The Hypocrisy Of America

2008-06-02 07:08:24

#1

rammunition: Fully Loaded; +143|6282

We read about Iran apparently arming shia militia in Iraq to fight the U.S

BUT

Did you know the U.S is arming/funding/helping groups to kill Iranian soldiers and civilians???

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne … -Iran.html

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/200 … xclus.html

Yet again america makes one rule for themselves, and one for others, the hypocrisy of America doesn't surprise me anymore.

Last edited by rammunition (2008-06-02 07:08:37)

2008-06-02 07:11:34

#2

rammunition: Fully Loaded; +143|6282

Also i urge everyone to watch this video

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=wSm24lSrvNA

2008-06-02 07:13:48

#3

Parker: isteal; +1,452|6815|The Gem Saloon

first, its called "edit", and i would have thought you know about it by now.

rammunition wrote:
Yet again america makes one rule for themselves, and one for others, the hypocrisy of America doesn't surprise me anymore.

it obviously surprises you enough to make ANOTHER thread about it.

we get it kid, you hate america.
now go do something about it

2008-06-02 07:18:11

#4

rammunition: Fully Loaded; +143|6282

Parker wrote:
first, its called "edit", and i would have thought you know about it by now.

rammunition wrote:
Yet again america makes one rule for themselves, and one for others, the hypocrisy of America doesn't surprise me anymore.
it obviously surprises you enough to make ANOTHER thread about it.

we get it kid, you hate america.
now go do something about it

LOL, typical isn't it if you question the Americans you become an "anti-american"

2008-06-02 07:19:00

#5

Parker: isteal; +1,452|6815|The Gem Saloon

rammunition wrote:
Parker wrote:
first, its called "edit", and i would have thought you know about it by now.

rammunition wrote:
Yet again america makes one rule for themselves, and one for others, the hypocrisy of America doesn't surprise me anymore.
it obviously surprises you enough to make ANOTHER thread about it.

we get it kid, you hate america.
now go do something about it
Typical, you question america/israeli you become an anti-american/israeli, lol, learn to debate

what in the fuck are you even talking about?
i need to learn how to debate, says the kid whos been banned twice already for his lack of ability.

https://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f180/parkercustoms/kettle-pot.jpg

2008-06-02 07:20:04

#6

ZombieVampire!: The Gecko; +69|6248

Wow, you very neatly dodged responding to the issue Parker. Obvious, but neat.

And you notice how the pot and the kettle are at fault in your cartoon?

OP: I'd honestly wonder how far this is the CIA acting on their own. The US government doesn't strike me as having a whole lot of control over the CIA.

Last edited by ZombieVampire! (2008-06-02 07:23:29)

2008-06-02 07:22:24

#7

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6574|what

Did you know the U.S is arming/funding/helping groups to kill Iranian soldiers and civilians???

And they supported anti-Castro rebels during the Cuban Missile Crisis era. It's not something that is new.

2008-06-02 07:23:16

#8

OrangeHound: Busy doing highfalutin adminy stuff ...; +1,335|7070|Washington DC

ZombieVampire! wrote:
Wow, you very neatly dodged responding to the issue Parker. Obvious, but neat.

OP: I'd honestly wonder how far this is the CIA acting on their own. The US government doesn't strike me as having a whole lot of control over the CIA.

You clearly do not understand the American government ... the activity of the CIA, DIA, NSA, etc are all under the control of the administration. Granted, the administration may not know every detail, but they direct the broad policy.

2008-06-02 07:23:57

#9

rammunition: Fully Loaded; +143|6282

TheAussieReaper wrote:
Did you know the U.S is arming/funding/helping groups to kill Iranian soldiers and civilians???

And they supported anti-Castro rebels during the Cuban Missile Crisis era. It's not something that is new.

very true, but in the middle east its not properly known who they fund

2008-06-02 07:25:53

#10

ZombieVampire!: The Gecko; +69|6248

Certainly, but the CIA is in the business of keeping secrets, and I suspect they're not exactly kept on a tight leash. I wouldn't be surprised to learn of a Hoover-like situation (he was the one who had dirt files on all the politicians, wasn't he? And yes, I know he was FBI).

Last edited by ZombieVampire! (2008-06-02 07:29:10)

2008-06-02 07:27:43

#11

Parker: isteal; +1,452|6815|The Gem Saloon

ZombieVampire! wrote:
Certainly, but the CIA is in the business of keeping secrets, and I suspect they're not exactly kept on a tight leash. I wouldn't be surprised to learn of a Hoover-like situation (he was the one who had dirt files on all the politicians, wasn't he? And yes, I know he was FBI).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta … _Oversight

2008-06-02 07:29:34

#12

ZombieVampire!: The Gecko; +69|6248

ZombieVampire! wrote:
Certainly, but the CIA is in the business of keeping secrets, and I suspect they're not exactly kept on a tight leash. I wouldn't be surprised to learn of a Hoover-like situation (he was the one who had dirt files on all the politicians, wasn't he? And yes, I know he was FBI).

2008-06-02 07:29:55

#13

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7178|Argentina

It's a payback. Something like You help to kill our soldiers in Iraq, we help to kill yours. Nothing new here.

2008-06-02 07:30:56

#14

Parker: isteal; +1,452|6815|The Gem Saloon

Parker wrote:
ZombieVampire! wrote:
Certainly, but the CIA is in the business of keeping secrets, and I suspect they're not exactly kept on a tight leash. I wouldn't be surprised to learn of a Hoover-like situation (he was the one who had dirt files on all the politicians, wasn't he? And yes, I know he was FBI).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta … _Oversight

we can play this fucking game all day.

but hey, since you know they keep secrets, fuck the Intelligence Oversight Committee.

eeeerrrrrrr, what?

