Underground:


Calm down. What trashing? Don't see any here. Apparently people don't seat around the internet all day debating. I for instance can only find time mostly on weekends to check nairaland out.
Perhaps he's out, perhaps he's sleeping, perhaps he's busy, perhaps he's ignoring you. I don't see Appleyard around as well, do you? People have lives away from here brah.

Whilst we await the next round, I would really like you and Missy89 to refute the allegations (lies you call them) ofTulsi Gobbard, Joe Biden, Wesley Clark, Roland Dumas, Senator Black and all

Unfortunately you seem to be the one taking matters seriously. Scummy in one thread threatened reporting me to the police. Lolz whenever minted begin spamming it means you have gotten him bad that is his attitude. Buhahaha. Anyway do you notice minted is refuting himself saying biden apologize for his words? Why do you peole equate allegations without concrete proof as fact we could simply do the same litvenchenko made very indicting allegations against putin, and got murdered do we start giving you assignment on refuting such allegations?

vedaxcool:


Unfortunately you seem to be the one taking matters seriously. Scummy in one thread threatened reporting me to the police. Lolz whenever minted begin spamming it means you have gotten him bad that is his attitude. Buhahaha. Anyway I do you notice minted is refuting himself saying biden apologize for his words? Why do you peole equate allegations without concrete proof as fact we could simply do the same litvenchenko made very indicting allegations against putin, and got murdered do we start giving you assignment on refuting such allegations?

Wow! Talk about delusions of grandeur! Had to pause what I am doing. Reported you to the police? Hahahahaha!! Amerikan or Russian police?

NairaMinted:


Wow! Talk about delusions of grandeur! Had to pause what I am doing. Reported you to the police? Hahahahaha!! Amerikan or Russian police?

Haba you would notice each time I reffered to you I use the word minted, scummy wasn't in reference to you but that you friend whose only card is chanting Zionists he repeatedly threatened that he would report me to the police. you should have ask for clarification rather than jump to conclusion but trust you putin supporters to jump to conclusions with little insight in the matters under discussion.

Missy89:


Kinzer argument has been shredded to pieces by the "neo con" already. There is no need to start digging for his pay master. That will be an overkill

Maybe If he write something else.


Which one do u prefer?

"Maybe If he write something else."? Lmao......His background biko, Missy........Please

Besides, I do not see any shredding. How exactly? All I see is propaganda. Akin to "Russian Aggression", "Putin's billions", "Paedophile Putin", "Putin's missiles brought down MH17", "Putin ordered the disappearance of MH370", "Russia is bombing only the moderates" and so and so forth. Same ol' relentless, absurd propaganda from a myriad of so called investigative journalists and think-tanks...

His background...

Underground:


"Maybe If he write something else."? Lmao......His background biko, Missy........Please

Besides, I do not see any shredding. How exactly? All I see is propaganda. Akin to "Russian Aggression", "Putin's billions", "Paedophile Putin", "Putin's missiles brought down MH17", "Putin ordered the disappearance of MH370", "Russia is bombing only the moderates" and so and so forth. Same ol' relentless, absurd propaganda from a myriad of so called investigative journalists and think-tanks...

His background...

So wait, you want me to post the background of someone. Who wrote an article that was easily refuted by a neo con?

Isn't that counter productive?

I am sure u didn't read the link. He shredded steven with facts and he cited them.

That the empire of chaos and its "70,000 moderate head choppers and cannibals" are on the back foot is apparent to any right thinking observer, hence, the call for a halt in fighting.
The US and the west are yet to provide evidence of Saddam's WMDs to the public 12 years after the invasion and with over 1million dead in Iraq.
If you believe the US govt then you can fall for anything.

Missy89:


So wait, you want me to post the background of someone. Who wrote an article that was easily refuted by a neo con?

Isn't that counter productive?

I am sure u didn't read the link. He shredded steven with facts and he cited them.

So now I have read the link................................

Come on Missy! This what you call "shredding"? This is a rebuttal? Haba! You are actually not taking this Kyle Orton guy serious are you? Apart from his dodgy resume, I looked up his Twitter handle and I can tell you that he spends a considerable amount of time bashing Russia, Assad, Iran and anyone or any country whose stance is in opposition to the United States'. It's like he's obsessed with these topics.

Now, to the so called rebuttal he has written:

1. Introduction: According to him, Stephen Kinzer, a veteran journalist, including for The New York Times, who wrote in The Boston Globe,
and Jeffrey Sachs, an academic economist working at Columbia University, who wrote in The Huffington Post have both been recruited by the
Syrian government for the purpose of disinformation. Lol! Does he mean this literally or in context? In either case, you gotta applaud this
remarkable feat by the Syrian government and its allies by getting a journalist and an academic working for a top American
university and newspapers to pen this "disinformation" on behalf of the Syrian government.

2. A Matter of Framing: Mr Kyle Orton states that the US never sort "regime change" in Syria. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Honestly, I do not know whether to cry or laugh!
The US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Britain, France have been singing the regime change tune from day 1! Stating how the "Assad regime" has "lost
its legitimacy", how the "Syria has no future with Assad in it", how the regime is "murdering his own people" and so on and on.Their exact
words; right from 2011 till now! As a matter of fact, just yesterday Obama repeated the call in the run up to the ongoing ceasefire agreement. Just what planet is this Mr Kyle Orton living on?!

"The US never sort regime change" Hahahahaha! At this point any reasonable person wouldn't continue reading this travesty of an article but just for the fun of it, I'll humour you.

3. Assad as Saviour: Mr Kyle Orton starts by quoting unsubstantiated (most probably fictitious) figures of the civilian casualties of
Russia's intervention and the "egregious" war crimes Russia has committed. Mr Kyle Orton - whom at this stage i conclude must be a raging
luna.tic - gives harrowing accounts of vile atrocities committed by the Iranian-run sectarian militia and other groups. Such sensational
stories we have learnt from past campaigns include totally fabricated accounts of how Libyan soldiers high on Viagra raped and killed women
when NATO "liberated" Libya ( of which Libya is in dire need of another round of "liberation" by the way ) and of course in Khan-Assal
(confirmed by a UN chief investigator, Del Pointe) and Ghouta in 2013 when the Syrian government was falsely accused of using chemical
weapons (rubbis.hed by Seymour Hersh, MIT, etc) - all now found out to be TOTALLY false.

