CENTCOM to stop lying about troop numbers in Iraq and Syria . . .

What evidence is there that Assaud or the Syrian army did this? A radio transmission that hasn't been released and some satellite surveillance that also hasn't been released. And an unnamed source in the pentagon or defense delivered to you by people known to have produced or fallen for the propaganda that led to the invasion in Iraq.



This four years after the first false flag attempt failed because the public actually got to see some of the evidence for that one. And you're calling me gullible.



There is a reason this happened without an investigation regarding what happened.

snoscythe wrote:



Anderson Cooper and NYT are not the "sources" they are the ones running down and talking to the sources.



You claimed there was "no evidence", but there is ample evidence as previous post have shown.

You're wrong on both counts here. There is a government report (not even an intelligence report) asserting a few thing, several of which are completely bogus - the only evidence is that a nerve agent was used. Meanwhile CNN and the NYT have collectively alluded to a single source (who was not identified as an intelligence officer) and all the rest of the "journalists" have simply cited CNN and the NYT.



How many former intelligence officers will it take to help you reconsider your opinion which is only based upon the faith that Donald trump and his generals are more truthful than George Bush and his generals? Here's an assessment from more than two dozen who still have contacts on the ground who question the veracity of what we've been told. These are the same guys who told us before the Iraq invasion that the evidence was bogus then too.



https://consortiumnews.com/2017/04/11/trump-should-rethink-syria-escalation/

No sense in arguing with someone who won't accept anything that doesn't come from tinfoil-approved sources.



https://i.imgflip.com/kroqr.jpg" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

jvquarterback wrote:

How many former intelligence officers will it take to help you reconsider your opinion

I have refrained from getting into these "back and forth" conspiracy discussion with you, because once you go down the rabbit hole of "govt conspiracies", I have found there is no bottom.



I have also found it interesting that over the few discussion that we have had, you ridicule me and tell me that my posts are full of crap. That I personally am full of crap. And generally, I only believe the propaganda of a corrupt government. It's interesting that you launch these personal attacks without knowing anything about me, or my professional experience. If you recall, a number of months ago, I asked you what your personal and professional experience was, to allow you to form such strong opinions.



Very few people on this board know what my professional experience is. I thought it's time I share it with you. You can take it or leave it. I could not care less. I find it interesting though, that you have had no experience in the military or the intelligence world, yet you are so opinionated and negative towards those communities.



My professional experience involves receiving a commission as an Army Infantry officer. I never saw combat. Butt I earned a healthy respect for out armed services, all branches, and all that have served. It's not that the military makes all the right decisions, nor do they always conduct themselves correctly. That said, the armed services is full of dedicated men and women that are committed to protecting and serving this nation, our constitution, and are fully prepared to give the ultimate sacrifice - even though they do not want to make that sacrifice.



I left the Army and entered Law Enforcement. I worked for nearly 10 years in a hardcore ghetto in Southern California. I worked gangs and drugs relentlessly. I have a pretty good understanding of the crime and pain that that world brings.



I left Law Enforcement and went to work for a large metropolitan fire department. At this time 9-11 occurred. The FBI was organizing a Joint counter-terrorism unit, and because of my military and law enforcement experiences, I was loaned/detailed to the FBI for 5 years. After that experience, I returned to my regular dept, but was asked to write a book/manual of how to deal with terrorist incidents. I did and that book is now being used by more than 30 major fire and police departments.



Of note, one of my best friends retired from the CIA about 3 years ago, after nearly 30 years of service. We communicate multiple times each week - about current events and terrorism.



So, it's interesting that you attack me for being full of crap, yet I happen to be one of those former intelligence officers that you love to quote. Of note, I still have my Top Secret clearance, and am still working. Note, I find it very offensive that you are so quick to attack and demean people personally when you have no idea what their work experience is, or who they are. I think you would be wise to throttle back your personal attacks.

I've asked you multiple times for a list of your approved intelligence review websites and ... Nada. I suppose you can go snowcythe's route and just say the people who spent their entire careers in intelligence and who cautioned everyone back in 2003 in Iraq, 2009 in Libya, and 2013 in Syria are all crazy even though they were later proven correct, but I'd expect more from you than a citation from thehill that only references an unnamed source in a CNN article in which the position of the source is unclear and is certainly not identified as anyone in intelligence and the inference I took was that it was a political appointee.



