If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Info Wars)   Syrian rebels admit using chemical weapons to "kill like Osama bin Laden said"   (infowars.com) divider line 69
    More: Interesting, Osama bin Laden, Syrian rebels, Paul Joseph Watson, Syrians, chemical weapons, Nadeem Baloosh, Free Syrian Army, Aleppo  
•       •       •

11673 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Sep 2013 at 8:39 PM (50 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-09-05 08:59:23 PM
5 votes:
All war is deception
~ Sun Tzu
2013-09-05 08:14:05 PM
4 votes:
We shouldn't be taking sides at all. We're planning to be the Air Force for al Qaeda sympathizers against an insidious dictator. Saudi Arabia wants us to do something. Well, how about the incredibly wealthy Saudis put those fighter jets and M-1 Abrams tanks we sold them to good use. How about instead of the Saudis giving us lip service support for intervention, we offer them lip service support for intervention for a change? The Arab League should be equipped to handle this. Every time we intervene in Middle East conflicts, it seems like we win more enemies than friends. T. E. Lawrence was right.
2013-09-05 08:08:25 PM
4 votes:
Farking Alex Jones, man.  You're more likely to get credible information from one of those plastic kids toy phones that make animal noises when you dial them
2013-09-06 12:19:41 AM
3 votes:
fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net
SEEMS LEGIT
2013-09-05 10:05:57 PM
3 votes:
There's a lot of shooting the messenger here, but the doubts about the Syrian government actually carrying out this attack are reasonable doubts.

I'm willing to bet that about 90% of the people here scoffing at infowars haven't even read the article or watched the video. The news articles linked on the infowars page are from the BBC and Reuters.

If it was a Republican president pushing for this, all the Democrats here would be expressing similar doubts about the credibility of the evidence put forth by the US government. But criticizing the US government here would be giving the Republicans a victory, so nobody whispers a word of protest.

Democrats love a good war for peace.
2013-09-05 08:51:36 PM
3 votes:

Kit Fister: Shhh. Anyone against the war must be a republitard derper. Duh.


It's one thing to be against the war because Syria is a nightmare with no way to a good outcome and potentially no benefit to intervening whatsoever and another to be against it because Obama.

I'd prefer we didn't get involved either, and I hope that doesn't bite us in the ass in regards to chemical weapons down the line, but if you're going to pretend Obama's red line was about missiles flying immediately, you're probably a republitard derper.
2013-09-05 08:44:52 PM
3 votes:
TheDumbBlonde: "There is no winning here."

how about a nice game of chess?
2013-09-05 08:44:19 PM
3 votes:
Alex Jones' Infowars?

Seems legit.
2013-09-05 08:19:57 PM
3 votes:

Nabb1: We shouldn't be taking sides at all. We're planning to be the Air Force for al Qaeda sympathizers against an insidious dictator. Saudi Arabia wants us to do something. Well, how about the incredibly wealthy Saudis put those fighter jets and M-1 Abrams tanks we sold them to good use. How about instead of the Saudis giving us lip service support for intervention, we offer them lip service support for intervention for a change? The Arab League should be equipped to handle this. Every time we intervene in Middle East conflicts, it seems like we win more enemies than friends. T. E. Lawrence was right.


Them and the French, who have been talking smack, should feel free to jump right in to this mess, if they think action is so important.

There are no good guys in Syria. There is no "winning" there.
2013-09-05 08:12:14 PM
3 votes:
Thank you, Drew, for wiping the sweat from your brow and personally greenlighting this article.  This is a defining moment in our country and our voices must be heard.  If the United States goes to war on false pretense and bad information, it will be unprecedented.  The repercussions for our actions will come in the form of an ethical mushroom cloud, and we need to make sure the argument is a slam dunk before we choose to intervene.

TuteTibiImperes: FTFY


Yes, yes, you are correct.  Thank you, InfoWars, for keeping us infromed.
2013-09-05 07:57:52 PM
3 votes:
infowars? yeah, right.
2013-09-05 07:45:09 PM
3 votes:

Kit Fister: No one will care. This won't even get greened.