What about other instances such as when some weeping girl posed as the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to Iraq and told a sensational
tale of how Iraqi soldiers pulled babies from their incubators, all part of the disinformation campaign and psychological warfare in the build
up to the Gulf War 1.0 and what about "Saddam has WMDs" spectacle in build up to the Gulf War 2.0?

The Empire and its agents would say and do anything as a pretext to bring about "regime change."



4. Shifting the Blame: Mr Kyle Orton tells a bold faced lie blaming the Syrian government for the dashed Kofi Annan lead peace process in 2012.

Missy89, in your desperation to win arguments, please at least take the time to vet the source of your news biko.


Haven't you heard of the "It was was an opportunity lost" phrase?
Russia in February proposed a three-point plan, which would bring the Syrian government and opposition to the negotiation table and result
in Assad stepping down as president. US, Britain and France rejected that proposal, being convinced that fall of Assad's government was
inevitable.

Then again in June 2012, Kofi Annan was able to draft a peace proposal setting up a "transitional government body with full executive
powers" comprising of members of the Syrian government and oppostion, which was supported by the US, UK and France but scuttled by Clinton herself inisisting that Assad couldn't be part of this transitional government.

Still on peace talks, guess what parties failed to show up at the last peace talks scheduled to hold a couple of weeks ago?


5. Lies and Delusion: Mr Kyle Orton ends this paragraph by attempting to label Mr Kinzer has borderline conspiracy theorist who is not to
be taken seriously by "serious people" by mentioning Mr Sachs's belief that JFK was assassinated by “hardline” elements of the U.S.
government. . Lol! Irrelevant, distracting and cheap!

About the constitents of these rebels, I won't even waste time on this. Have you already forgotten even how just a few days before the
RUssian intervention the head of the US Central Command General Lloyd Austin, while appearing before a US Senate's Armed Forces Committee
and asked about the so called moderates the Pentagon and CIA were training said, "We're talking four or five." Everyone knows that the
majority of these so called rebels are foreign backed proxy fighters. Nairaminted has provided several links about their origins, their
backers and their alliance with (or defection to) other jihadist groups. Mr Kyle Orton names reporters who have been on the ground in Syria
who have given a narrative that contradicts Mr Kinzer's. What about the narratives of reporters such as Serena Shim and or Germany's
international broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW) video report that ISIS is supplied not by "black market oil" or "hostage ransoms" but
billions of dollars worth of supplies carried into Syria across NATO member Turkey's borders via hundreds of trucks a day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akbfplUcjLU

What's more, the recently retired head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Michael Flynn, has said that the Obama regime made a “willful
decision” to support ISIS and use ISIS against the Assad government in Syria. That the violence in Syria originated in a US/ISIS conspiracy
against Syria.


I don't see how Mr Orton has "dismantled" anything or anyone. Rather he has dismantled and ridiculed himself with his poor grasp of
historical events as far as the Syrian crisis is concerned and by his obvious obfuscation and twisting of the facts on ground to suit his agenda. The narrative on Syria is falling apart (a dam bursting at the seams as The Saker put it) and the Empire's foot soldiers are scrambling, desperately trying to salvage any remaining bit of false reality they can wield over the people.

You were better served refuting Stephen Kinzer and Jeffrey Sach yourself rather depending on a piece of jun.k, group think article from Kyle Orton. So now - at the 3rd time of asking - I await your rebuttal of Senator Black's, COngresswoman Gobbard's, former NATO Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark, and others' allegations - but I am not counting on it....

Underground:



So now I have read the link................................

You were better served refuting Stephen Kinzer and Jeffrey Sach yourself rather depending on a piece of jun.k, group think article from Kyle Orton. So now - at the 3rd time of asking - I await your rebuttal of Senator Black's, COngresswoman Gobbard's, former NATO Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark, and others' allegations - but I am not counting on it....

Her CIA handlers haven't sent a guideline on how to respond to those and/or we are to wait for Oga Kyle Orton to pen a rebuttal of those as well

Has Uncle Sam thrown Sultan Erdogan under the bus? Used and dumped in the face of a failed "regime change" effort? Unlike Libya, Syria didn't turn out to be a walk in the park did it? His travails reminds me of Saddam Hussein

http://thesaker.is/erdogan-genocide-and-isis-the-sultan-is-doomed/

[img]http://thesaker.is/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Selection_161-275x200_c.png[/img]

Erdogan, Genocide, and ISIS – The Sultan is Doomed

By Michael Collins

Turkish President Recep Teyyip Erdogan’s attempts to demonize the Syrian Kurd’s YPG army and threaten and bully the United States are having the net effect of creating a powerful movement for his removal based on a rationale that will encourage the public in the United States and Europe to forget the real culprits in the tragic attack on Syria and focus on charges of genocide leveled against ISIS. The genocide charge will be tied to Erdogan as a result of his documented support for ISIS and ultimately doom his increasingly dictatorial rule of Turkey. Rather than divert the attention of Turks from his crimes and massive negligence as a means to preserve his power, Erdogan’s castigation of the Kurds and, more significantly, his public blackmail of the U.S. will spell his doom in the near future.

Erdogan is lashing out in all directions as he experiences the collapse of his allout support for Syrian rebels, including ISIS. The president’s anger at the United States is both surprising and dangerous. For weeks, Erdogan has objected to U.S. support of the YPG, the Syrian Kurdish army that controls nearly the entire Syrian border region with Turkey.

The spark that lit Erdogan’s fuse occurred about ten days before the start of the U.S. – Russia sponsored Munich peace conference on the Syrian conflict. The YPG and the Syrian Arab Army are the only major land forces fighting ISIS. While YPG should have been invited to the Munich conference, the U.S. accommodated Erdogan by leaving them off list of invited parties.

About the same time that YPG was removed from the Munich conference, the White House sent Brett McGurk, “President Barack Obama’s envoy to an international coalition fighting IS in Syria and Iraq” to visit Syrian Kurdish forces in Kobani, Syria. French and British officials made the trip with McGurk. The envoy made clear U.S. admiration and support for the YPG’s efforts. Unlike Erdogan and his foreign minister, the Kurds welcomed the delegation with open arms and muted their concerns about being left out of the Munich affair.

Instead of accepting a partial victory, Erdogan and his foreign minister threatened the U.S. with a harsh choice. The U.S. must show that it is either for Turkey by labeling the YPG as terrorists or against Turkey by continuing to support YPG and its efforts against ISIS.

Bitterness toward the U.S. continued, including implied threats of a Turkish-Saudi land attack on Syria.

The Turks then took direct action by shelling YPG forces that were closing in on the critical Syrian border town of Azas.

