Prepare for War!

Hmm. I’ll get back to this. Here’s a starter.
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/09/7589...d-control-torture-lsd-and-a-poisoner-in-chief

Ah, yes, Glenn Greenwald. The man who was convinced that Trump fabricated the poison gas attacks in Syria so that we could go to war with them. He recently quit The Intercept because they asked him to substantiate one of the claims he made in a piece and rather than do that, he left in a huff. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that he's past his journalistic peak and is now heading into nutter territory.

More
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/09/7589...d-control-torture-lsd-and-a-poisoner-in-chiefHmm, sounds familiar. 911.

The Syria gas attacks were fabricated, not by Trump though.

Greenwald claimed that Trump fabricated them.

Your implication being that the CIA commiteed, arranged, or aided in JFK's assassination, which is entirely unsubstantiated. One event occurring after the other does not mean the first event caused the second. There are plenty of people who want to reign in the CIA and who have not been assassinated.

I don't necessarily agree with everything the CIA does, and I am certainly against the US military industrial complex and its 220+ years of war. But your opening post talking about the oogedy boogedy dEeP sTaTe reaks of conspiracy theories more at home on 4chan or 8chan.

Or you're trolling and you're not very good at it.

We know that, it was posted earlier.

No one's suggesting the CIA have perfectly ethical methods. No one does.

They're just questioning the idea that examples of people doing terrible things behind closed doors means anything beyond humans being a long way from how we'd like to imagine ourselves.

Why don’t you address what I quoted in the article?

I literally just did.

Fact: Soliemani never came round to my house for dinner.

Fact: Soliemani got splattered in Iraq

Ergo I killed him.

Logical fallacies are easy to dream up but are much more convincing to a mind predisposed to believe them, because such a mind is less likely to look for the disconnects.

Harry S Truman founded the CIA and didn't trust them for shit. He wasn't killed. Do you dispute those two facts?

Whilst I'm at it Trump doesn't trust the CIA and hasn't been killed. He and Truman had company. Why weren't they all killed?

Yet.

*gasp* you... you murderer!

Greenwald is a strange one. He strikes me as someone who is relentless and driven in his pursuit for truth, but he will also start a fight with his own shadow, hence his exit from The Intercept.

There's not much in this article that I find to be other than trivially correct. The CIA work behind the scenes to manipulate public opinion all over the world, including in relation to ongoing wars. They believed Obama a useful tool to assist them in this - as someone who had a positive PR image and who said a lot of vague "hopey-changey" stuff but who served the establishment. Trump was an unpredictable idiot who couldn't sell what they're selling abroad so they didn't like him.

The article doesn't mention Biden, but it's fair to say that they'll have a similar assessment of him as they did Obama.

That said, @The Ghost of Crazy Horse is off on the crazy train.

Misses the point entirely. There are already ongoing and long-lasting wars and there's no suggestion that the CIA necessarily wishes for Biden to start more - only that he will be more effective in prosecuting the ones they already have.

Not supported by the article you've posted, or by reality. Trump has been erratic and unpredictable but he hasn't opposed America's wars in any serious way. He's tried to play the stern "don't fuck with us" card quite a bit and been too brutally open about things - and this is again, bad for PR - which the CIA dislikes.

No, he won't. He'll be influenced by them but he's not their direct puppet. This is an insane conspiracy theory.

Even more insane. There's no evidence that the Kennedy was involved in a major conflict with the CIA and no evidence that they killed him.

sounds like misinformation to me "Lanzman"......if that's your real name.

Link?

There were numerous occasions where Trump's dictates went against the advice of generals - abandoning the Kurds was a major one. CIA has seemingly done shit about this unless - and this is the entire reason this article was put out - you are meant to believe that the CIA helped rig the election against him.

It's a conspiracy!!!!!!

Australian National Review - CIA DIRECTOR GINA HASPLE IS DEAD

Small world huh? Maybe we jinxed it talking about the CIA. Stranger things have happened!

Not seeing anything about that on Reuters or other services . . .

probably a false alarm/disinformation/satire etc.

somebody's feeling their oats.

"You made fun of me on a message board so you deserve to be killed" is not the hot take I was expecting to read this morning ...

Meh he probably saw Trump's lawyer saying the former cybersecurity guy should be "taken out and shot" and got a twitch in his nethers so decided to copy him.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

And, please, it's "rein," as in "hold your horses." Nothing to do with royalty.

Trap sprung

It's called a metaphor.

A metaphor for "you need killing".

Whatever. The point is that @Ten Lubak will be ignored from now on because he's never going to stop with his bullshit so there's no point in engaging with him.