I hope it does.  InfoWars informs me like no other web site.  If this headline gets downvoted, then it is proof that the NSA has gotten to the owner of this web site.  There would be no other explanation.
2013-09-05 07:43:42 PM
3 votes:
No one will care. This won't even get greened.
2013-09-06 02:59:45 AM
2 votes:
oi44.tinypic.com
2013-09-05 11:45:58 PM
2 votes:
2wolves:  Which rebels?  There are at least three groups fighting each other and Assad.   This is a fuster cluck of incredible dimensions.

My view on U.S. involvement in Syria:

i.imgur.com

1) France and Turkey are more than capable of handling it themselves.

2) fark this proxy war shiat.
2013-09-05 11:26:15 PM
2 votes:

Biological Ali: They're two separate incidents.


You don't say?

Biological Ali: Even if you assume that the rebels carried out that attack


Yeah I'm sure the Syrian government launched sarin gas at their own soldiers.

Like someone else around here has been saying: Who benefits? It certainly isn't the Syrian regime that's about to benefit from this attack.


Regarding this article:
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/09/05/alan -g rayson-syria-intelligence-manipulated

"The White House released its four-page public report Aug. 30, arguing that Assad's government killed 1,429 people on Aug. 21 with a planned chemical weapon attack. Evidence cited in that report included "intercepted communications involving a senior official intimately familiar with the offensive who confirmed that chemical weapons were used."

Grayson, however, says "the claim has been made that that information was completely mischaracterized."

He points to an article published by The Daily Caller that alleges the communications actually showed Syrian officers were surprised by the alleged chemical weapon attack. The communications, according to unnamed sources paraphrased in article, were intercepted by Israeli intelligence and "doctored so that it leads a reader to just the opposite conclusion." "

...

Members of Congress are "not being given any of the underlying elements of the intelligence reports," according to Grayson. He's not sure if the information will come before the votes on a proposed strike next week.



These are perfectly valid concerns. If you want to gobble up the US government's case like you did with Iraq, well that's on you.
2013-09-05 11:00:38 PM
2 votes:

Gwendolyn: Nabb1: Gwendolyn: Anyone else think Obama pulled this Syria debate to get people to shut the fark up about the Affordable Care act causing the downfall society?

Do I think he would bomb people and kill hundreds or even thousands to stop people from complaining about Obamacare? Only if he's a total farking psychopath.

No. The bringing it up when we should have done something two months ago and then allowing everything to dick around for a few weeks. I said the DEBATE not the attack.


Still not buying it. Guy talked himself into a corner and now is lobbing it over to Congress. And now Putin is calling his bluff. "Red line." Every two-bit lawyer alive knows you always leave an out in everything you say. Nice work, Harvard Law.
2013-09-05 10:16:27 PM
2 votes:
Anyone else think Obama pulled this Syria debate to get people to shut the fark up about the Affordable Care act causing the downfall society?
2013-09-05 09:22:37 PM
2 votes:
  Here's the real conspiracy theory- Alex Jones and his ilk are puppets for the system. They spout 99% gibberish and the ever so occasional nugget of truth. Look- no one looks for diamonds in the sewer. If someone told you there were diamonds under all the crap you wouldn't believe them. If a credible person told you about the diamonds, you would think they were gullible or stupid. All you've ever seen in the sewer is shiat and you will not believe anything to the contrary.
  The thing is that maybe the sewer is the best place of all to hide diamonds. Once a story has been tainted with the conspiracy label legitimate journalists will not touch it. It's not about control of the information itself. The only thing that matters is the public's perception of the information.
  That's the real Info War... if you believe that kind of thing. Us cool kids know that conspiracy stuff is all bullshiat. Right?
2013-09-05 09:10:14 PM
2 votes:
I thought img1.fark.net always had a i.imgur.com tag?
2013-09-05 08:55:24 PM
2 votes:
img.fark.net =
fc09.deviantart.net
2013-09-05 07:59:38 PM
2 votes:

Kit Fister: TuteTibiImperes: Mike_LowELL: Kit Fister: No one will care. This won't even get greened.

