Has there ever been an enemy to dehumanize as ISIS?

Now going forward, I'd like to extend an apology to CBS and say that I'd like to be able to discuss the subject regarding the Middle East civilly. However, to preface such a debate I freely and openly make an admission that while I have said possibly bigoted and 'extreme' statements regarding Jews as a people, I do not hate them nor beleive everything is their fault. This does not mean I do not have criticisms of Israel, and in fact I have strong opinions of them, however I would like to think I've grown enough since those statements to say I now understand that It isn't so much the Jews as a people helping to commit atrocities as much as it is the Israeli lobby who are not out for anything other than becoming more powerful.
 
I'm about as objective in this matter as they come. Just because I am Lebanese does not mean I lost my objectivity. I have been to Israel, Lebanon and several other countries in the Middle East. I have been shot at by Israeli soldiers and harassed by them at Beirut airport for doing absolutely nothing. I have also dug through the rubble to search for survivors from Israeli attacks and seen bodies in states that no person should ever have to see. I have also been spit on by a group of Jewish people in Williamsburg, NY for being who I am. After all that I still hold no ill will to the Israeli people and I think they're suffering is just as painful as that of the Arab people.

I never accused you of losing your objectivity because you're Lebanese. I accused you of losing your objectivity because you withheld the source of the articles you posted, and those sources happened to consist of disingenuous authors who write for a website that pretends to be a legitimate journalistic publication when in fact it's nothing more than an anti-Semetic, anti-American, anti-Isreal, conspiratorial hate machine that uses outright fabrications and lies to further its aims.

I don't care if you're a Palestinian or an Israeli or a Martian, I still expect you to debate in good faith. I've seen your posts and I believe that you value the truth above all else, so it was disappointing to see you of all people reduced to posting propaganda. Kawilt posts Global Research articles all the time - it's his conspiracy website of choice - but he actually believes that garbage. Kawilt drank the Kool-Aid years ago and is so far gone there's no hope that he'll ever come to his senses (Hello Kawilt). I don't believe for one minute that you believe it. If you do then I have grossly misread you.

Instead of attacking the source you could attack the substance of what was copied and pasted. Is a Hamas publication wrong just bc it's from Hamas?

No, a Hamas publication isn't wrong just because it's from Hamas. It's wrong because it's a fabrication - and a well-known fabrication at that.

As far as addressing the points raised in your articles, the problem with using sources that aren't credible is that they AREN'T credible. Since I know the author is dishonest, I would first have to fact check each and every point raised before addressing them. That's too time consuming so I reject the whole thing. Sure, there's some 'truth' in those articles - even a broken clock is right twice a day - but I'm not going to weed through all the lies and distortions to find it.

I'm not sure where you are coming from but I can tell you MOST publications on the shit in the Middle East you see here in the west is either slanted or a straight up lie.

It's convenient for you to reject all media as dishonest. Then you can put all news sources on the same level of credibility. But it's disingenuous because it's not true.

Unfortunately not many know any better and believe what they see and hear on the news but that's the beauty of knowing people who live there....if you're more interested in the truth you will not find it on the news or publications of this country.

I wouldn't dispute that the stories of the people you know in the area have some value but it is anecdotal. It's certainly not going to be objective. Palestinian "truth" is going to differ significantly from Israeli "truth" just like the truth for blacks in Ferguson, MO is going to differ from that of whites. If you want facts that are objective and supported by verifiable evidence then you're going to have to rely on an objective, independent media to find them.
 
I never accused you of losing your objectivity because you're Lebanese. I accused you of losing your objectivity because you withheld the source of the articles you posted, and those sources happened to consist of disingenuous authors who write for a website that pretends to be a legitimate journalistic publication when in fact it's nothing more than an anti-Semetic, anti-American, anti-Isreal,[b{ conspiratorial hate machine that uses outright fabrications and lies to further its aims[/b].

So not dissimilar from typical western media?

I don't care if you're a Palestinian or an Israeli or a Martian, I still expect you to debate in good faith. I've seen your posts and I believe that you value the truth above all else, so it was disappointing to see you of all people reduced to posting propaganda. Kawilt posts Global Research articles all the time - it's his conspiracy website of choice - but he actually believes that garbage. Kawilt drank the Kool-Aid years ago and is so far gone there's no hope that he'll ever come to his senses (Hello Kawilt). I don't believe for one minute that you believe it. If you do then I have grossly misread you.

Maybe some of what you believe to be propaganda isn't really propaganda? I have my own conspiracy theories myself but those are generally kept to myself lol.

No, a Hamas publication isn't wrong just because it's from Hamas. It's wrong because it's a fabrication - and a well-known fabrication at that.

As far as addressing the points raised in your articles, the problem with using sources that aren't credible is that they AREN'T credible. Since I know the author is dishonest, I would first have to fact check each and every point raised before addressing them. That's too time consuming so I reject the whole thing. Sure, there's some 'truth' in those articles - even a broken clock is right twice a day - but I'm not going to weed through all the lies and distortions to find it.



It's convenient for you to reject all media as dishonest. Then you can put all news sources on the same level of credibility. But it's disingenuous because it's not true.

