Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your tax dollars at work. Billions in western aid is going to fund the overthrow of legitimate governments using terrorist like these.
"One group of Libyans hit hardest are the people of Tawargha - who were either exterminated or exiled from their city of 10,000-30,000 during the NATO-led destruction of Libya last year. Since then, their refugee camps have been raided, and survivors who have not yet fled Libya are being systematically imprisoned, tortured, and murdered.
Long before the first NATO bombs dropped on Libya, genuine geopolitical analysts including Dr. Webster Tarpley of Tarpley.net, noted that the Libyan "rebels" were in fact notoriously brutal racists and led by militias belonging to a listed international terrorist organization responsible for violence not only in Libya, but in Afghanistan and Iraq. On March 1, 2011 Dr. Tarpley spoke on the Alex Jones show warning that Libyan rebels were lynching black Libyans, hailed from Al Qaeda, and that the overall agenda of destabilizing and possibly intervening militarily across the Arab World was to implement "chaos, civil war, and the division of countries," along with the installation of weak puppet-regimes."
We stayed out of Egypt and Tunisia and both of them are spiraling downward. NATO entered Libya and now its spiraling downward. Now we have Syria. So for NATO, going in either direction is lose-lose situation. Best thing for NATO to do is stay out of it and stop outside radicals from trying to control the outcomes and basically turn them all into Islamist extremist states under Sharia Law.
well then Syria should not ask for our help and they seem to be both willing to fight each other and we should let them fight it out and then work with the regime that wins.
US CIA now confirmed to be arming the terrorists in Syria, just as we did in Libya.
Quote:
The New York Times claims that, "the C.I.A. officers have been in southern Turkey for several weeks, in part to help keep weapons out of the hands of fighters allied with Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups, one senior American official said," a unsubstantiated claim that was similarly made in Libya before Al Qaeda flags were run up poles in Benghazi by rebels flush with NATO cash and arms used to collapse the government of Muammar Qaddafi. In fact, it is confirmed that Libyan LIFG rebels, led by Al Qaeda commander Abdul Hakim Belhaj, have now made their way by the hundreds to Syria (and here).
Despite months of the US claiming the "international community" sought to end the violence and protect the population of Syria, the New York Times now admits that the US is engaged in supporting a "military campaign" against the Syrian government aimed at increasing "pressure" on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Efforts to impose an arms embargo on Syria is now revealed to be one-sided, aimed at giving rebels an advantage in the prolonged bloodbath with the intent on tipping the balance in favor of Western proxy-forces - not end the violence as soon as possible as claimed by the UN, and in particular, Kofi Annan.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