I hope it does.  InfoWars infromes me like no other web site.  If this headline gets downvoted, then it is proof that the NSA has gotten to the owner of this web site.  There would be no other explanation.

FTFY

Oh. Its you again.


And you think Infowars has a shred of credibility?  Who knows where that video actually came from.

Still, is it possible the rebels have chemicals weapons?  Sure.  Are all of the rebels using them, member of Al Qaeda, or even fighting for the same cause?  No.

It's a mess over there, I honestly don't care at this point if we get involved or not, but let's not pretend there's some government conspiracy to subvert the public opinion.  Your tinfoil hat might be on too snug.
2013-09-05 07:51:06 PM
2 votes:

Mike_LowELL: Kit Fister: No one will care. This won't even get greened.

I hope it does.  InfoWars infromes me like no other web site.  If this headline gets downvoted, then it is proof that the NSA has gotten to the owner of this web site.  There would be no other explanation.


FTFY
2013-09-06 09:33:47 AM
1 votes:
As we highlighted last week, Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta admitted to a reporter that they were responsible for last month's chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad's forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.

But I thought the Right was telling us that these Chem Weapons were used by Assad's government, and that they got them from Iraq when Saddam "smuggled them out of the country"? NOW they're telling us that the guy who kissed Bush and held hands with him is the one providing the weapons? How does this justify the Iraq invasion now?

And seriously, if we're going to bomb ANYONE, it should be friggin' Saudi Arabia, they were the country that produced 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers, after all.
2013-09-06 01:54:14 AM
1 votes:

2wolves: The U.S. used willie pete in Iraq.  No ethical high ground in sight.


Willie pete is a chemical weapon like a hand grenade is a chemical weapon.

Chemical weapon is widely considered to mean nerve agents, or caustic agents.  WP is NOT a chemical weapon.
2013-09-06 01:19:19 AM
1 votes:
I don't farking care.  No amount of super scary warmongering is going to get me approving of bombing a country that poses zero threat to the US.  I hate that Obama has me agreeing with the goddamn Tea Party.  Seriously, what the fark is going on?
2013-09-06 01:11:44 AM
1 votes:

Biological Ali: Radioactive Ass: I will simply point out to you that the Geneva Protocol of 1925 allow forces to respond to the use of chemical weapons with more chemical weapons.The prohibition is about being the first ones to use them. Link. If in fact the rebels used chemical weapons first then even if the Assad regime used chemical weapons on August 21st they were justified in doing so based upon the only treaty that they have signed regarding chemical weapons.

This attack happened nearly six months after the first incident, in a completely different city, and was targeted at suburbs populated by civilians. Even if you assume for the sake of argument that the Damascus attack can be termed a "retaliation" to the Aleppo incident (itself a laughably massive stretch), something like this would violate other international norms, such as those relating to the targeting of civilians.



Obviously the key question is, "the targeting of civilians " by whom?

There are numerous entities that might have seen a mass-gassing outside of Damascus as benefiting their "cause".

AssadCo is not one of them.


/Why are we doing this, again?
2013-09-06 12:54:30 AM
1 votes:

darth_badger: vygramul: Frederick: vygramul: Amos Quito: vygramul: Somacandra: 2) fark this proxy war shiat.

Proxy war?


Yes, proxy war.

The US fighting on the behalf of Israel.

Proxy war.

Lol - a moment ago it was on behalf of the Saudis and Qataris. Why don't you and darth badger work out for whom we're fighting and get back to me.

Can we agree it is not for the US's own behalf?  I know I am not threatened by Syria....

No, we can't. The idea that chemical weapons are unacceptable is a useful concept for everyone, including you. It may not seem like it's likely now, but you never know.

So if someone on your block was murdered and the cops couldn't prove who did it, then would it would be OK to just execute one family ( you only mean to kill one of the neighbors but get his family in collateral damage) on your block, so people one block over wouldn't murder someone too?


If that was what was going on here, then you'd have a point.
2013-09-06 12:53:21 AM
1 votes:

Greymalkin: Both sides are as bad as each other. Getting involved just makes it a 3 way shiatstorm.


