US Plot to Evacuate Top Jihadis From Ramadi Uncovered


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, jjkusaf said:

Which was Iranian.  Yep...very credible also. :)

 

It is true!  It all is because one guy said something, a russian sponsored news site reported it, and a news site from Iran which the US has been enemies for decades and only recently agreed of a few issues.

11 minutes ago, ctebah said:

Sputnik quoted another article from another news agency.  If you read before commenting you would realize this.  I'm simply pointing out your hypocrisy.  You sure come up with a lot of excuses when it comes to defending U.S. policies.  Now that is what I call funny. 

What is hilarious here is how many comments you make concerning other countries, or comments made, and how they are not true due to lack of proof, and then you turn around here and do the same thing. 

Edited by techbeck
Just now, techbeck said:

What is hilarious here is how many comments you make concerning other countries and lack of proof, and then you turn around here and do the same thing

This sentence makes no sense.  

 

This is just classic denial based on where the news comes from, the same thing U.S. does every time it's accused of something.  People denied the Afghan hospital bombing based on the source, and the same militia reporting on this reported about 30+ Iraqi soldiers being bombed by U.S. planes.  Both turned out to be true.    

Just now, ctebah said:

This sentence makes no sense.  

 

This is just classic denial based on where the news comes from, the same thing U.S. does every time it's accused of something.  People denied the Afghan hospital bombing based on the source, and the same militia reporting on this reported about 30+ Iraqi soldiers being bombed by U.S. planes.  Both turned out to be true.    

I edited my comment.  But my point was, you dismiss a lot of things due to lack of proof but then turn around and post a "news" story lacking any proof what so ever and claim it is true.   And those others stories that turned out to be true, there was something called evidence that backed it up.  And this article is just flame bait until/if evidence is proven.

 

I am sure glad most rest of the world does not believe something just of hearsay, or because a certain news agency/group has been right before.  There is a reason why evidence is needed to condemn someone for their actions.

  • Like 2
Just now, ctebah said:

This sentence makes no sense.  

 

This is just classic denial based on where the news comes from, the same thing U.S. does every time it's accused of something.  People denied the Afghan hospital bombing based on the source, and the same militia reporting on this reported about 30+ Iraqi soldiers being bombed by U.S. planes.  Both turned out to be true.    

That's great, but it doesn't make this story true because of the previous articles.  Until other news organizations/officials corroborate this, it is simply an unsubstantiated report.

7 minutes ago, ctebah said:

This sentence makes no sense.  

 

This is just classic denial based on where the news comes from, the same thing U.S. does every time it's accused of something.  People denied the Afghan hospital bombing based on the source, and the same militia reporting on this reported about 30+ Iraqi soldiers being bombed by U.S. planes.  Both turned out to be true.    

 

Makes total sense, all you do is post anti American nonsense from less than reputable sites that make CNN and Fox look unbiased, but when it comes to something you agree on you have qualms dismissing the source as propaganda, yey uour two "sources" are much worse than all the sites you dismiss as propaganda combined 

5 minutes ago, techbeck said:

I edited my comment.  But my point was, you dismiss a lot of things due to lack of proof but then turn around and post a "news" story lacking any proof what so ever and claim it is true.   And those others stories that turned out to be true, there was something called evidence that backed it up.  And this article is just flame bait until/if evidence is proven.

 

I am sure glad most rest of the world does not believe something just of hearsay, or because a certain news agency/group has been right before.  There is a reason why evidence is needed to condemn someone for their actions.

Can you backup that point please?  A few days ago you posted an article about Russian "supposed" bombing of civilians, and my reply was that "It wasn't supposed, it was definitely Russian."

 

In this long line of denial you try and accuse me of defending Russia when in fact I do the contrary and have no problem agreeing that the Russians are as guilty as anyone else.

 

PS:  most of the world knows U.S. created ISIS.   

2 minutes ago, Anibal P said:

 

Makes total sense, all you do is post anti American nonsense from less than reputable sites that make CNN and Fox look unbiased, but when it comes to something you agree on you have qualms dismissing the source as propaganda, yey uour two "sources" are much worse than all the sites you dismiss as propaganda combined 

So, just like I asked tech, can you backup your claim that I "dismiss" other sources?  And he was so in hurry to type out some denial that his initial sentience made absolutely no sense.  

Just now, ctebah said:

So, just like I asked tech, can you backup your claim that I "dismiss" other sources?  And he was so in hurry to type out some denial that his initial sentience made absolutely no sense.  

