Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 79
  1. #51
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    67,334
    I bet she wants to be a real journalist when she grows up.

    By Caitlin Johnstone / Rogue Journalist
    Rogue journalist and utopia prepper. Published in 21st Century Wire, The New York Observer, Mint Press News, Counter Propa, Global Research. Seen on the Jimmy Dore Show and The Humanist Report.

  2. #52
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:42 PM
    Posts
    7,258
    ^What does 'arry refer to? The article of the named journo is no longer here, nor any mentioning about missing posts...

  3. #53
    Hansum Man! panama hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Last Online
    Today @ 03:21 PM
    Location
    Way, Way South of the border now - thank God!
    Posts
    22,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Klondyke View Post
    ^What does 'arry refer to?
    It's called 'English' and would only confuse you

    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    I bet she wants to be a real journalist when she grows up.
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    Research. Seen on the Jimmy Dore Show and The Humanist Report.
    This is way coooool - I wish I could have done research as well as her when I was at uni

  4. #54
    Thailand Expat raycarey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    14,326
    this scandal isn't going anywhere.

    expect house and senate hearings to to last into the fall.



  5. #55
    Thailand Expat
    kmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:53 PM
    Location
    Rayong.
    Posts
    11,452
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    I bet she wants to be a real journalist when she grows up.
    Maybe, but the original NYT lead is just quoting "anonymous officials" for a supposedly major story.

    WASHINGTON — American intelligence officials have concluded that a Russian military intelligence unit secretly offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing coalition forces in Afghanistan — including targeting American troops — amid the peace talks to end the long-running war there, according to officials briefed on the matter.
    Not much difference between that type of reporting and a State mouthpiece, a la Russia / China, etc. really.

  6. #56
    Thailand Expat raycarey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    14,326
    Quote Originally Posted by kmart View Post
    Maybe, but the original NYT lead is just quoting "anonymous officials" for a supposedly major story.
    of course the source wants to remain anonymous....it's classified national intelligence. but at least one person saw a patriotic responsibility to release it despite the potential consequences.

  7. #57
    Hangin' Around cyrille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    20,206
    ^^What sort of lunatic official would put their name to the claim, whether it were a 'supposedly' major story or not?

    Especially with this President at the helm? He doesn't just 'shoot the messenger', he wants it hung, drawn and quartered.

    Quote Originally Posted by kmart View Post
    Not much difference between that type of reporting and a State mouthpiece, a la Russia / China, etc. really.


    Not much difference between the New York Times and, say, RT?

    Really?
    Last edited by cyrille; 30-06-2020 at 02:44 PM.

  8. #58
    Thailand Expat
    kmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:53 PM
    Location
    Rayong.
    Posts
    11,452
    ^Well, as the stories are impossible to verify anyway, do you trust that some CIA / intelligence person is telling the truth?

  9. #59
    Thailand Expat raycarey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    14,326
    Quote Originally Posted by kmart View Post
    ^Well, as the stories are impossible to verify anyway, do you trust that some CIA / intelligence person is telling the truth?
    i am reasonably confident that the US house and senate hearings will provide sufficient information to make that determination.

  10. #60
    I am no longer a Hostage
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    4,834
    Quote Originally Posted by cyrille View Post
    Not much difference between the New York Times and, say, RT?
    When watching RT, you should arm yourself with some healthy scepticism.

    If you don't feel the need to do the same with NYT, you are naive.

    Please name a newsmedia, that deserves your trust

  11. #61
    Thailand Expat raycarey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    14,326
    ^
    take that weak ass bothsidesism somewhere else.


    anyway....

    in april 2019, three members of the US military were killed near bagram air base and it has been claimed that the perpetrators received a cash bounty from the russians...


  12. #62
    I am no longer a Hostage
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    4,834
    Quote Originally Posted by raycarey View Post
    take that weak ass bothsidesism somewhere else.
    Piss off yourself, unpleasant fool

    I was merely typing my own thoughts to Cyrrile's post

  13. #63
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    29,925
    Interesting question toward the end of this piece.
    Trump claims he didn't know about this. The question is where's his outrage that he didn't know about this.