Despite the provocation, Washington tried to be even handed. State Department spokesman Mark Toner suggested that the YPG stop its advance on Azaz and, at the same time, asked the Turks to end their daily barrage of YPG and other anti-ISIS forces in Syria. The Turkish army continued the barrage.

After days of threats to the U.S. and rash actions against its Kurdish allies, on February 20 The Saker noted the abject folly of Erdogan’s statements and actions: “If Erdogan and his advisors seriously believe that they can publicly blackmail a superpower like the USA then their days are numbered.“

Unfortunately, for Erdogan, he didn’t get The Saker’s memo. On February 24, the Turkish leader said: “If Daesh (IS/ISIS) and Al-Nusra are kept outside the ceasefire, then the PYD-YPG must similarly be excluded from the ceasefire for it is a terrorist group just as they are,” Erdogan told local officials in Ankara.”

Why is the current Turkish government obsessed with the YPG? There are several reasons, none of them related to terrorism and all of them about the survival of the amazingly corrupt and repellant Erdogan, his family, and cronies in the AKP party.

What do Erdogan and company have to fear?

Jail.

Erdogan and his cronies were caught engaged in the following on publicly released audiotapes: instructing his son on how and where to hide huge sums of cash that neither party wanted found; telling judges how to decide critical cases in his interests; planning a false flag operation in which Turkish troops would fire weapons at the Turkish border from within Syria and assign the blame to Syria; ordering government takeovers of private corporations, media outlets in particular, that simply opposed his government; ordering the release of weapons bound for Syrian rebels held up by local authorities at the Syrian border; and enabling the transit and sale of ISIS oil traveling over the Turkish landmass and shipped from Turkish ports.

These criminal acts are well known in Turkey. Should any government other than one controlled by Erdogan come to power, then Erdogan, his family members, and his cronies will go to trial and likely be sentenced to serious jail time.

What does Erdogan have to fear more than jail?

Barack Obama.

You might ask why I didn’t say Vladimir Putin. That’s simple. Putin is indeed Erdogan’s enemy, one he should greatly fear. However, Erdogan doesn’t work for Putin, he works for Obama. Putin can make life very difficult for Erdogan, but only Obama can fire him. Turkey is part of NATO, which is up to its neck in supporting Islamic extremists fighting to topple the government of Syria. More specifically, Erdogan has been a willing servant of the White House through Turkey’s key role in training, supplying, and transferring foreign fighters into Syria and supporting homegrown rebels.

Erdogan’s wholehearted support of the Syrian rebels didn’t happen as a result of any long-held Shia-Sunni antipathy or due to his steadfast opposition to Bashar Al-Assad, Syria’s elected president. As late as 2010, Erdogan was engaged in personal diplomacy with Al-Assad for closer trade and security relations. But when then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said ‘Assad must go,’ Erdogan fell in line immediately. This path was sweetened by inducements by Saudi Arabia but there was no question that the maestro was (and is): President Barack Obama.

Over recent weeks, as it became obvious that the U.S. ‘Assad must go’ policy was a failure, it was time for Erdoğan to back down and follow the leader. This was necessary for two compelling reasons. First, Erdogan isn’t the leader. Obama is. Turkey is not the world’s dominant superpower. The United States is.

The second reason to follow Obama’s lead is subtler.

Everything Turkey has done to stoke the flames of Islamist extremism, including support for the rise of ISIS, was done with the full knowledge and, in many cases, involvement of the White House and its subordinates in London, Paris, and Berlin. Turkey was the frontline state. But Obama and his supporting cast of NATO leaders were providing instructions and pitching in.

Had Turkey cooperated and allowed what will happen inevitably to happen quietly, i.e., peace in Syria with a government chosen by Syrians, then the White House and company could have taken a victory lap with the knowledge than no one will be inclined to take a serious look at what they all did to destroy a society.

By failing to cooperate and making a spectacle of defying Obama, Turkey raises the risk of a more detailed examination of this entire sordid affair – the real cause of the loss of 250,000 lives in Syria; the real cause of the refugee crisis (there was none prior to the attack on Syria); the strong support, direct or indirect, by all parties of jihadist extremists who gloried in the killing of Christians, Druze, and other minorities in Syria.

Erdogan’s attempt to create an ever expanding set of dramas to divert public attention finally provoked what appears to be a rationale for his removal.

Here’s the emerging basis for end pseudo Sultan’s demise.

Foundations for the end of Erdogan – backing ISIS genocide

The White House is facing pressure to label as genocide the actions of ISIS.. The pressure comes from American Catholics, the Vatican, Republicans, and some Democrats including Hillary Clinton, and an assortment of academics.

Secretary of State John Kerry was pressured to apply the label at a recent congressional hearing. At that hearing of the House of Representatives Appropriations Subcommittee on State and Foreign Operations (February 24), Representative Jeff Fortenberry, Republican of Nebraska, asked Secretary of State John Kerry to “use the authority and power of your office to call this [ISIS attacks on Christians and other minorities] genocide.” Kerry responded by saying “… obviously none of us have ever seen anything like this in our lifetimes though obviously to go back to the holocaust the world has seen it.”

A press by Rep. Fortenberry’s office just after the hearing demonstrated the bipartisan nature of the effort to declare ISIS anathema.

“A growing coalition is urging the world to recognize that ISIL is committing genocide against Christians, Yezidis, and other ethnic and religious minorities. While Secretary of State John Kerry has not yet reached that conclusion [to label ISIS acts as genocide], I was grateful for his willingness to openly engage in a thoughtful dialogue on this gravely important matter. I hope the State Department makes a comprehensive and inclusive genocide designation soon.”

This is not at all typical behavior by House Republicans toward the secretary of state and it is no accident. The words “grateful and willingness to engage” along with “thoughtful dialog” are a clear sign of bipartisan coalescence against ISIS. Those in Congress and the White House who supported the cause of Syrian rebels and who enabled Turkey’s supply of material and funds by their failure to object are now standing together to characterize ISIS actions in the harshest terms, genocide.

This accomplishes two purposes. It provides a major diversion from any serious examination of the history of U.S. policy in the conflict, including the start of the attack by demands that ‘Assad must go.’

The genocide label is also a pretext to correctly label President Erdogan and his cronies as both supporters of ISIS and the acts of genocide. The accusation is the opening act for the end of the Erdogan government. When the State Department does what Kerry indicated it will do by mid March, label ISIS actions as genocide, the sentence will be served and the survival of Erdogan’s government will become an affront to the world, the European Union, and NATO. How on earth can we have a nation, an international partner, that supports a group committing genocide will be the question asked again and again.