If I've offended you somehow by saying I don't have to be in the military or support a corrupt government that has repeatedly abused the men and women in the military to be a patriot I don't know what to say.



If you're willing to put your name and professional standing on the line and say you support the immediate bombing of Syria based on the government brief (or whatever they're calling the four page document the Trump guys Released) go ahead, I'm not stopping you. The guys at intelligence veterans for sanity have put their reputations on the line (just like they have multiple times before) but I haven't found anyone else willing to do so. If you have I would love to check it out.

The big mistake you make is believing the president, the joint chiefs, and the intelligence have to prove something, anything to you. They don't. The have already revealed plenty. You refuse to accept. Your 1st knee jerk reaction is that the joint chiefs, the intelligence community and the president are corrupt and lie. That is your "go to" position. God bless you.



I am not quite as hostile to the military as you are. And as I posted, I have a good number of years in the intelligence community, and I still have my finger on the pulse. They know things they don't reveal. They do not want to compromise intelligence sources.



You will never be satisfied because you find comfort in you conspiracy theories and believing our federal government is corrupt. I could not care less about the world you choose to dwell in. You will never be convinced otherwise unless you worked in that world. Then your eyes would be opened.

The military exists largely to make a lot of money for a small group of people, and it does that job very well. Protecting Americans is secondary. I don't feel that's even widely disputed.

Ddawg wrote:
The big mistake you make is believing the president, the joint chiefs, and the intelligence have to prove something, anything to you. They don't. The have already revealed plenty. You refuse to accept. Your 1st knee jerk reaction is that the joint chiefs, the intelligence community and the president are corrupt and lie. That is your "go to" position. God bless you.



I am not quite as hostile to the military as you are. And as I posted, I have a good number of years in the intelligence community, and I still have my finger on the pulse. They know things they don't reveal. They do not want to compromise intelligence sources.



You will never be satisfied because you find comfort in you conspiracy theories and believing our federal government is corrupt. I could not care less about the world you choose to dwell in. You will never be convinced otherwise unless you worked in that world. Then your eyes would be opened.

We should all be gullible idiots. Thanks for your intelligence review. With that sort of analysis we'll be sure to repeat the debacle in Iraq.



Those of us who want to be informed patriots will have to look elsewhere for an analysis.



Try this: https://www.yahoo.com/news/mit-expert-claims-latest-chemical-100819428.html

So Ddawg, in your expert FBI weapons experience, explain how this sarin canister dropped from a plane and caused that crater. Tell us what your finger on the pulse says about the crush artifact on the surface and how the sarin leaked out of the end. Or should we just rely on your good number of years in the intelligence community and bluster about compromising intelligence sources? Maybe if we worked in your world for a few years our faith would make us whole.



https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/VxJ_5FihrQIJt3SYD1cbRA--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9NjQwO2g9Mzg0/http://media.zenfs.com/en-GB/homerun/international_business_times_news_7/5eea90cc98574f4b03cd69c4caf3ec67" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">



This photo came from a "white house intelligence report" dated April 11, 2017. The full report and analysis of the report by the former DoD weapons expert and MIT professorcan be found here. Or you all can put your faith in the president and Ddawg. Because they don't have to prove anything before starting another war.

Got news for you JVQB - you can give it your all to demean me, ridicule me, try to diminish my years of commitment and service. I could not care less. I have stated before and stand by it - the rabbit hole you have gone down of government conspiracies is endless. Anything can be spun and turned inside out. I have seen it done over and over. So, God bless you in your beliefs and efforts. God bless you in your efforts to bash me all you want. I sincerely could not care less.

Ddawg wrote:
Anything can be spun and turned inside out.

You can't provide a shred of proof. And that's ok too. Just don't try to pass yourself off as a weapons expert and geospatial guru and then tell us we should all believe you because you're smarter than the rest of us. It is the duty of a citizen to question the government and require proof before you people who allegedly represent you to go off half cocked on a killing spree costing a billion dollars of other people's money.

jvqb-



I admit I've been laying in wait for you to post that photo. Your unimpeachable MIT professor is basing his entire conspiracy theory on that photo. Here's a lesson in sources:



Postol states that the photo "shows a high quality photograph of the crater identified in the White House report as the source of the sarin attack. Assuming that there was no tampering of evidence at the crater, one can see what the White House is claiming as a dispenser of the nerve agent." That's great, but where did this distinguished scholar get this photograph on which his entire false-flag narrative rests? Well, he only tells you in the caption to his photo:



http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Figure-2.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">



So that's his source for his smoking gun -- it's from "numerous mainstream media publications".



I'll let you noodle on that piece of irony for a bit. Here you are, telling us "Fools!!! You're ignorant sheep being led to the slaughter by the mainstream media!! If you would just listen to this guy MIT drummed out of teaching for his conspiracy theories about his fellow professors, you could taste the salvation I know!!" ....and it turns out this guy is relying on the mainstream media to provide his evidence.



The double-irony comes from the fact that Postol's reliance on the mainstream media is misplaced. The gas attack in question occurred on April 4, 2017. Unfortunately for Postol's entire premise, a quick Google images search for that picture reveals it existed online well before April 4, 2017. Versions of that picture existed online as much as two years ago.



What probably happened? An online news site probably dug up the photo to add color to their story, and the incestuous media cycle of sharing and repeating things took its course, and eventually the dated photo made its way into the mainstream media. And then your anti-mainstream media guy who is such a great scholar took the photo without even subjecting it to thirty-second critical review. He found a photo that supported his whacko conspiracy theories, and because of that self-confirmation bias, he ran with it and made himself (and anyone else who sees the letters "MIT" and loses all power for critical thinking) look like an idiot.

jvquarterback wrote:

Anything can be spun and turned inside out.

You can't provide a shred of proof. And that's ok too. Just don't try to pass yourself off as a weapons expert and geospatial guru and then tell us we should all believe you because you're smarter than the rest of us. It is the duty of a citizen to question the government and require proof before you people who allegedly represent you to go off half cocked on a killing spree costing a billion dollars of other people's money.

I'll give one more effort, JVQB, at being courteous and respectful to you. A courtesy you have failed repeatedly to extend to me.

1. You misrepresent, basically lie, about what I have posted. I am not shocked given your attitude.

2. You think that because you read quirky conspiracy theory blogs that you are an expert - and have ALL the truth. You do not.

3, You attack me for representing myself as a "weapons expert", and a "geospatial guru." !00% false and pure BS on your part. I have never made any such claim.

4. I shared with you my experience in the fight against terrorism. I was assigned to an FBI counter-terrorism unit for 5 years. We were a very dedicated and hard working group. We consistently worked 70+ hours a week. Many rimes 80+ hours in a week. I can report that for 5 years I never took a vacation, and took just 1 sick day. The commitment and dedication of my unit was exemplary. I am very proud of the work we did.

5. I shared my experience with you, and you attack me because I choose not to enter your bizarre and twisted world of conspiracies and debate endlessly. I repeat again, the bizarre world of conspiracies never ends. It is a bottomless pit where anything is possible. It's an unverifiable and murky world. You choose to exist in that world. God bless you in your efforts.

6. I can assure you, if you ever had a Top Secret security clearance and really worked in the intelligence world, working with and ferreting out real evidence, you would not be posting as you are. Good luck.

The white house intelligence report says "amnesty international said evidence pointed to an air-launched chemical attack." Amnesty international used the image in question. So the white house gets a pass for citing the misleading mainstream media reports. Then you try to discredit Postol for discrediting the white house's citation. That's pretty slick. Maybe we could call that a Triple-irony.



The point remains - we have no proof of what happened so we have to rely on youtube videos and other media reports - reports the white house admits are "pro-opposition media reports."

jvquarterback wrote:
The white house intelligence report says "amnesty international said evidence pointed to an air-launched chemical attack." Amnesty international used the image in question.

Even if Amnesty International did use that photo (I wouldn't put it past them, but it's not in their press release so who knows), you're missing a connection there. The presence of a photo in a press release doesn't mean that photo is relied upon as lynch-pin evidence when you summarize the overall release.



In any event, good attempt to turn the tables when your entire premise fails.

Turn the tables? That table was set by the guys who wrote a report that relies on "pro-opposition" youtube videos, "commercial satellite images" two days after the alleged incident, and reports from Amnesty International.



If you read the above link, the first two pages outline all the data we have been presented by Trump and his buddies (what's important is that they aren't endorsed by any intelligence agency). The only thing any of this shows is that a nerve agent was very likely used. And again note the supposed location of the attack is backed up with youtube videos and the commercial satellite images.