There are actually  a whole lot more than three sides in this. It's more of a gangbang shiatstorm where each guy has their own special STD and the chick spreads it around like a petri dish in an incubator.
2013-09-06 12:42:47 AM
1 votes:
From another source:  http://www.mintpressnews.com/witnesses-of-gas-attack-say-saudis-suppl i ed-rebels-with-chemical-weapons/168135/

Both sides are as bad as each other.  Getting involved just makes it a 3 way shiatstorm.
2013-09-06 12:37:45 AM
1 votes:

Amos Quito: vygramul: Amos Quito: vygramul: Somacandra: 2) fark this proxy war shiat.

Proxy war?


Yes, proxy war.

The US fighting on the behalf of Israel.

Proxy war.

Lol - a moment ago it was on behalf of the Saudis and Qataris.


No, I have always said that it was always on the behalf of Israel. You're confused.


vygramul: Why don't you and darth badger work out for whom we're fighting and get back to me.


Please try to focus.

Here, read this article.


/Squint if necessary


Strange, France backs a strike on Syria - their former imperial possession. Yet you don't even consider the possibility it's a proxy for France. I wonder why that might be?

/No I don't.
2013-09-06 12:36:26 AM
1 votes:
Tyee

Are you under some kind of contractual obligation to work Benghazi conspiracy theories into every thread you post in?
2013-09-06 12:35:46 AM
1 votes:

Frederick: vygramul: I'm not sure what you're saying, but just in case, there's no dispute Saddam used chemical weapons against the Kurds.

Saddam and the Iraqi's sure dispute it.  They claim it was Iran.


Considering the Iraqis had air superiority over Iran, that is a pretty unlikely claim. And the Iraqis don't deny it.
2013-09-06 12:33:37 AM
1 votes:

spamdog: - The refusal of the western powers to wait for the UN's report on the attacks.


That's a bit of a red herring. The UN inspectors, as far as I can tell, aren't allowed to officially apportion blame for the attacks (unless their mandate has been changed recently, which I doubt). So the most they'll be able to do is determine that an attack did take place (which everyone already knows), and possibly a few other details that will add to the pile of circumstantial evidence (or corroborate existing evidence) against Assad, but either way it's understandable why this upcoming report isn't being treated as some kind of make-or-break milestone that everything hinges on.
2013-09-06 12:09:52 AM
1 votes:
So a "rebel" in Latakia, an area full of Alawites supporting Assad, says he has a ton of chemical weapons and likes killing women and children just before the U.S. is going to come in and help his cause... Seems legit.

The only reason for rebels to use chemical weapons is to induce the West to help them, but only the jihadists would be likely to use them, and the jihadists are now going into hiding because they're afraid of America coming in and removing them along with Assad. It's pretty farking obvious Assad's behind the chemical attacks.
2013-09-05 11:57:22 PM
1 votes:

wahsman: I vote for whatever makes my gas cheaper,dammit.  God bless 'Murica!


Hey can I borrow your backyard for a few years?

poetcore.files.wordpress.com
2013-09-05 11:41:44 PM
1 votes:

spamdog: Yeah I'm sure the Syrian government launched sarin gas at their own soldiers.

Like someone else around here has been saying: Who benefits? It certainly isn't the Syrian regime that's about to benefit from this attack.


The Syrian regime has already benefited from the attack. It hit opposition-held suburbs in Damascus and helped with their bid to retake the city. Moreover, the evidence that the regime carried it out also includes the nature of the attack itself - a "large-scale, coordinated rocket and artillery attack", as per the USG report. The rebels have never carried out such an attack before, and indeed it's not clear whether they even have the capability to do so.


spamdog: He points to an article published by The Daily Caller that alleges the communications actually showed Syrian officers were surprised by the alleged chemical weapon attack. The communications, according to unnamed sources paraphrased in article, were intercepted by Israeli intelligence and "doctored so that it leads a reader to just the opposite conclusion." "


I daresay that "Unnamed sources paraphrased by a Daily Caller article" might even give Infowars a strong challenge in the competition for "Worst information source possible".
2013-09-05 11:36:36 PM
1 votes:
I see your stinking unshaved guy in clean new fatigues you cannot buy in Syria on a camcorder talking about having and using chemical weapons and raise you seven clean shaved well dressed men with digital recording studios talking about how they speak with aliens.