2008-06-02 07:33:33

#15

OrangeHound: Busy doing highfalutin adminy stuff ...; +1,335|7070|Washington DC

ZombieVampire! wrote:
Certainly, but the CIA is in the business of keeping secrets, and I suspect they're not exactly kept on a tight leash. I wouldn't be surprised to learn of a Hoover-like situation (he was the one who had dirt files on all the politicians, wasn't he? And yes, I know he was FBI).

<---- Notice where I'm from?

In the past, I have worked in those dark & secret areas ... trust me ... the leash is VERY, VERY tight. (But, there is always a broken link or two somewhere up the chain of command that provides a "plausible deniability" for political ass preservation.)

2008-06-02 07:34:02

#16

ZombieVampire!: The Gecko; +69|6248

Parker: All you've demonstrated is that there is some oversight, which is exactly what Orangehound did. If you can't understand my response even when I highlight the important part, that's hardly my problem.

Orangehound: I tend not to trust intelligence agencies at all, nor do I believe they can both perform effectively and be policed effectively (though apparently the Australian ones can do neither 0.

Last edited by ZombieVampire! (2008-06-02 07:35:48)

2008-06-02 07:40:47

#17

OrangeHound: Busy doing highfalutin adminy stuff ...; +1,335|7070|Washington DC

ZombieVampire! wrote:
Orangehound: I tend not to trust intelligence agencies at all, nor do I believe they can both perform effectively and be policed effectively (though apparently the Australian ones can do neither 0.

They are effectively policed, at least in the US ... they are not as "cowboy" as some would imagine. That stereotype is from the 1960s/1970s. Today's intelligence agencies are highly political with much control.

Now, you may not like what they do or how they do it, but their activities are well-regulated.

BTW, I don't work in this stuff anymore for ethical/moral reasons (if that is a hint).

2008-06-02 07:41:08

#18

Parker: isteal; +1,452|6815|The Gem Saloon

ZombieVampire! wrote:
Parker: All you've demonstrated is that there is some oversight, which is exactly what Orangehound did. If you can't understand my response even when I highlight the important part, that's hardly my problem.

i know, you have many different "problems" to deal with......like finding some new heroes that blow up children, right buddy?

anyway, did you post this?

ZombieVampire! wrote:
OP: I'd honestly wonder how far this is the CIA acting on their own. The US government doesn't strike me as having a whole lot of control over the CIA.

cause if you did, i responded to it.
in fact, two people responded, but you "dont trust intelligence agencies", so really, ANYTHING that gets said isnt going to matter, cause bubbles here has already made his mind up.

well, why would you even wonder buddy?
you obviously already know the answers

now, if you cant understand that........

2008-06-02 07:45:11

#19

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7022|132 and Bush

Where is the source in the telegraph article? Just a former CIA agent (Fred Burton) speculating over a year ago because it "falls in-line"?

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2008-06-02 07:47:04

#20

ZombieVampire!: The Gecko; +69|6248

OrangeHound wrote:
They are effectively policed, at least in the US ... they are not as "cowboy" as some would imagine. That stereotype is from the 1960s/1970s. Today's intelligence agencies are highly political with much control.

Now, you may not like what they do or how they do it, but their activities are well-regulated.

BTW, I don't work in this stuff anymore for ethical/moral reasons (if that is a hint).

But how do they manage it? How can you effectively review top secret papers, whilst keeping them top secret?

Hey Parker, you notice how were having an adult, back and forth discussion without being condescending or insulting each other? Maybe you should try it sometime.

2008-06-02 07:47:15

#21

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6574|what

Plus the Intelligence Agencies are broken down into fields and areas of expertise, like counter-terrorism. And as each of these cells operate individually and as a whole they are also working together with other intelligence agencies. Some will promote and share obtained information and share resources, while others will seem to co-operate yet send out deliberately false information when they choose.

You might not trust them but if one agency is reporting WMD then you can bet the other agencies are either validating or countering the claims, as was the case with Iraq.

Last edited by TheAussieReaper (2008-06-02 07:48:45)

2008-06-02 07:47:28

#22

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|7022|132 and Bush

The blotter lacks sources as well.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2008-06-02 07:48:59

#23

ZombieVampire!: The Gecko; +69|6248

TheAussieReaper wrote:
Plus the Intelligence Agencies are broken down into fields and areas of expertise, like counter-terrorism. And as each of these cells operate individually and as a whole they are also working together with other intelligence agencies. Some will promote and share obtained information and share resources, while others will seem to co-operate yet send out deliberately false information when they choose.

You might not trust them but if one agencies is reporting WMD then you can bet the other agencies are either validating or countering the claims, as was the case with Iraq.

It's not the reporting I distrust. It's the possibilities for supplying groups without checking, or leaking information for their own gain (as ASIO has done in the past).

2008-06-02 07:50:04

#24

Parker: isteal; +1,452|6815|The Gem Saloon

ZombieVampire! wrote:
Hey Parker, you notice how were having an adult, back and forth discussion without being condescending or insulting each other? Maybe you should try it sometime.

just because you dont like the way i prove my points, does not mean im insulting

it just means that you dont like the way i tell you that you are wrong......sorry.

2008-06-02 07:52:10

#25

ZombieVampire!: The Gecko; +69|6248

How have you proven anything? You've provided a Wikipedia source for a body who are supposed to look in on the CIA, and you've accused me of ignoring people because I'm so stubborn. The efficacy of oversight is exactly what the discussion is about, the second claim is demonstrably wrong.

BF2S Forums The Hypocrisy Of America

rammunition wrote:

Parker wrote:

rammunition wrote:

rammunition wrote:

Parker wrote:

rammunition wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

Parker wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

OrangeHound wrote:

TheAussieReaper wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

Board footer