U.S., British, and French supporters of the attack on Syria will be able to hide their complicity in this abomination of a policy behind the more sensational demands that something be done to end the genocide. Since Turkey is the hands-on culprit as ISIS enabler and ally, there will be no possibility of distancing from the charge. At that point, Erdogan’s opponents in the AKP, who are already hinting of a party break up, and the three main opposition parties will unite to demand Erdogan’s removal. AKP founders Bulent Arinc and Abdullah Gul are two well known, highly regarded figures to watch. Arinc has already openly criticized the president about his policy towards Turkey’s Kurds. A direct attack on Erdoğan by Gul for the ISIS scheme may well provide the coup de grace.

How that removal happens depends on the power centers of Turkish society. Erdogan will be hard pressed to find many supporters willing to risk EU trade relationships and NATO membership simply to preserve the power of the would-be Sultan. The president will struggle to find any business leaders or merchants to champion his cause if the Russian sanctions are joined or expanded by European nations. Erdogan will be a dictator unable to issue dictates, a bully who finds himself smaller that those he has consistently bullied, and, worst of all, an embarrassing and damaging inconvenience and impediment.

Erdogan is already doomed. He just doesn’t know it

Creative Commons 4.0

Michel Collins
http://opednews.com/michaelcollins

Sarin materials brought via Turkey & mixed in Syrian ISIS camps – Turkish MP to RT

Published: 14 Dec 2015 | 05:03 GMT
Watch the video



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoQPtub9eLs

Business Insider:

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/isis-just-lost-its-back-door-2015-6

"Pipes, ammonium nitrate, and other bomb-making materials were being transported across Turkey’s border into Tal Abyad by agents of the Islamic State (aka ISIS, ISIL, Daesh) while Turkish border guards looked the other way, Jamie Dettmer of The Daily Beast reported."

Hmmm........

What about The Daily Beast, What do they have to report:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/22/where-isis-gets-its-bombs.html


“They are very tough with the Kurds and the areas controlled by the Free Syrian Army, but with areas across from ISIS not so much,” he explains over a cup of tea in the sitting room of his apartment a short walk from the border.


All these (and more) were reported several months before the Russians decided to toss their hats in the ring. Perhaps these news media didn't anticipate that Russia would soon be a partaker in the Syrian imbroglio.

Anyway, people, it is very obvious by now to the least geopolitics savvy of humans and even to the dumb.est of the dumb.est that Turkey is the major conduit through which arms and ammunition, money, fighters, equipment etc flows to The Islamic State.

Turkey is the very lifeline through which all the other facilitators of ISIS in the Middle East sustains terror in Syria and Iraq.

This thread too! Went dead! No answer to the questions posed.

Missy89 - since it seems I have to call you out - what happened na?

NairaMinted:
Missy89 - since it seems I have to call you out - what happened na?

What are the questions? MAKE THEM CLEAR AND PRECISE. And when i post a response dont go all conspiracy theory on me

Missy89:


What are the questions? MAKE THEM CLEAR AND PRECISE. And when i post a response dont go all conspiracy theory on me

Ok no ves! Sorry to bother you

Missy89:


What are the questions? MAKE THEM CLEAR AND PRECISE. And when i post a response dont go all conspiracy theory on me

HumbledbYGrace, mukina2 and co please close this thread seeing Missy89 is unable to answer the questions or mount a response to my rebuttal of Orton's rebuttal ramblings which she had presented as a "rebuttal" to what the Boston Global had published in concurrence to what an increasingly number of Western news media are now publishing or saying - together with the likes of Gobbard, Clark, Black, Biden, Dumas, etc.

These are all conspiracy theories -or worse, "Kremlin recruits"

Underground:


HumbledbYGrace, mukina2 and co please close this thread seeing Missy89 is unable to answer the questions or mount a response to my rebuttal of Orton's rebuttal ramblings which she had presented as a "rebuttal" to what the Boston Global had published in concurrence to what an increasingly number of Western news media are now publishing or saying - together with the likes of Gobbard, Clark, Black, Biden, Dumas, etc.

These are all conspiracy theories -or worse, "Kremlin recruits"

Lol.

You will get a response when you respond to what i asked you instead of cutting my post and responding to the part that you feel like.

I dont get the excitement , are you unfamiliar with the Danth's Law?

Underground

You should have hanged on to your self proclaim victory when you think you have it.

First if what you wrote is what you call a rebuttal. I cant help but laugh hard.

1. I don’t understand how working for new york times and Boston globe makes a journalist incorrigible (By the way, aren’t these the same mediums you and your crew always cite as propaganda outlets? or are they propaganda only when they say what you don’t like?

2 Again, the first line of Orton's argument reads "While President Obama said Assad must “step aside” in August 2011" He quoted a NY times editorial ( reputable according to you) to point out that Obama never had the intention of going all into Syria because of the US over investment in the Middle east. And even pointed out that Obama told Iraqi PM ( who has ties with Iran) that the US has no intention to intervene militarily. But in your "rebuttal" the only thing you did was quote the same thing Orton said (Assad must “step aside” in August 2011) without supporting it with how Obama has been working day and night to implement the policy and you only ended up humoring yourself

3 You claimed his number was probably fictitious, yet you did not support your argument with the "probable correct number". Then you went on a Libya, WMD, NATO, empire agents and Viagra rant and try to make your point by assuming correlation equals causation

4. Now this is the most funny one of your so called "rebuttal".

Orton was talking about March/April's cease fire plan by Annan. You are quoting the peace plan of February which is not even true

You claim Russia in February proposed a three-point plan, which would bring the Syrian government and opposition to the negotiation table and result in Assad stepping down as president. US, Britain and France rejected that proposal, being convinced that fall of Assad's government was inevitable.

A line associated to Martti Ahtisaari. But you left out the part where this claim cant be verified and there is no shred of evidence to prove it was true. You should read the next sentence from where you lifted that line or let me help you with the whole article here where diplomats pointed out why the claim is not even logical

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/15/west-ignored-russian-offer-in-2012-to-have-syrias-assad-step-aside

Orton's article clearly was talking about how Kinzer was blaming the US for the failure of the April cease fire even thou it was broken by Assad in Houla on May 25

So the only thing you did here is debunking yourself. and talking about an unverified incident that is irrelevant to the discourse

5. Orton was only doing the same thing you did. If you think his argument is invalid because he is a neo con. Apply the same logic to Kinzer. He only pointed out his second opinion bias


Congratulations on your hatchet job. Please try again

Sigh! Classic Missy89:
Flailing all over the place, incoherent and twisting facts and citing parallels between unrelated, irrelevant events so much so that a retort is pointless.