 

It's called your post history, want a link to it? 

 

4 minutes ago, ctebah said:

Can you backup that point please?  A few days ago you posted an article about Russian "supposed" bombing of civilians, and my reply was that "It wasn't supposed, it was definitely Russian."

 

In this long line of denial you try and accuse me of defending Russia when in fact I do the contrary and have no problem agreeing that the Russians are as guilty as anyone else.

 

PS:  most of the world knows U.S. created ISIS.   

I mentioned George Haswani, you said as usual US had no proof of the accusations.   I can find more issues, but frankly this flame bait posting is not worth my time and effort to do so.

 

And this is not about how ISIS was created.   Didnt you just accuse me of deflection the discussion...or should I go before you start commenting on my lack of grammar/education to try and prove your point.

1 minute ago, ctebah said:

Perfect, so you and Tech shouldn't have a problem finding posts to backup your claims.

Since 2 people here made the same comment and didnt originally provide any proof (I did tho), that makes it 100 percent true!   Just like the OP!!

4 minutes ago, techbeck said:

I mentioned George Haswani, you said as usual US had no proof of the accusations.   I can find more issues, but frankly this flame bait posting is not worth my time and effort to do so.

 

And this is not about how ISIS was created.   Didnt you just accuse me of deflection the discussion...or should I go before you start commenting on my lack of grammar/education to try and prove your point.

To which I replied that Assad is definitely buying oil from ISIS, just not as much as Turkey.  I also mentioned where Assad and Rebels/ISIS share the electricity from the Aleppo power station.  

 

A direct reply isn't a deflection.  One has only to look at your replies to see classic examples of deflection.  First it was the source, then it was "other countries are doing it", what's next?

 

But please, continue....

8 minutes ago, ctebah said:

To which I replied that Assad is definitely buying oil from ISIS, just not as much as Turkey.  I also mentioned where Assad and Rebels/ISIS share the electricity from the Aleppo power station.  

 

But please, continue....

You may have made a comment about Assad buying oil from ISIS, but it was not in that tread.  You also made a comment in the same thread about how no one but Russia has offered concrete proof of where ISIS oil is going.  But whatever, continue your anti US campaign.  Quite amusing. 

 

And that was not your reply when I mentioned George Haswani.

 

12 minutes ago, ctebah said:

A direct reply isn't a deflection.  One has only to look at your replies to see classic examples of deflection.  First it was the source, then it was "other countries are doing it", what's next?

 

 

Just pointing out that what you are complaining that one group is doing, most, if not all, other groups do the same thing.  To complain about one and support the other is being hypocritical.  I just realize that every country does the same/similar crap and it comes as no surprise to me and I dont use it to further my anti group agenda.

Just now, techbeck said:

You may have made a comment about Assad buying oil from ISIS, but it was not in that tread.  You also made a comment in the same thread about how no one but Russia has offered concrete proof of where ISIS oil is going.  But whatever, continue your anti US campaign.  Quite amusing. 

 

Exactly, that was a fact.  The U.S. offered no proof and denied it until the amount of evidence was overwhelming.  Then they "politely asked" Turkey to try and close it's borders.  A post from FunkyMike nails it:

 

Quote

Just a few weeks ago the US was in denial that the Oil is going into Turkey.

 

Then Russia dumped pictures. The US administration denied it again saying that the pictures are static and do not show the trucks going over the border. (This is no joke)

 

Then Russia dumped videos of moving trucks. Still the US denied it saying that it is just a few trucks worth and that they do not have any intelligence of oil movement.

 

Then Russia dumped videos of their drones filming US drones that are filming the Syrian Turkey border + oil movement.

This was exactly what happened before the U.S. came out and said that "Assad is buying oil (which no one denied) and that "some of it is going to Turkey".  Facts on the ground showed thousands, if not tens of thousands, of oil trucks crossing into Turkey every single day.  When asked why they don't bomb ISIS oil installations in the Eastern Syria, a U.S army official said it was due to "environmental concerns" (definitely not a joke)

 

The only person looking pathetic is the one denying all the facts on the ground.  But go on...

