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.
I'm a bit skeptical about an article appearing on Uprootedpalestinians website.
It also says the rebels told an AP reporter that, but when you follow the links the (freelance) AP reporter never spoke to rebels himself and isn't in Syria. It's rather a second hand report.
Passed the Senate Committee. Congress doesn't resume until Sept 9.
Isn't it nteresting how some people can't follow what is going on. I guess the blood rushing to their head over the fact that Obama may be close to getting what he wants is causing them confusion. I bet if he get's the go ahead their "heads" will explode from overjoy.
I'm a bit skeptical about an article appearing on Uprootedpalestinians website.
It also says the rebels told an AP reporter that, but when you follow the links the (freelance) AP reporter never spoke to rebels himself and isn't in Syria. It's rather a second hand report.
Posted with TapaTalk
I don't suppose you'll like this one either. If you are only going to accept first hand news, you're options are severely limited.
The most in depth report yet to date:
The Russian statement warned the United States and its allies not to conduct a military strike against Syria until the United Nations had completed a similarly detailed scientific study into the Aug. 21 attack. It warned that what it called the current “hysteria” about a possible military strike in the West was similar to the false claims and poor intelligence that preceded the United States invasion of Iraq.
“The Russian report is specific,” the ministry statement said. “It is a scientific and technical document.”
The statement also noted that the attention paid to the Aug. 21 attack had diverted attention from the investigation into the March 19 incident, which was the reason U.N. investigators were in Syria when the more recent attack took place.
“Unfortunately, that investigation still essentially has not begun,” the statement said.
I don't suppose you'll like this one either. If you are only going to accept first hand news, you're options are severely limited.
No....I don't have a problem with your Russian report.
The problem with the other article is the source and it saying an AP reporter was told that, yet when you read it and follow the link, you find out the guy was (a) just a freelanced AP reporter and (b) he didn't leave Amman, Jordan so he couldn't have been told that.
If a bona fide AP reporter really was told that first hand, that would be printed by AP and would be able to be found on more that a pro Palestinian website.
It has been this way since at least Clinton. I remember when Clinton sent troops to Bosnia, there were protests around Seattle. I was also against going to Bosnia, so I went and talked to some of the protestors. They were all far-left, socialist worker party types.
I seem to remember President Clinton bombing former Yugoslavia, but not sending in troops. The UN sent some troops, I believe.
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.