NairaMinted:
Sigh! Classic Missy89:
Flailing all over the place, incoherent and twisting facts and citing parallels between unrelated, irrelevant events so much so that a retort is pointless.

Is that the best you can do? or you are waiting for your buddie? trying to hide behind elaborate rhetoric in other to run away from the thread

Missy89:
Underground

You should have hanged on to your self proclaim victory when you think you have it.

First if what you wrote is what you call a rebuttal. I cant help but laugh hard.

1. I don’t understand how working for new york times and Boston globe makes a journalist incorrigible (By the way, aren’t these the same mediums you and your crew always cite as propaganda outlets? or are they propaganda only when they say what you don’t like?

2 Again, the first line of Orton's argument reads "While President Obama said Assad must “step aside” in August 2011" He quoted a NY times editorial ( reputable according to you) to point out that Obama never had the intention of going all into Syria because of the US over investment in the Middle east. And even pointed out that Obama told Iraqi PM ( who has ties with Iran) that the US has no intention to intervene militarily. But in your "rebuttal" the only thing you did was quote the same thing Orton said (Assad must “step aside” in August 2011) without supporting it with how Obama has been working day and night to implement the policy and you only ended up humoring yourself

3 You claimed his number was probably fictitious, yet you did not support your argument with the "probable correct number". Then you went on a Libya, WMD, NATO, empire agents and Viagra rant and try to make your point by assuming correlation equals causation

4. Now this is the most funny one of your so called "rebuttal".

Orton was talking about March/April's cease fire plan by Annan. You are quoting the peace plan of February which is not even true

You claim Russia in February proposed a three-point plan, which would bring the Syrian government and opposition to the negotiation table and result in Assad stepping down as president. US, Britain and France rejected that proposal, being convinced that fall of Assad's government was inevitable.

A line associated to Martti Ahtisaari. But you left out the part where this claim cant be verified and there is no shred of evidence to prove it was true. You should read the next sentence from where you lifted that line or let me help you with the whole article here where diplomats pointed out why the claim is not even logical

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/15/west-ignored-russian-offer-in-2012-to-have-syrias-assad-step-aside

Orton's article clearly was talking about how Kinzer was blaming the US for the failure of the April cease fire even thou it was broken by Assad in Houla on May 25

So the only thing you did here is debunking yourself. and talking about an unverified incident that is irrelevant to the discourse

5. Orton was only doing the same thing you did. If you think his argument is invalid because he is a neo con. Apply the same logic to Kinzer. He only pointed out his second opinion bias


Congratulations on your hatchet job. Please try again

LWKMD! Like Nairaminted has already stated: no ves

Underground:


LWKMD! Like Nairaminted has already stated: no ves

You guys are citing each other now?

Mission failed?

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/03/10/turkeys-path-to-dictatorship/

Turkey’s Path to Dictatorship
March 10, 2016


Throttling Turkey’s democracy, President Erdogan seized an opposition newspaper that dared reveal his clandestine arming of jihadists seeking to overthrow neighboring Syria, as Alon Ben-Meir explains.


By[b] Alon Ben-Meir[/b]

Only a few months after Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan raided the offices of the Koza Ipek Media Group, the Turkish police assaulted early this month the offices of Feza Publications, which owns two newspapers (including Zaman) and two TV stations, without any warning.

There is little else more injurious to any democracy than closing down news outlets and choking off freedom of speech. To take such an extreme measure based on concocted accusations that such media outlets are aiding terrorism and conspiring against the state is nothing short of scandalous, and shows his fear of public criticism despite his bravado.

President Erdogan, however, seems completely dismissive of any potential repercussions, as he was emboldened by his past rampage against the press and jailing of scores of journalists on phony charges with impunity.

Although Erdogan knows well that Turkey is far from being a democratic state, he continues to promote the absurd notion that Turkey is indeed a genuine democracy, stating with his usual twisted flare that “nowhere in the world is the press freer than it is in Turkey.” In fact, Reporters Without Borders’ 2015 World Press Freedom Index ranked Turkey 149 out of 180 countries, between Mexico, where journalists are regularly murdered, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which is a failed state.

Perhaps Erdogan should be reminded of what truly constitutes a democracy. Freedom of expression represents one of four critical pillars of any democratic form of government, which also includes the election of a representative government, equality before the law, and strict observance of human rights.

Sadly, Erdogan did not stop at repressing freedom of expression in all forms — he regularly chipped away at the other pillars, which is bound to unravel what is left of Turkey’s democracy.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees “the right to freedom of opinion and expression;” but as Benjamin Franklin warned, “Whoever would overthrow the Liberty of a Nation must begin by subduing the Freeness of Speech.”

Erdogan was highly admired for his impressive socio-political reforms and significant economic development, which made Turkey the 17th largest economy in the world during his first and much of his second term in office. He could have realized much of his ambitions to make Turkey a recognized regional superpower with rallying support of the public with pride. He would have been able to do so without destroying the principles of Turkey’s foundation as a secular democracy, as was envisioned by its founder Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, and offer a real model of a flourishing Islamic democracy to be emulated by much of the Arab and Muslim world.

Sadly, however, Erdogan ignores the fact that his systematic dismantling of Turkey’s democratic institutions will have the precise opposite effect by directly torpedoing Turkey’s potential as a great power and squandering what the country has to offer.

Time and again, Erdogan demonstrated his lack of tolerance to opposing views and found the press to be a nuisance, as it was generally critical of his Islamic agenda. He understood, as George Orwell aptly put it, “Freedom of the press, if it means anything at all, means the freedom to criticize and oppose,” a freedom which Erdogan is bent on suppressing.

As such, Erdogan has used his strong Islamic credentials to project himself as a pious leader, when in fact he consistently engaged in favoritism, granting huge government contracts to those who supported him and to his family members, irrespective of conflicts of interest and the corruption that ensued as a result.

With a rubber-stamp parliament, he has been able to pass any legislation he wished, with the exception of a constitutional amendment that would have granted the President unlimited powers. He subordinated the justice system to his whims and basically became a one-man ruler with dictatorial powers, finally doing away with the checks and balances of the government apparatus.