So, give us something real next time?
2013-09-05 11:26:43 PM
1 votes:

Klippoklondike: Farking Alex Jones, man.  You're more likely to get credible information from one of those plastic kids toy phones that make animal noises when you dial them


The sheep says baaaaa?
2013-09-05 11:22:13 PM
1 votes:

vygramul: uber humper: Democrat Congressman saying Obama & Co  manipulated the intel

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/09/05/alan -g rayson-syria-intelligence-manipulated

The question is why Germany manipulated the intel.


Lower LNG prices.
2013-09-05 11:08:42 PM
1 votes:

Coming on a Bicycle: skullkrusher: The President does not want to bomb Syria. If the President wanted to bomb Syria, we would be bombing Syria right now. He says he wants to bomb Syria. He actually does not, though. The President is actually banking on NOT getting approval so he can say that he really, really wanted to bomb Syria but he has to listen to the elected representatives of the people

So you can look into his mind, eh?


no, but it isn't very hard to deduce things if you try.
2013-09-05 10:54:24 PM
1 votes:

uber humper: Democrat Congressman saying Obama & Co  manipulated the intel

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/09/05/alan -g rayson-syria-intelligence-manipulated


well, at least he's gone beyond being low class and vulgar to get the attention he craves
2013-09-05 10:51:44 PM
1 votes:

wahsman: I vote for whatever makes my gas cheaper,dammit.  God bless 'Murica!


This war will only help Europe with lower natural gas prices, Saudi Arabia and Qatar get sales of LNG. Russia has about 25% of the sales ( 150 BCM out of  485 billion cubic metres (bcm). Other supplies come from norway by land and Saudi Arabia and Qatar by sea with other smaller suppliers. Syria as Russia's ally has blocked building a pipeline from Qatar- Saudi Arabia.

That's why Kerry can say this  ...

"With respect to Arab countries offering to bear the cost and to assist, the answer is profoundly yes, they have. That offer is on the table," Kerry said as he appeared before a House of Representatives panel.
The offer was "quite significant," he said.


That's why /Obama/Kerry have the financial backing of Arab contries. America will be the guy the nerd hires to go beat up the big, bad' bully who is blocking the door to the bank everyday.

Imported petroleum from the Middle East will go up a lot when the USA shoots the first cruise missle.

I included non-Infowars  references  for these ideas. I could find many more.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/04/arab-nations-offered-to-p_n_ 3 868087.html">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/04/arab-nations-of fered-to-p_n_3 868087.html

http://michaelsnyder.mensnewsdaily.com/2013/09/is-the-united-states-g o ing-to-go-to-war-with-syria-over-a-natural-gas-pipeline/">http://mich aelsnyder.mensnewsdaily.com/2013/09/is-the-united-states-go ing-to-go-to-war-with-syria-over-a-natural-gas-pipeline/

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/07/18/uk-energy-gas-europe-analysi s -idUKBRE96H0SE20130718">http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/07/18/uk-e nergy-gas-europe-analysis -idUKBRE96H0SE20130718


I know it gets hard to think the people you elect can be evil, killing people for profit. But it's time to own up and take a real look at things.
2013-09-05 10:48:24 PM
1 votes:

spamdog: Biological Ali: Do you think that the evidence that Assad's regime carried out the attack is stronger or weaker than the evidence put forward by the Bush administration in support of their claims prior to the invasion of Iraq?

I think they're just about the same.


They're not even remotely the same, but for the purpose of argument let's assume they are. Given that the Democrats didn't express any serious doubts about the stated rationale for attacking Iraq at the time that it was given, it would appear that Democrats indeed aren't being less skeptical now than they were then.
2013-09-05 10:43:48 PM
1 votes:
Russian President Vladimir Putin warned on Wednesday that any US Congress approval for a military strike against Syria without UN consensus would represent an "aggression".