3 minutes ago, ctebah said:

Exactly, that was a fact.  The U.S. offered no proof and denied it until the amount of evidence was overwhelming.  Then they "politely asked" Turkey to try and close it's borders.  A post from FunkyMike nails it:

 

Fact, that the US did not have concrete proof. Sure, but the same goes for the article you posted.  You posted a crap article with no evidence and took it as proof enough to condemn the US.   And that was my point, you accuse others over lack of proof but deny accusations towards others due to lack of proof.  This has nothing to do with what FunkyMike said as this is what YOU do.

 

And you were even wrong on your reply when I mentioned George Haswani.  And my point was not concerning the buying ISIS oil, it was how you, again, take no evidence and condemn someone and then do the oppoisite.

4 minutes ago, techbeck said:

Fact, that the US did not have concrete proof.

U.S. and it's allies bombed ISIS for a year before Russia stepped in and had no proof of oil routes to Turkey.  Russia comes in and immediately embarrasses the West, NATO and Turkey over the oil smuggling routes.  Yeah, it's very "believable" that the U.S. didn't have proof....

 

Quote

You posted a crap article with no evidence and took it as proof enough to condemn the US.   And that was my point, you accuse others over lack of proof but deny accusations towards others due to lack of proof.  This has nothing to do with what FunkyMike said as this is what YOU do.

  You're all over the place man.  Doing a lot of defending for something you believe is a conspiracy.  Hilarious.    

6 minutes ago, ctebah said:

U.S. and it's allies bombed ISIS for a year before Russia stepped in and had no proof of oil routes to Turkey.  Russia comes in and immediately embarrasses the West, NATO and Turkey over the oil smuggling routes.  Yeah, it's very "believable" that the U.S. didn't have proof....

 

  You're all over the place man.  Doing a lot of defending for something you believe is a conspiracy.  Hilarious.    

You like to disagree with one side due to lack of proof while agreeing with another for the same thing.   And evidently, I am not the only one who thinks the OP article is a load of crap.

 

What is funny is how you are taking something 1 person said as fact.  I have some swamp land to sell in AZ...want to buy it?

Just now, techbeck said:

You like to disagree with one side due to lack of proof while agreeing with another for the same thing. 

 

What is funny is how you are taking something 1 person said as fact.  I have some swamp land to sell in AZ...want to buy it?

Yes, I tend to disagree with the side that helped created ISIS and that sponsors terrorists and agree with the side that is bombing them.  Remember, we heard almost nothing about the ISIS oil routes until Russians exposed it.  And like I mentioned before, do some research on the guy that made this accusation.  

3 minutes ago, ctebah said:

Yes, I tend to disagree with the side that helped created ISIS and that sponsors terrorists and agree with the side that is bombing them.  Remember, we heard almost nothing about the ISIS oil routes until Russians exposed it.  And like I mentioned before, do some research on the guy that made this accusation.  

Yup, according to you the Russians are saints.  Any accusations currently against Russia are crap since it is from western media or the US said it

 

Something you may need for the new year....

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/vladimir-putin-calendar-2016_567e5d2fe4b0b958f6597836

 

US is not perfect, far from it.  And I recognize the issue where they screw up.  But I am not going to take one person's word for anything without proof.  If there is proof of the article in the OP, hard proof, I would be one of the first to condemn the US for it.

Just now, techbeck said:

Yup, according to you the Russians are saints.  Any accusations currently against Russia are crap since it is from western media or the US said it

 

Something you may need for the new year....

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/vladimir-putin-calendar-2016_567e5d2fe4b0b958f6597836

Man, you must have the memory of a goldfish.

 

Quote

 A few days ago you posted an article about Russian "supposed" bombing of civilians, and my reply was that "It wasn't supposed, it was definitely Russian."

 

In this long line of denial you try and accuse me of defending Russia when in fact I do the contrary and have no problem agreeing that the Russians are as guilty as anyone else.

 

4 minutes ago, ctebah said:

Man, you must have the memory of a goldfish.

 

 

Congratulations, you have an instance where you accused Russia.  Want a cookie?  Your praise of Russia and believing what they say far negates anything negative you say about them.  Little tip, Russia is as full of crap as the US is.  They lie/say things to make themselves appear like the good guys.  And really, until I see hard proof, I dont believe any one of them.

 

And memory of a goldfish...funny, considering you got the reply yo made to me concerning Asaad buying ISIS oil wrong and could not understand why I brought up Russia in a post where the OP source links to Russian run news outlet.  But ok then!

1 minute ago, techbeck said:

Congratulations, you have an instance where you accused Russia.  Want a cookie?

1 instance lol. It's like an Apple zealot defending one thing MS does and trying to call themselves unbiased. 