To be sure, Erdogan’s appetite for increasing power, harsh treatment of dissidents, religious zeal, and narcissistic predisposition made him feared by much of Turkish society yet admired by others; he is almost unanimously reviled by the international community, but dealt with out of necessity.

The agreement that was achieved on March 7 between Turkey and the European Union in connection with Syrian refugees and asylum seekers is one case in point — he made his move to shut down Zaman around the same time, knowing he would not be severely condemned by either the U.S. or the E.U. for his actions.

The question is that having been in power for nearly 14 years and amassing so much clout, with or without constitutional amendments, will Erdogan take time as President to contemplate Turkey’s future — a country that has all the elements and resources to become a great and influential power, especially now that the Middle East is awash in unprecedented turmoil?

Being that Turkey now faces a historic crossroad, the choices Erdogan will make in the months and years to come will have a lasting effect on Turkey’s future. Erdogan will make a grave mistake if he continues to take the Turkish people for granted. The Turks are inventive, industrious, educated, with a long history of achievements, western-oriented, and stand for, believe in, and will insist on a democratic way of life.

There are limits as to how much longer the Turkish people will tolerate not only the stifling of free speech, but Erdogan’s draconian style of governing before they rise against him. Erdogan should know that for Turkey to capture its rightful place among the great powers, he must restore all that was lost in the past few years, especially its democratic foundation.

Without such democratic principles, Turkey will be further alienated from the Western countries, the bloc to which Turkey should belong, and will be unable to harness its true potential as a Middle Eastern and European power.

Ironically, Erdogan seems to relish the illusion that he will preside over the 100th anniversary of the Turkish Republic in 2023, and be remembered as the new “Turkish Father,” overshadowing Atatürk. He desperately wants to restore some of the “glory” of the Ottoman Empire, forgetting however that the then-Empire crumbled partly under its own weight, and became easy prey for the allied forces in the early Twentieth Century because of corrupt and unscrupulous leaders.

Failing to make the right choice, Erdogan will not be remembered as the father of the new democratic and powerful nation, but as the misguided and ambitious dictator who sacrificed Turkey’s potentially glorious future for his religious zeal and burning desire for ever more power.

Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at NYU. He teaches courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies. alon@alonben-meir.com Web: www.alonben-meir.com

The United States of Anarchy & Selective Democracy in partnership with Al-Qaeda (the alleged perpetrators of 911 ) to unseat yet another democratically elected government so they can install their own special kind of democratic government in its place - like they have been doing since 1947 at least.

[size=18pt]US Media Hid Al Qaeda’s Syria Role[/size]
March 23, 2016
When Russian airstrikes began in Syria, the U.S. media falsely claimed President Putin had promised to hit only ISIS and instead attacked “moderate” rebels, but the dirty secret was that those rebels were working with Al Qaeda, writes Gareth Porter.

By Gareth Porter

A crucial problem in news media coverage of the Syrian civil war has been how to characterize the relationship between the so-called “moderate” opposition forces armed by the CIA, on one hand, and the Al Qaeda franchise Al Nusra Front (and its close ally Ahrar al Sham), on the other.

But it is a politically sensitive issue for U.S. policy, which seeks to overthrow Syria’s government without seeming to make common cause with the movement responsible for 9/11, and the system of news production has worked effectively to prevent the news media from reporting it fully and accurately.


President Barack Obama meets with his National Security Staff to discuss the situation in Syria, in the Situation Room of the White House, Aug. 30, 2013. From left at the table: National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice; Attorney General Eric Holder; Secretary of State John Kerry; and Vice President Joe Biden. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)
The Obama administration has long portrayed the opposition groups it has been arming with anti-tank weapons as independent of Nusra Front. In reality, the administration has been relying on the close cooperation of these “moderate” groups with Nusra Front to put pressure on the Syrian government.

The United States and its allies – especially Saudi Arabia and Turkey – want the civil war to end with the dissolution of the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who is backed by U.S. rivals like Russia and Iran.

Reflecting the fact that Nusra Front was created by Al Qaeda and has confirmed its loyalty to it, the administration designated Nusra as a terrorist organization in 2013. But the U.S. has carried out very few airstrikes against it since then, in contrast to the other offspring of Al Qaeda, the Islamic State or ISIS (Daesh), which has been the subject of intense air attacks from the U.S. and its European allies.

The U.S. has remained silent about Nusra Front’s leading role in the military effort against Assad, concealing the fact that Nusra’s success in northwest Syria has been a key element in Secretary of State John Kerry’s diplomatic strategy for Syria.

When Russian intervention in support of the Syrian government began last September, targeting not only ISIS but also the Nusra Front and U.S.-supported groups allied with them against the Assad regime, the Obama administration immediately argued that Russian airstrikes were targeting “moderate” groups rather than ISIS, and insisted that those strikes had to stop.

The willingness of the news media to go beyond the official line and report the truth on the ground in Syria was thus put to the test. It had been well-documented that those “moderate” groups had been thoroughly integrated into the military campaigns directed by Nusra Front and Ahrar al Sham in the main battlefront of the war in northwestern Syria’s Idlib and Aleppo provinces.

For example, a dispatch from Aleppo last May in Al Araby Al-Jadeed (The New Arab), a daily newspaper financed by the Qatari royal family, revealed that every one of at least ten “moderate” factions in the province supported by the CIA had joined the Nusra-run province command Fateh Halab (Conquest of Aleppo). Formally the command was run by Ahrar al Sham, and Nusra Front was excluded from it.

But as Al Araby’s reporter explained, that exclusion “means that the operation has a better chance of receiving regional and international support.” That was an indirect way of saying that Nusra’s supposed exclusion was a device aimed at facilitating the Obama administration’s approval of sending more TOW missiles to the “moderates” in the province, because the White House could not support groups working directly with a terrorist organization.

A further implication was that Nusra Front was allowing “moderate” groups to obtain those weapons from the United States and its Saudi and Turkish allies, because those groups were viewed as too weak to operate independently of the Salafist-jihadist forces — and because some of those arms would be shared with Nusra Front and Ahrar.

After Nusra Front was formally identified as a terrorist organization for the purposes of a Syrian ceasefire and negotiations, it virtually went underground in areas close to the Turkish border.

A journalist who lives in northern Aleppo province told Al Monitor that Nusra Front had stopped flying its own flag and was concealing its troops under those of Ahrar al Sham, which had been accepted by the United States as a participant in the talks. That maneuver was aimed at supporting the argument that “moderate” groups and not Al Qaeda were being targeted by Russian airstrikes.