    Another interesting question is why's he throwing doubt on the intelligence without looking carefully at it. Seems like he's siding with his buddy putin again.
    What an asshole.
    Donald Trump was given a written briefing months ago about intelligence suggesting Russia offered bounties for attacks on US forces in Afghanistan, multiple US media have reported on Monday night. The president said on Sunday he was not told of the allegations because the information was not “credible”.

    The New York Times quoted two sources as saying details were included in a daily intelligence briefing the president received in late February. CNN said an official with direct knowledge told them it was included in the briefing – a written document – briefing “sometime in the spring”.


    Senior White House officials were aware as far back as early 2019 and the intelligence assessment was included in at least one of the president’s written daily briefings, the Associated Press reported, according to multiple officials.


    Trump is said to prefer oral briefings several times a week rather than to read the daily written document prepared for US presidents.


    The reports emerged late on Monday, after the White House briefed Republican lawmakers on the intelligence assessment. In an unusual step, Democratic lawmakers were not included in the initial briefing, which was conducted by the national security adviser, the director of national intelligence and the White House chief of staff.


    Later on Monday a new planwas revealed and Congressman Steny Hoyer, the No 2 Democrat in the House, said a number of leading Democrats would be briefed at the White House on Tuesday at 8am.


    Trump has publicly attacked the strength of the intelligence about the alleged bounty program. An initial report on the program last week by the New York Times, which has since been widely corroborated, raised the question of why the United States had not taken action in response to the suspected targeting of US soldiers.


    Trump claimed on Sunday that he had never been briefed on the intelligence assessment. Later that day he said that intelligence officials told him the threat was not “credible”.


    But Trump was contradicted in the White House briefing room on Monday by the press secretary, Kayleigh McEnany, who said that views about the veracity of the intelligence were mixed within the intelligence community.


    “There is no consensus within the intelligence community on these allegations, and in effect there are dissenting opinions from some in the intelligence community with regard to the veracity of what’s being reported, and the veracity of the underlying allegations continues to be evaluated,” McEnany said.


    Susan Hennessey, executive editor of the Lawfare website at the Brookings Institution, replied on Twitter: “This smells like the White House trying to mislead the public.


    “It is common for different intelligence agencies to attach different degrees of confidence based on the manner on underlying intel; that isn’t the same as there being disagreement over whether something happened,” Hennessey wrote.


    “Maybe there really is a disagreement between agencies on whether this happened at all. But there is strong consensus among the reporting and the language the White House is using sure seems designed to obfuscate.”


    The national security council spokesman, John Ullyot, told the Washington Post that “the veracity of the underlying allegations continue to be evaluated,” while the CIA, state department and defense department all declined comment.


    The Post reported on Monday that the bounty program was believed to have resulted in deaths of US troops. Top Republican members on the House armed services and foreign affairs committees were briefed on Monday by the White House.


    Congresswoman Katherine Clark, the vice-chair of the Democratic caucus, questioned Trump’s reaction to having purportedly been left in the dark about the bounty program. “The president is saying that he did not know of this, but where’s the outrage from him, that he didn’t know about this?” Clark told Fox news. “Where is his questioning and demands for information?”


    Dmitry Peskov, spokesman for Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, denied on Monday that such a bounty program existed. “You know, maybe I can say it’s a little bit rude but this is 100% bullshit,” Peskov told NBC News’ Keir Simmons.
    'Russian bounties' intelligence was in Trump written daily briefing – reports | US news | The Guardian
    “If we stop testing right now we’d have very few cases, if any.” Donald J Trump.

  14. #64
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    29,925

  15. #65
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    29,925
    Quote Originally Posted by kmart View Post
    ^Well, as the stories are impossible to verify anyway, do you trust that some CIA / intelligence person is telling the truth?
    Watch the video above.

