US bombs Syria

[fay spook]

Marvin, fay spook, otherwise known as the riddler is a hasbarist. He only seeks to obfuscate and deflect.

That's why I ignore him. I've tried the other way but he would just bog you down with irrelevant, convoluted nonsense.

Look at Marvins comments on those who ignore.

I'll always work with the comments you raise. Don't forget that I'll try to pick up on your absolutist arguments. Have a fact check with your quotes from Theresa May. It makes for a better argument when you're factually correct. It's a simple tactic in debate, find the weak points. You tell us about news sources and which ones have an agenda or something similar. I'm still awaiting help from a self confessed informed observer. I'll keep trying because I was taught not to give up.

 

[gassor]

I have to say I'm dreadfully disappointed to learn that Trump is a puppet of the neo-con/military industrial complex/Zionist cabal/Bilderberg-Trilateral lot. There I was, thinking his vast wealth made him immune to all that.

Oops, forgot to mention Wall Street.

Well Max told us that Trump was the best choice for pres because Shillary was controlled by the NeoCon/Zionist conspirators and Trump was immune, as you say, due to his great wealth. Surely we have not been mislead!

 

[maxflinn]

It says so on the BBC. It must be true!

Have a look at what the BBC were saying just before the Iraq war with regards to Iraq and its WMD capability.

Isn't it amazing how the sheep suck it all up, again..

Thing is though that the powers that be have spent years calling Putin and Assad evil etc, as of course they did Saddam and Qaddafi, so the sheep react positively to propaganda about them. They don't question. Assad is bad so yeah, I bet he did drop chemical weapons on the 'beautiful babies'.

And they suck it up. Hell, more than that, they defend the propaganda.

Of course there's a parallel with hifi cable arguments. People believe one way or the other and nothing ever changes that viewpoint. All that happens is people get more deeply entrenched.

The scum that provide our Western media with their narrative know this of course. That's why they always sell the good vs evil construct first. Then the sheep are hooked without even realising it.

The recipe for regime change. It works every time.

 

[fay spook]

It says so on the BBC. It must be true!

Have a look at what the BBC were saying just before the Iraq war with regards to Iraq and its WMD capability.

Remember.......

Originally Posted by maxflinn View Post
And that war criminal whore May was on today saying her scientists are 100% certain that Assad carried out the attack.

You tell me, is that what she said? Where should I go to find out? I'll have a look for a video link so we can decide.

Look what maxfling says about muddling along. I'm only using the BBC link to show what TM said. I've said nothing here about the WMD.

You've got a bit of catching up to do. You should learn a bit about the support some here had for Trump and put that into context of what they say about them now. Then tell me how informed my ignoring friend is on geopolitics. I'm not passing an opinion, just suggesting you do the research you say you want to do.

 

[russel]

May did seem to nail the UK to the Trump/Republican line, which is IMO most regrettable and the mark of a clearly inexperienced politician.

Its more of a mark of a politician in desperate need of a trade deal, Max is right insamuch she is whoring Britain but that is no different to any number of our political leaders, cf Saudi Arabia...

 

[fay spook]

Isn't it amazing how the sheep suck it all up, again..

But only I used the link to clarify what Theresa May said compared to what you said she said. You've managed to extrapolate a lot from "ignoring" me.

 

[NeilR]

Isn't it amazing how the sheep suck it all up, again.

Yes it is, isn't it. The problem is, i think you have mixed up who the sheep are. Have a look in the mirror.

 

[maxflinn]

Yes it is, isn't it. The problem is, i think you have mixed up who the sheep are. Have a look in the mirror.

Bah-ah-ah-ah

 

[fay spook]

I'll have a look for a video link so we can decide.

Theresa-May-Syria-chemical-weapons-attack-despicable.html

Look at this one and the following video. These are recordings of TM being interviewed. She is saying "If" Syria are behind and not the 100% the informed one says.

You see, I can view a video and summarise it.

 

[maxflinn]

Look at Ch4 news, Riddly.

 

[fay spook]

Look at Ch4 news, Riddly.

Thats why I asked. No closed mind here. What time into the show? I feel like I am talking to a ghost considering I am being ignored. Riddly from Alien

 

[maxflinn]

At the start of the ''news''.....

100% she said.