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Zoom Workplace 7.1.0.41345 by Razvan Serea Zoom Workplace for Windows is a reliable video conferencing tool that makes it easy to connect and collaborate. With features like messaging, file sharing, and app integrations, it’s designed to streamline teamwork. You’ll get high-quality audio and video, strong security with end-to-end encryption, and an intuitive interface—all of which help remote teams and businesses stay productive and connected. Zoom Workplace key features: High-Definition Video & Audio: Provides clear, reliable communication for virtual meetings. End-to-End Encryption: Ensures secure communication with strong data protection. Multi-Factor Authentication: Adds an extra layer of security for user accounts. Integration with Productivity Apps: Supports seamless integration with Microsoft Office, Google Workspace, and more. File Sharing: Easily share files during meetings for efficient collaboration. Real-Time Messaging: Enables team chat for ongoing communication. Collaborative Whiteboarding: Allows teams to brainstorm and collaborate visually. Webinar Support: Host large webinars with interactive features. Administrative Controls: Manage user permissions, meeting settings, and security features. Cloud Storage: Automatically stores meetings and files in the cloud for easy access. Cross-Platform Support: Available on Windows, macOS, and mobile devices. Meeting features: Virtual Backgrounds: Customize your background for meetings to maintain privacy or enhance professionalism. Touch Up My Appearance: Automatically smoothens skin tone for a more polished video appearance. Breakout Rooms: Divide meetings into smaller sessions for group discussions or workshops. Live Transcription: Automatically generate real-time captions during meetings for accessibility. Zoom Apps: Integrate third-party applications directly into Zoom for enhanced functionality. Meeting Reactions: Participants can use emojis for quick, non-verbal feedback during meetings. Polling: Conduct live polls during meetings to gather instant feedback from participants. Attention Tracking: Monitors participant attention during meetings to ensure engagement. Closed Captioning: Enable manual or automatic captions for a more inclusive experience. Webinar Replay: Record and share webinars with analytics for audience engagement. Download: Zoom 64-bit | 145.0 MB (Free, paid upgrade available) Links: Zoom Website | Zoom ARM64 | Zoom Installers | Release Notes Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • UK funds £60M AI labs to challenge US tech dominance with open-source models by Paul Hill The UK government has awarded £60 million to Oxford University and University College London to help keep the country in the AI race by focusing on open-source, low-hardware alternatives. This is in stark contrast to the expensive, closed-source, and high-hardware-requirement models being created in the United States and elsewhere. The money will be shared among two new academic research labs over six years to help them redesign the fundamental mathematics and architectures of AI to help the UK reduce its reliance on a handful of US tech firms. Commenting on the development, AI Minister Kanishka Narayan said: Initially, the government planned to fund just one lab with a £40 million investment, but with this update, two labs will now get access to a larger pool of funds. The labs are expected to invest in the top AI researchers at every career stage, with £2 million per lab being set aside for hiring at least ten doctoral students. The government hopes that this will grow the UK’s talent in the field of AI. The labs are also expected to work closely with the leaders in British AI research, such as the Alan Turing Institute and UKRI’s AI research hubs. This will allow the various teams to collaborate and create new solutions faster than they could alone. This development is pretty interesting for a number of reasons, chiefly that it could create a long-term challenge for US tech firms if these labs successfully scale these open-source architectures that bypass the proprietary ecosystems. It could also give British businesses and public sector organizations access to AI features without paying high licensing fees to foreign providers or needing to invest in specialized server infrastructure.
    • If I were them, I'm gonna hold out until the prices of these semiconductor parts normalize. $1,049 for a ~5 year old hardware is DoA, more so for gamers. On a deeper note, if Steam Machine is priced like this, we are soo effed up for the next gen Xbox console and PS6. With great AAA titles releasing at the end of the year, this just creates more demand...and more tears for me. Lol.
    • I suspect one reason its hard to justify subsidising is that it's not a locked down device like a traditional console is. In this climate sadly if it was a "good deal" you'd get people hoarding them for anything but gaming. The Lenovo Legion Go 2 with the Ryzen Z2 Extreme is £1300 here ($1720) for some context on how other SteamOS like devices are now priced. I got the older Z1 Extreme model for £300 with a dock, just shows how insane prices have got recently.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
    • First Post
      mike_rumble earned a badge
      First Post
    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      465
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      183
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      94
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      88
    5. 5
      neufuse
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!