  16. #66
    Thailand Expat
    Chico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Online
    Today @ 04:16 AM
    Location
    I'm Dead
    Posts
    5,609
    Quote Originally Posted by raycarey View Post
    in april 2019, three members of the US military were killed near bagram air base and it has been claimed that the perpetrators received a cash bounty from the russians...
    So who's the unnamed source.

  17. #67
    Thailand Expat
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    20,972
    Quote Originally Posted by Chico View Post
    So who's the unnamed source.
    Why are you laughing you pathetic imbecile? If it was a named source there would be no source at all as it was obtained through classified channels. Clearly it is not one person at this point.

    Why is it that you must show up to so many threads and display your utter retardation on a constant basis?

    Go back to flipping burgers you fucking retard.

  18. #68
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    67,334
    Hannity's current shag, the Fox News bimbo, reckons he didn't know because he doesn't read his briefings.

    They need to do them in popup or colouring format.

    Ainsley Earhardt Defends Trump on Russian Bounty Intel

  19. #69
    Member
    Buckaroo Banzai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 07:20 PM
    Posts
    727
    I hear people say "well we did it in the seventies, as if it's an excuse.
    It was not good when we did it, and it is not good that the Russians are doing it now.
    Period!!! and for trump to claim ignorance is no excuse. He is either ignorant or corrupt.
    Either one not a desirable conditions for a President.
    The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up.

  20. #70
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    29,925
    Quote Originally Posted by harrybarracuda View Post
    Hannity's current shag, the Fox News bimbo, reckons he didn't know because he doesn't read his briefings.

    They need to do them in popup or colouring format.

    Ainsley Earhardt Defends Trump on Russian Bounty Intel
    Well someone should tell her that's not much of a defense, pretty damning actually.

    Top officials in the White House were aware in early 2019 of classified intelligence indicating Russia was secretly offering bounties to the Taliban for the deaths of Americans, a full year earlier than has been previously reported, according to U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the intelligence.

    The assessment was included in at least one of President Donald Trump’s written daily intelligence briefings at the time, according to the officials. Then-national security adviser John Bolton also told colleagues he briefed Trump on the intelligence assessment in March 2019.
    AP sources: White House aware of Russian bounties in 2019

  21. #71
    Thailand Expat
    OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:38 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    20,186
    Another of goldilock's promises goes down in flames.

    Russia offered cash for British and American soldiers to be killed in Afghanistan-afghan-jet-jpg


    House panel votes to constrain Afghan drawdown, ask for assessment on 'incentives' to attack US troops

    By Rebecca Kheel - 07/01/20 11:24 PM EDT 467
    4,029

    The House Armed Services Committee voted Wednesday to put roadblocks on President Trump’s ability to withdraw from Afghanistan, including requiring an assessment on whether any country has offered incentives for the Taliban to attack U.S. and coalition troops.

    The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) amendment, from Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), would require several certifications before the U.S. military can further draw down in Afghanistan.

    The amendment was approved 45-11.

    Rep. Liz Cheney (Wyo.), the No. 3 House Republican, argued the amendment “lays out, in a very responsible level of specificity, what is going to be required if we are going to in fact make decisions about troop levels based on conditions on the ground and based on what's required for our own security, not based on political timelines."

    “And that is crucially important, and I think it is our number one priority,” she added.

    The amendment comes as Trump’s withdrawal deal with the Taliban remains precarious as high violence levels persist in Afghanistan.

    The U.S. military has said it is down to 8,600 troops, in line with the agreement to get to that level by mid-July. But military officials have insisted any further drawdown will be based on conditions on the ground that are not yet met, even as Trump pushes for a speedy withdrawal.

    The amendment also comes amid a firestorm in Washington over intelligence showing a Russian military unit offered bounties to Taliban-linked militias to kill U.S. and coalition service members in Afghanistan.

    Among the amendment’s requirements is an assessment of whether any “state actors have provided any incentives to the Taliban, their affiliates, or other foreign terrorist organizations for attacks against United States, coalition, or Afghan security forces or civilians in Afghanistan in the last two years, including the details of any attacks believed to have been connected with such incentives.”

    Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) framed the measure as particularly important in light of the revelations.