But a review of the coverage of the targeting of Russian airstrikes and the role of U.S.-supported armed groups in the war during the first few weeks in the three most influential U.S. newspapers with the most resources for reporting accurately on the issue—the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal – reveals a pattern of stories that tilted strongly in the direction desired by the Obama administration, either ignoring the subordination of the “moderate” groups to Nusra Front entirely or giving it only the slightest mention.

In an Oct. 1, 2015 article, Washington Post Beirut correspondent Liz Sly wrote that the Russian airstrikes were being “conducted against one of the few areas in the country where moderate rebels still have a foothold and from which the Islamic State was ejected more than a year and a half ago.”

To her credit, Sly did report, “Some of the towns struck are strongholds of recently formed coalition Jaish al Fateh,” which she said included Nusra Front and “an assortment of Islamist and moderate factions.” What was missing, however, was the fact that Jaish al Fateh was not merely a “coalition” but a military command structure, meaning that a much tighter relationship existed between the U.S.-supported “moderates” and the Al Qaeda franchise.

Sly referred specifically to one strike that hit a training camp in the outskirts of a town in Idlib province belonging to Suquor al-Jabal, which had been armed by the CIA.

But readers could not evaluate that statement without the crucial fact, reported in the regional press that Suquor al-Jabal was one of the many CIA-supported organizations that had joined the Fateh Halab (“Conquest of Aleppo”), the military command center in Aleppo ostensibly run by Ahrar al Sham, Nusra Front’s closest ally, but in fact under firm Nusra control. The report thus conveyed the false impression that the CIA-supported rebel group was still independent of Nusra Front.

An article by New York Times Beirut correspondent Anne Barnard (co-authored by the Times stringer in Syria Karam Shoumali — Oct. 13, 2015) appeared to veer off in the direction of treating the U.S.-supported opposition groups as part of a new U.S./Russian proxy war, thus drawing attention away from the issue of whether the Obama administration support for “moderate” groups was actually contributing to the political-military power of Al Qaeda in Syria.

Under the headline “US Weaponry Is Turning Syria Into Proxy War With Russia,” it reported that armed opposition groups had just received large shipments of TOW anti-tank missiles that had to be approved by the United States. Quoting the confident statements of rebel commanders about the effectiveness of the missiles and the high morale of rebel troops, the story suggested that arming the “moderates” was a way for the United States to make them the primary force on one side of a war pitting the United States against Russia in Syria.

Near the end of the story, however, Barnard effectively undermined that “proxy war” theme by citing the admission by commanders of U.S.-supported brigades of their “uncomfortable marriage of necessity” with the Al Qaeda franchise, “because they cannot operate without the consent of the larger and stronger Nusra Front.”

Referring to the capture of Idlib the previous spring by the opposition coalition, Barnard recalled that the TOW missiles had “played a major role in the insurgent advances that eventually endangered Mr. Assad’s rule.” But, she added:

“While that would seem like a welcome development for United States policy makers, in practice it presented another quandary, given that the Nusra Front was among the groups benefiting from the enhanced firepower.”

Unfortunately, Barnard’s point that U.S.-supported groups were deeply embedded in an Al Qaeda-controlled military structure was buried at the end of a long piece, and thus easily missed. The headline and lead ensured that, for the vast majority of readers, that point would be lost in the larger thrust of the article.

The Wall Street Journal’s Adam Entous approached the problem from a different angle but with the same result. He wrote a story on Oct. 5 reflecting what he said was anger on the part of U.S. officials that the Russians were deliberately targeting opposition groups that the CIA had supported.

Entous reported that U.S. officials believed the Syrian government wanted those groups targeted because of their possession of TOW missiles, which had been the key factor in the opposition’s capture of Idlib earlier in the year. But nowhere in the article was the role of CIA-supported groups within military command structures dominated by Nusra Front even acknowledged.

Still another angle on the problem was adopted in an Oct. 12 article by Journal Beirut correspondent Raja Abdulrahim, who described the Russian air offensive as having spurred U.S.-backed rebels and the Nusra Front to form a “more united front against the Assad regime and its Russian and Iranian allies.” Adbulrahim thus acknowledged the close military collaboration with Nusra Front, but blamed it all on the Russian offensive.

And the story ignored the fact that those same opposition groups had already joined military command arrangements in Idlib and Aleppo earlier in 2015, in anticipation of victories across northeast Syria.

The image in the media of the U.S.-supported armed opposition as operating independently from Nusra Front, and as victims of Russian attacks, persisted into early 2016. But in February, the first cracks in that image appeared in the Washington Post and New York Times.

Reporting on the negotiations between Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on a partial ceasefire that began on Feb. 12, Washington Post associate editor and senior national security correspondent Karen DeYoung wrote on Feb. 19 that an unresolved problem was how to decide which organizations were to be considered “terrorist groups” in the ceasefire agreement.

In that context, DeYoung wrote, “Jabhat al-Nusra, whose forces are intermingled with moderate rebel groups in the northwest near the Turkish border, is particularly problematic.”

It was the first time any major news outlet had reported that U.S.-supported armed opposition and Nusra Front front troops were “intermingled” on the ground. And in the very next sentence DeYoung dropped what should have been a political bombshell: She reported that Kerry had proposed in the Munich negotiations to “leave Jabhat al Nusra off limits to bombing, as part of a ceasefire, at least temporarily, until the groups can be sorted out.”

At the same time, Kerry was publicly demanding in a speech at the Munich conference that Russia halt its attacks on “legitimate opposition groups” as a condition for a ceasefire. Kerry’s negotiating position reflected the fact that CIA groups were certain to be hit in strikes on areas controlled by Nusra Front, as well as the reality that Al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front and Ahrar al Sham were central to the success of the U.S.-backed military effort against Assad.

In the end, however, Lavrov rejected the proposal to protect Nusra Front targets from Russian airstrikes, and Kerry dropped that demand, allowing the joint U.S./Russian announcement of the partial ceasefire on Feb. 22.

Up to that point, maps of the Syrian war in the Post and Times had identified zones of control only for “rebels” without showing where Nusra Front forces were in control. But on the same day as the announcement, the New York Times published an “updated” map, accompanied by text stating that Nusra Front “is embedded in the area of Aleppo and northwest toward the Turkish border.”

At the State Department briefing the next day, reporters grilled spokesman Mark Toner on whether U.S.-supported rebel forces were “commingled” with Nusra Front forces in Aleppo and northward. After a very long exchange on the subject, Toner said, “Yes, I believe there is some commingling of these groups.”