From Yahoo News
2013-09-05 10:42:21 PM
1 votes:

spamdog: GhostFish: Inforwars is trash and it was picked by the submitter to get a reaction. If you have a problem with people shooting the messenger then take it up with the submitter who intended for it to happen.

No. As a matter of fact I will call out farkers for being reactionary when the article does indeed have some credible sources in it.

There's quite a bit of reasonable doubt about the US government's claims, but it's all getting swept under the rug by angry reactionaries like you, just the same as doubts about the Iraq war claims were.

I would bet a hundred dollars you didn't even go to the article and read the linked pieces, even after I told you. And here you are angrily telling me off for telling people to think again.

Like I said, reactionary as fark.


Is bullshiat your middle name? No one is sweeping anything under any rug.
2013-09-05 10:38:53 PM
1 votes:

spamdog: vygramul: Not clicking on a potatowars link.

Another one shooting the messenger, despite there being credible links to the BBC and Reuters in there.


Those links have nothing to do with what that article (and this thread) are about - i.e., the authenticity of this video. Moreover, those links are all about an attack that took place in March in Aleppo - and not the one that took place in August in Damascus, which is what's in the news now. It's not clear who carried out that attack (a small-scale attack that killed about 30 people, mostly soldiers) - there's a Russian report claiming that it was likely done by the rebels based on their, but there's also been news of a Syrian defector who says that it was carried out by Assad.

With the attack in Damascus, however - the one that killed over a thousand people, including more than 400 children - there is nothing to suggest the rebels carried it out. The idea this attack was carried out by anybody other than Assad's regime is farfetched to say the least, and there's a reason that the article's claims about the Damascus attack all link back to infowars.
2013-09-05 10:37:45 PM
1 votes:

FnkyTwn: Is there a way to just not see InfoWars posts? Like some sort of setting I can turn on/off? It's almost as if there was NAMBLA news being posted. It's that level of offensiveness, and everybody knows it, probably even those who think it's real.


You can probably get a plug-in that will filter them out but the easiest way not to see Infowars stories is to not click on the links
2013-09-05 10:37:04 PM
1 votes:
Infowars is bad and the subby & trollerator should feel bad.
2013-09-05 10:36:41 PM
1 votes:

GhostFish: Inforwars is trash and it was picked by the submitter to get a reaction. If you have a problem with people shooting the messenger then take it up with the submitter who intended for it to happen.


No. As a matter of fact I will call out farkers for being reactionary when the article does indeed have some credible sources in it.

There's quite a bit of reasonable doubt about the US government's claims, but it's all getting swept under the rug by angry reactionaries like you, just the same as doubts about the Iraq war claims were.

I would bet a hundred dollars you didn't even go to the article and read the linked pieces, even after I told you. And here you are angrily telling me off for telling people to think again.

Like I said, reactionary as fark.
2013-09-05 10:06:49 PM
1 votes:

Mrtraveler01: 2wolves: Kuroshin: spamdog: Snark aside, does anyone actually have any disproof of the claims in the video and article?

I mean I know it's infowars, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Not at the poles.

Not if it's a digital clock.

Then it's only once a day as it blinks "12:00"


It's twelve o'clock twice a day, at least where I live...
2013-09-05 09:56:34 PM
1 votes:

Empty Matchbook: Infowars: Continuing Their Ongoing War Against Info!


And winning!
2013-09-05 09:28:20 PM
1 votes:
LOL, how long into the US's war against nefarious chemical weapons users will it be before the US military uses fuel-air explosives, white phosphorus ordnance, or both?
2013-09-05 09:22:06 PM
1 votes:

2wolves: Prophet of Loss: 2wolves: Prophet of Loss: at the behest of the Arabs and Israelis.

Ya wanna look that part over Mr. Happy?

Both sides are pushing for us to get involved. You have a problem with that?

Different factions of each of those larger groups are lobbying for involvement,  So is General Dynamics.


Well the truth is both Arabs and Israelis are pushing hard for us to get involved. Argo, they want Americans to die on their behalf. Anyone else who wants that puts them in the same immoral boat.