    “There's been bipartisan criticism of what a weak deal [Trump] got with the Taliban, a deal that is already falling apart,” Moulton said. “Now we learned that he was making this deal at the same time as there were bounties on the heads of American troops, American sons and daughters. We clearly need more oversight over what the president is doing in Afghanistan.”

    Crow’s amendment would block funding to dip below 8,000 troops and then again to below 4,000 troops unless the administration certifies that doing so would not compromise the U.S. counterterrorism mission in Afghanistan, not increase risk for U.S. personnel there, be done in consultation with allies, and is in the best interest of the United States.

    It would also require an analysis on the effects of a drawdown on the threat from the Taliban, the status of human and civil rights, an inclusive Afghan peace process, the capacity of Afghan forces and the effect of malign actors on Afghan sovereignty.

    Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), a staunch Trump ally, argued the amendment would unfairly tie the administration’s hands.

    “A great nation does not force the next generation to fight their wars, and that's what we've done in Afghanistan,” Gaetz said. “I think the best day to have not had the war in Afghanistan was when we started it, and the next best day is tomorrow."

    "I don't think there's ever a bad day to end the war in Afghanistan," he added. "Our generation is weary of this and tired of this.”

    https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5...-assessment-on
    A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.

  22. #72
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:42 PM
    Posts
    7,258
    Perhaps the Congress should renew the impeachment process (send in Adam). To withdraw the army from war zones is much worse case than the impeachment case before (what was the case, anyway?).

    To withdraw army, that's unheard of (OK, that was one case before, didn't they impeach Nixon for that? Or was it for some similar nonsense also connected with his re-election?)

    That would be cowardly, like the Ruskies withdrew from Afghanistan and finally also from East Europe. That's not very consistent like others: once in, forever in...

  23. #73
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    67,334
    If this was Obama, the GOP would have set up about ten investigations by now, leaked bullshit stories to the press, the whole gamut.

    The Democrats try and pass a bill that is going nowhere.

    Utterly pointless.

  24. #74
    Thailand Expat
    Klondyke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:42 PM
    Posts
    7,258
    Most Americans believe Russia targeted U.S. soldiers, want sanctions in response, Reuters/Ipsos poll shows
    July 8, 2020NEW YORK (Reuters) - A majority of Americans believe that Russia paid the Taliban to kill U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan last year amid negotiations to end the war, and more than half want to respond with new economic sanctions against Moscow, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday.

    The national opinion poll conducted on Monday and Tuesday shows that the American public remains deeply suspicious of Russia four years after it tried to tip the U.S. presidential election in Donald Trump’s favor, and most Americans are unhappy with how the president has handled relations with the country.

    The Reuters/Ipsos poll follows a series of reports, including several by Reuters, that Russia had been rewarding Taliban-affiliated militants, possibly by offering them bounties, to attack and kill U.S. troops in the region. Moscow denies the allegations.

    The New York Times and Washington Post both reported that several American soldiers were believed to have died as a result of the bounties.

    Trump said last week he was not told about the reported Russian effort, because intelligence officials were uncertain about its veracity. The New York Times reported that the president received written briefings about the program earlier this year, and it was also included in a widely read CIA report in May.

    Overall, 60% of Americans said they found reports of Russian bounties on American soldiers to be “very” or “somewhat” believable, while 21% said they were not credible and the rest were unsure.

    Thirty-nine percent said they thought Trump “did know” about Russia’s targeting of the U.S. military before reports surfaced in the news media last month, while 26% said the president “did not know.”

    Most Americans believe Russia targeted U.S. soldiers, want sanctions in response, Reuters/Ipsos poll shows - Reuters

  25. #75
    Thailand Expat
    sabang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 03:37 PM
    Location
    BackinOz
    Posts
    31,731
    House panel votes to constrain Afghan drawdown, ask for assessment on 'incentives' to attack US troops

    By Rebecca Kheel - 07/01/20 11:24 PM EDT 467
    4,029

    And that is what it was about, all along. Isn't that obvious?

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •