bud

syria has had the chemical weapons since the 80's. the same 80's when u.s. actively helped iraq use its chemical weapons against the kurds and iranians.

israel? really? the NSA is giving raw information, including emails from its citizens, to israel. In the months since Edward Snowden's classified document leaks, the Obama administration has repeatedly assured Americans that the National Security Agency does not intentionally collect information about U.S. citizens. The government has also said that when data are collected "inadvertently," because an American is in contact with a foreign target, the data are protected by strict "minimization procedures" that prevent the information from being misused. New documents from Snowden reported by the Guardian on Wednesday appear to contradict those claims. They reveal that the NSA has been sharing raw intelligence information with the Israeli government without first filtering it for data on the communications of American citizens. Link

how should we be punished for this tragedy that has befallen our dear pam? "Unfortunately, the Senate committee succumbed to a 'lynch mob' mentality. There was no regard to procedural or substantive fairness. I am disappointed and angry about the way in which this matter was handled, and any implication that I behaved dishonestly," Wallin said. "I have not done anything wrong. I am not guilty of any misconduct. Accordingly I will not resign as a senator. I will continue to act for the people of Saskatchewan and Canada, fulfilling the duties of a senator that have been entrusted to me," her statement said. link

ah. rue. why do you even bother? The Alawites, also known as Alawis (ʿAlawīyyah Arabic: علوية‎) are a prominent mystical religious group centred in Syria who follow a branch of the Twelver school of Shia Islam. Link

assad may have used chemical weapons. from what the opposition has said and other evidence, the opposition has also used chemical weapons. they are both guilty of breaking international law. they should be prosecuted just like many others have been in the past for breaking international law. an attack will not resolve anything. everyone except for the warmongering neocons who were mostly behind the iraq b.s. and obama who trapped himself by trying to act tough are advocating for an attack.

i like that.

i'm surprised that you like him. despite his occasional honesty, he's one of the biggest prostitute politicians around. one look at the campaign money he receives and from whom and the bills he has sponsored and it's enough for me to know that he's one of the biggest problems when it comes to politics. despite what he keeps repeating, what is going on in syria is not the act of rebellious syrians, but the mercenaries of death and destruction, misguided by savages like mccain and the zionist cohorts, and paid for by the american tax dollars.

HRW is now saying that it is more than likely that the syrian government forces were behind the attacks in late august. personally, i find them to be more credible than any governmental organization. here is a detailed explanation with analysis and evidence. as topaz mentioned earlier, russia will be pushing syria to place its chemical weapons under government control. with the lack of support from congress and the international pressure on obama, it's unlikely that an attack will take place on assad. this is bad news for the BFF's: israel, saudi and qatar, who wanted an attack and removal of assad, which would have been a lead into an attack on iran, the BFF's major regional foe.

what are you on about now? i said congress doesn't give the americans what they want and it's proven through the approval rating. you're being all weird and incoherent again.

okay. here, learn: does congress do what the american people want? no. evidence: Congress' Approval Rating Remains Near Historical Lows

why don't you know the answer to that? look at the approval rating of congress. that will give you a clue.

since you said please. oh and i don't do empty claims. i'm not rue, argus, shady or sharkman. CNN poll: Public against Syria strike resolution AP poll: Most Americans oppose strike on Syria Poll: Majority Of Americans Approve Of Sending Congress To Syria

one should also take into consideration what other partners in the region want, like: saudi, qatar and israel. they all have some influence over the decision making. saudi and qatar see any shia controlled country as an enemy. they also purchase a lot of weapons from the u.s. and allow u.s. bases on their land. so u.s. has to listen to their needs. of course, you have the war addicts who control israel. bibi and his party and the rest of the extremist rightwing zionist parties want a war with iran. before going to iran, assad needs to be removed. israel has unleashed AIPAC to work over the u.s. lawmakers. every single one of the lawmakers who receive campaign funding from AIPAC will vote for the war. the GOP is torn between the racist hatred of obama, AIPAC who pays millions to many of their campaigns and the eternal love of bombing the middle east. it's a tough call for them. oh yeah, and majority of american people don't really want to go in, but what they want usually takes a backseat to the other things. we'll see what happens.

because if he had undeniable evidence that assad used chemical weapons, he would have shown it to the UN, EU and congress. he never did. all he did was show some youtube videos of children dying without having any concrete proof as to who was behind it.

US: Proven Link of Assad to Gas Attack Lacking - ABC News McDonough conceded the administration lacks "irrefutable, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence" that skeptical Americans, including lawmakers who will start voting on military action this week, are seeking. you'll be taken seriously once you offer more than just words on the screen, like links and citations.

her report was denied by the UN? do tell. since obama has shown 0 evidence that assad has used chemicals, it stands that there is more proof showing the rebels have used chemical weapons than assad has. if obama and co. are so sure and have unquestionable proof that assad has used chemical weapons, then why aren't they showing it to anyone, including the UN and of course the members of congress? it's a simple question that us "truthers" want to know. i realize that you are a huge fan of obama and biden and take every word they say without questioning them, but wouldn't it be a good idea to show some proof before start bombing? or you just need to some fireworks NOW?

pay attention to this argus, because it doesn't make sense to keep repeating and correcting: UN's Carla Del Ponte says there is evidence rebels 'may have used sarin' in Syria this is from earlier this year. when you have these opposition groups ripping hearts out and eating them and cutting the heads of christian priests, what makes you think they won't gas people?

okay. so you acknowledge that there is no proof and it's all lip service by obama, biden, kristof, mccain, lindsey and the AIPAC entourage. got it. even bush jr. made an effort to come out with 'something'. even though it was mostly bullshit, they at least made an effort. i think you should change your photo of obama. he's a hero now.

the arabs, lead by saudi and qatar don't like assad because he's a shia, like those who rule iran. they want these guys gone as much as israel does. you didn't know that? it's interesting watching israel, saudi and qatar in the same bed. actually, the new(old) military rulers of egypt have recently crawled back into the bed as well.

it, what? are you unable to form a clear thought and explanation? can you only repeat simple, bigoted slogans?

do you always tackle conversations with irrational accusations to try to shut down the conversations? do YOU have evidence that assad shot those chemical weapons? because the whole world is waiting to see this evidence. if you want, there is evidence that the rebels used chemicals weapons earlier this year. that's if you want. UN's Carla Del Ponte says there is evidence rebels 'may have used sarin' in Syria can you blink for a second to consider the above? or carla el ponte and her team from the UN are wrong and they're "truthers"? give me a reason to continue acknowledging you and conversing with you by acknowledging the information posted on these posts that question the validity of obama's assertion that assad did it, when there is no actual proof and when it's quite possible that the rebels could be behind the attacks, instead of your last few responses which go along the lines of: "duh.. let me guess, you're a truther and don't believe 911! i knew it!"

what is about their religion, sharkman? the occupation? the bombings? the puppet regimes? the fight over their oil?

what is unfolding in the u.s. is very interesting. the gop is torn between racist hatred of obama, aipac who pays millions to many of their campaigns and the eternal love of bombing the middle east. what to do, what to do.

ah okay sharkman. if it doesn't add up, go talk to AIPAC and alan dershowitz and bibi. they might be able to explain to you what 1+1 equals.

show me this evidence. i am not saying assad didn't do it, but there isn't any real evidence to show that he did. there is also the fact that the rebels have been accused by the UN fact finding mission, earlier this year, to have used chemical weapons. why would assad, who has been winning the war, use chemical weapons that could end up being the green light to attack him? stop and think for a moment and if you ever get a chance, show some proof that assad is behind the attacks.