served the interests of the U.S., the Saudis (et al) and the Turks. ISIS were the strongest force that faced the Syrian Government.
Initially ISIS did not serve our interests no matter how you chose to spin their getting a hold of some of our support to other non ISIS groups.That's why we're bombing ISIS strongholds and using drones to take out their leaders....... Got it.......Yes we have allied with different groups at different times when it serves our national security. ISIS does not serve our national security in any way shape or form, care to try again?Nice rationalization, you must practice on a continual basis.Do you even know what parochial means? If you do, you would realize that it's an inappropriate term for the dynamic you are trying to characterize. I have actaully widened the debate rather than narrowing it.
Do you know what pathetic means? Pathetic would be not noting that the U.S. has allied itself with Islamists and Wahabis when it served U.S. interests.
So, far from a deflection, it presents facts which are perhaps to difficult for your naive little brain to process given your severe case of cognizant dissonance.
Of course, initially in Syria, ISIS served the interests of the U.S., the Saudis (et al) and the Turks. ISIS were the strongest force that faced the Syrian Government.
Do you know what initially means?