And he went on to say, speaking on behalf of the International Syria Support Group, which comprises all the countries involved in the Syrian peace negotiations, including the U.S. and Russia:

“We, the ISSG, have been very clear in saying that Al Nusra and Daesh [ISIS] are not part of any kind of cease-fire or any kind of negotiated cessation of hostilities. So if you hang out with the wrong folks, then you make that decision. … You choose who hang out with, and that sends a signal.”

Although I pointed out the significance of the statement (Truthout, Feb. 24, 2016), no major news outlet saw fit to report that remarkable acknowledgement by the State Department spokesperson. Nevertheless, the State Department had clearly alerted the Washington Post and the New York Times to the fact that the relationships between the CIA-supported groups and Nusra Front were much closer than it had ever admitted in the past.

Kerry evidently calculated that the pretense that the “moderate” armed groups were independent of Al Nusra front would open him to a political attack from Republicans and the media if they were hit by Russian airstrikes. So it was no longer useful politically to try to obscure that reality from the media.

In fact, the State Department now seemed interested in inducing as many of those armed groups as possible to separate themselves more clearly from the Nusra Front.

The twists and turns in the three major newspapers’ coverage of the issue of relations between U.S.-supported opposition groups and Al Qaeda’s franchise in Syria thus show how major news sources slighted or steered clear of the fact that U.S.-client armed groups were closely intertwined with a branch of Al Qaeda — until they were prompted by signals from U.S. officials to revise their line and provide a more honest portrayal of Syria’s armed opposition.

Gareth Porter, an independent investigative journalist and historian on US national security policy, is the winner of the 2012 Gellhorn Prize for Journalism. His latest book is Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare, published in 2014. [This story originally appeared at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting.]

Oh wow! Yet another propagandist and HAC (Hate Amerika Club) member serving as a U.S. Senator!

Will Kyle Orton also rebuff these ridiculous allegations from this "Kremlin lover"? Lol!



Amerika deserves every blowback she gets for the chaos, destruction & death she has wreaked across the world.

[size=18pt]US Senator: "We Have Never Done Anything More Loathsome or Despicable Than What We're Doing in Syria."[/size]
By Ollie Richardson for Fort Russ
9th July, 2016



Senator Richard Black and Janice Kortkamp discuss the shameful situation in Syria, where the US government is actively arming and funding Al Nusra (Al Qaeda) and "conduits" ("moderates", blending them together, and then using this model to exterminate the Syrian population.

It should be noted that the mass media machine is seemingly losing its effect, as more and more prominent and senior figures (e.g Robert Fisk) are calling a spade a spade, or a "moderate" a terrorist. It just goes to show that you can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but never all of the people all of the time


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4RzlWCe4dA

Video Description (published 8th July 2016): "Virginia State Senator Richard Black and Janice Kortkamp Fearing recently returned from trips to Syria -- reporting on a reality far different than the lies the American people are being fed by the media. EIR's Jeffrey Steinberg interviews both on their meetings and experiences with top officials and everyday Syrians."

Cowardminted what state does Richard black represents in the US congress since he is a US senator?

Missy89:
Cowardminted what state does Richard black represents in the US congress since he is a US senator?

Olodo self hating Issy Fit Missy Ibadan chic living off a PC in Guam...... Google is your friend.

NairaMinted:


Olodo self hating Issy Fit Missy Ibadan chic living off a PC in Guam...... Google is your friend.

Oh i checked. The 2 US senators from Virginia are Tim Kaine and Mark Warner.

So can you answer my question now cowardminted?

Missy89:


Oh i checked. The 2 US senators from Virginia are Tim Kaine and Mark Warner.

So can you answer my question now cowardminted?

Oh my! Your small mindedness, idiocy, obsfucation and mendacity knows no bounds! Unfortunately for you, we are mindful of your s1lly games.

It's 2:12 am. I'm off to bed. Please keep googling till you get it right. Hopefully you'll provide the answer when Im awake

NairaMinted:


Oh my! Your small mindedness, idiocy, obsfucation and mendacity knows no bounds! Unfortunately for you, we are mindful of your s1lly games.

It's 2:12 am. I'm off to bed. Please keep googling till you get it right. Hopefully you'll provide the answer when Im awake

Cowardminted. When was Richard black elected to the US congress since he is a US senator?

Running away as usual?

Missy89:


Cowardminted. When was Richard black elected to the US congress since he is a US senator?

Running away as usual?

I'll humour you so just I show all just how s1lly and empty you are and also expose your modus operandi.

Where was the US congress mentioned anywhere in the article? Please point it out

In your weak and characteristically twisted attempt to disregard the article, you have deliberately conflated the US Congress and the state senate. And even if Senator ( oh yes, he is a senator, stup1d!) Black was elected into the Virginia State senate, how does that in any way belittle his stance or make it any less relevant? Not that I'm interested in whatever twaddle you retort with as an answer.

Same way you f00lishly had to backtrack and admit your folly when you tried to use semantics to claim Amerika isn't involved in a territorial dispute with China. Ever since you have been trailing me upandan practically begging to engage me in a debate. Even throwing in a Game of Thrones meme along with your pleas. Lol!

S1lly Olodo Issy Missy Self Hating Ibadan Chic Living off a PC in Guam.

NairaMinted:


I'll humour you so just I show all just how s1lly and empty you are and also expose your modus operandi.

Where was the US congress mentioned anywhere in the article? Please point it out

In your weak and characteristically twisted attempt to disregard the article, you have deliberately conflated the US Congress and the state senate. And even if Senator ( oh yes, he is a senator, stup1d!) Black was elected into the Virginia State senate, how does that in any way belittle his stance or make it any less relevant? Not that I'm interested in whatever twaddle you retort with an answer.

Same way you f00lishly had to backtrack and admit your folly when you tried to use semantics to claim Amerika isn't involved in a territorial dispute with China. Ever since you have been trailing me upandan practically begging to engage me in a debate. Even throwing in a Game of Thrones meme along with your pleas. Lol!

S1lly Issy Missy Self Hating Ibadan Chic Living off a PC in Guam.

Cowardminted sound pissed lmao. A US senator (your words) is a member of US congress. Ur state senator is an unimportant person role playing international diplomat.

It is like a sokoto house of assembly member talking about foreign policy. Nobody cares.

He can keep appearing on RT till kingdom come. Only pootine colon eaters listens. Tell me about those unimportant German politicians in Crimea too. Are they still there?