 

[marvin1882]

Marvin, fay spook, otherwise known as the riddler is a hasbarist. He only seeks to obfuscate and deflect.

That's why I ignore him. I've tried the other way but he would just bog you down with irrelevant, convoluted nonsense.

Understood. fay spook can watch the linked video for himself should he wish to do so. I am not going to break it down into small bite sized chunks for him. I do find the hasbara methods of debate somewhat tedious.

 

[gassor]

Max is right insamuch she is whoring Britain but that is no different to any number of our political leaders, cf Saudi Arabia...

But that's not what he said. He said May was a whore.

war criminal whore

 

[Seeker_UK]

Isn't it amazing how the sheep suck it all up, again..

It's not about sucking it all up, Max, it's all about you spinning the story to support your own POV.

The PM stated aid that that it was definitely sarin or a sarin-like substance and 'highly likely' the regime were behind the attacks. Which is not the same as your post, which said:

And that war criminal ***** May was on today saying her scientists are 100% certain that Assad carried out the attack. What a lying *****.

So, regardless of the background noise you choose to throw up around this, I am calling you out for either misunderstanding what the PM said, not reading the story fully or wilfully misrepresenting the story to support your argument.

 

[marvin1882]

Look at Marvins comments on those who ignore.

I'll always work with the comments you raise. Don't forget that I'll try to pick up on your absolutist arguments. Have a fact check with your quotes from Theresa May. It makes for a better argument when you're factually correct. It's a simple tactic in debate, find the weak points. You tell us about news sources and which ones have an agenda or something similar. I'm still awaiting help from a self confessed informed observer. I'll keep trying because I was taught not to give up.

Look back at what I actually said with regards to those who ignore, "I agree, putting those who hold a different view from you on the ignore list, and for this reason alone, is immature."

"For this reason alone" is what I said. If you are someone who tediously seeks to obfuscate and deflect whilst in debate then ignoring is justified.

 

[maxflinn]

It's not about sucking it all up, Max, it's all about you spinning the story to support your own POV.

The PM stated aid that that it was definitely sarin or a sarin-like substance and 'highly likely' the regime were behind the attacks. Which is not the same as your post, which said:



So, regardless of the background noise you choose to throw up around this, I am calling you out for either misunderstanding what the PM said, not reading the story fully or wilfully misrepresenting the story to support your argument.

She said it's 100% that Assad used sarin to gas the people.

She's just another lying, warmongering Zionist shill!

 

[Seeker_UK]

She said it's 100% that Assad used sarin to gas the people.

Not according to the BBC article you linked to (the post has vanished, I note).

She's just another lying, warmongering Zionist shill!

I appreciate you're well qualified to identify liars.

At the start of the ''news''.....

100% she said.

Just to check:

1. Does C4 News count as MSM?
2. Are we trusting MSM today?

 

[fay spook]

Look back at what I actually said with regards to those who ignore, "I agree, putting those who hold a different view from you on the ignore list, and for this reason alone, is immature."

"For this reason alone" is what I said. If you are someone who tediously seeks to obfuscate and deflect whilst in debate then ignoring is justified.

Have a look at the debates where our self proclaimed informed observer has called me a fascist, a simpleton and and idiot amongst other things. He thinks I take an opposing point of view and thats why he ignores. Then again he's not ignoring me now so I can't be "tediously seeks to obfuscate and deflect whilst in debate". (only using what people say)

Look at what I say and the points I raise. For example you say all British Prime ministers........that is obviously wrong. We had effectively prime ministers before we even knew about America (I haven't googled, so I could be wrong but back in the 1400s I would suggest there wasn't a great neocon influence from America over here). Could I suggest you meant recent prime ministers? I work in a world where people actually listen to what others say and read what they write. Its nice to get it right. If you are correct, you will obviously be able to explain the absolutist part of your argument.

You might have a Brideshead style sense of tedium, to help you I will watch the video you recommend and report back. I am doing this on the assumption that you have recommended it because you agree with its comments and the possible channels videos?

 

[gassor]

She said it's 100% that Assad used sarin to gas the people.

She's just another lying, warmongering Zionist shill!

So she's changed from being a whore in the last hour. I'm so pleased, her being a daughter of the manse and all that. She must have decided that it being Easter would be a good time to keep her hand on her halfpenny and seek redemption. Oh as well as being the PM - you know how people talk.