Fight your own damn wars.
2013-09-05 09:21:41 PM
1 votes:
hey here's an idea:

USA lets brown people kill each other for free, spends your money helping Americans.

It's your tax money, your future social security, now being spent CONSTANTLY to murder brown folk overseas.
2013-09-05 09:16:14 PM
1 votes:
Snark aside, does anyone actually have any disproof of the claims in the video and article?

I mean I know it's infowars, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
2013-09-05 09:09:31 PM
1 votes:

runwiz: This is an example of amateurs trying to create fake evidence.  They need to leave this kind of work to government professionals.


cdn.uproxx.com
"Now just a goddamn minute h- ...I mean, yeah! That's what I was- ...um, wait..."
2013-09-05 09:02:52 PM
1 votes:

Klippoklondike: Farking Alex Jones, man.  You're more likely to get credible information from one of those plastic kids toy phones that make animal noises when you dial them


www.playingwithwords365.com
"...The conspiracy theorist says, 'Cuckoo! Cuckoo!'"
2013-09-05 08:57:22 PM
1 votes:
The U.S. used willie pete in Iraq.  No ethical high ground in sight.
2013-09-05 08:57:05 PM
1 votes:
Jeez...both Alex Jones and Dennis Kucinich warn of an Al-Qaeda takeover of Syria if Assad is ousted.  Proof that conspiracy theories know no political boundaries.
2013-09-05 08:50:19 PM
1 votes:
Infowars: Continuing Their Ongoing War Against Info!
2013-09-05 08:48:08 PM
1 votes:
img1.fark.net, subby? really? Really?
2013-09-05 08:47:12 PM
1 votes:
2013-09-05 08:45:33 PM
1 votes:
"Syrian rebels" admitting to using chemical weapons.

That's like the Rolling 80 Crips "admitting" to using MAC-10s.
2013-09-05 08:44:54 PM
1 votes:
ohmygodwhothehellcares.jpg

There is no good reason to "intervene" in Syria (and by "intervene" I mean "shoot motherfarkers in the face and kill innocent bystanders"). It doesn't matter what evidence for or against chemical weapons or what, it's all farking bullshiat and, frankly, given the US's tendency to use chemical weapons routinely against people for heinous crimes like "illegal camping" or "singing" it's the height of farking hypocrisy to even suggest it has some kind of moral responsibility or prerogative here.

Don't. Just farking don't. We will anyway, because capitalist trash demand it to buff their bottom lines, but there's no good reason for it.
2013-09-05 08:44:12 PM
1 votes:
This is an example of amateurs trying to create fake evidence.  They need to leave this kind of work to government professionals.
2013-09-05 08:33:26 PM
1 votes:
"There is no winning here."
2013-09-05 08:11:03 PM
1 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: Kit Fister: TuteTibiImperes: Mike_LowELL: Kit Fister: No one will care. This won't even get greened.

I hope it does.  InfoWars infromes me like no other web site.  If this headline gets downvoted, then it is proof that the NSA has gotten to the owner of this web site.  There would be no other explanation.

FTFY

Oh. Its you again.

And you think Infowars has a shred of credibility?  Who knows where that video actually came from.

Still, is it possible the rebels have chemicals weapons?  Sure.  Are all of the rebels using them, member of Al Qaeda, or even fighting for the same cause?  No.

It's a mess over there, I honestly don't care at this point if we get involved or not, but let's not pretend there's some government conspiracy to subvert the public opinion.  Your tinfoil hat might be on too snug.


Oh, I have no issues agreeing with your point. I'm just still a bit perplexed by you and your suggestion that Detroit should be bailed out by the feds.

That and some of your 2nd amendment stances. So, you always weird me out a little.

I don't buy this video for a second.
2013-09-05 07:58:54 PM
1 votes:
well, rush limbaugh sided with somali pirates over their american hostages in the maersk alabama hijacking, simply because he hates obama's guts - it shouldn't surprise me that alex jones and the rabid right would side with the butcher of damascus in this case.
 
Displayed 69 of 69 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report