I did not say all I said most and in some cases the truth is pretty damn convenient. This happens to be an example of one such instance. I'm not expecting you to change your mind but I've seen enough examples to sway me from where I originally stood.

I wouldn't dispute that the stories of the people you know in the area have some value but it is anecdotal. It's certainly not going to be objective. Palestinian "truth" is going to differ significantly from Israeli "truth" just like the truth for blacks in Ferguson, MO is going to differ from that of whites. If you want facts that are objective and supported by verifiable evidence then you're going to have to rely on an objective, independent media to find them.

You are not talking about truth. You're talking about side A vs side B and the TRUTH is normally in the middle somewhere. What's anecdotal about the number of people who have died? Please point me in the direction of a OBJECTIVE INDEPENDENT media if such a unicorn exists.
 
I don't care if you're a Palestinian or an Israeli or a Martian, I still expect you to debate in good faith. I've seen your posts and I believe that you value the truth above all else, so it was disappointing to see you of all people reduced to posting propaganda. Kawilt posts Global Research articles all the time - it's his conspiracy website of choice - but he actually believes that garbage. Kawilt drank the Kool-Aid years ago and is so far gone there's no hope that he'll ever come to his senses (Hello Kawilt). I don't believe for one minute that you believe it. If you do then I have grossly misread you.

Nice. So people who don't agree with you have 'drunk the kool-aid' and your evidence for why is because they post opinions supported by news sites that you also don't agree with. Furthermore, follow CBS' rules and research using his approved sites or be attacked with non-sequiturs, correct?


No, a Hamas publication isn't wrong just because it's from Hamas. It's wrong because it's a fabrication - and a well-known fabrication at that.

So you are saying that should I actually do the leg work that you say is inconvenient and find that something that they have posted is in fact true then it becomes fabrication again because Hamas posted it? I mean I admit Hamas is a terrorist organization but did you come to think that it might be a benefit if they told the truth if it was to their benefit? You know to garner international sympathy?

As far as addressing the points raised in your articles, the problem with using sources that aren't credible is that they AREN'T credible. Since I know the author is dishonest, I would first have to fact check each and every point raised before addressing them. That's too time consuming so I reject the whole thing. Sure, there's some 'truth' in those articles - even a broken clock is right twice a day - but I'm not going to weed through all the lies and distortions to find it.

So let's discard the relevant points that contradict your opinion because it is inconvenient? Logically I could say the exact same thing in regards to Jewish owned and Israeli lobby influenced news sites and the same would need to be truth following that new sites with a bias are not valid sources.

It's convenient for you to reject all media as dishonest. Then you can put all news sources on the same level of credibility. But it's disingenuous because it's not true.

So how do we then determine what is and what is not objective? It seems the greatest difficulty comes in finding a middle ground because while you claim that kiwilts sources are biased trash you on the other hand only post sources that are entirely on the side of Israel. Are we supposed to beleive that a source that doesn't question one side is entirely unbiased because you said it was? This following has no logic and doesn't make sense.
 
Last edited:
What's anecdotal about the number of people who have died?

Everything. There is no way to know the number of deaths because it's in Israel's best interest to minimize them and Fatah and Hama's to exaggerate them.

Please point me in the direction of a OBJECTIVE INDEPENDENT media if such a unicorn exists.

Writer's and journalist's individual biases are going to influence their work. I don't think anyone would suggest otherwise. But provided their work is verifiable and subject to scrutiny, it's as close as you're going to get truly objective reporting. Is it perfect? No, but it's the best we've got and it's a hell of a lot better than what Global Research does.
 
I mean have you seen this shit?! Is is exactly why I'm so critical of Israel. Netanyahu is a war monger and he doesn't care about Americans or Israelis he just cares about getting elected again. He's trying to sabotage relations that could possibly be useful to us in the states not because they are a threat but because he wants more power. Is Iran a threat to Israel, yes. Are they a threat to America? No. And the utter trash of our representatives as they grovel to their masters in Israel while openly and disrespectfully opposing the president and his decision it is just disgusting.


 
Now going forward, I'd like to extend an apology to CBS and say that I'd like to be able to discuss the subject regarding the Middle East civilly. However, to preface such a debate I freely and openly make an admission that while I have said possibly bigoted and 'extreme' statements regarding Jews as a people, I do not hate them nor beleive everything is their fault. This does not mean I do not have criticisms of Israel, and in fact I have strong opinions of them, however I would like to think I've grown enough since those statements to say I now understand that It isn't so much the Jews as a people helping to commit atrocities as much as it is the Israeli lobby who are not out for anything other than becoming more powerful.


I will accept your apology if you admit that (1) you've held anti-Semitic views; (2) you've made anti-Semitic comments; and (3) you publicly renounce those anti-Semitic views and comments.

The first two conditions should be easy to meet. The third will be a little more difficult.
 
But provided their work is verifiable
Ok then how do we accurately do this then? Trust a journalist that is employed by a questionable western news source? The fact is, you throw non sequitur after non sequitur stating what one must abide by in order to remain objective but you fail to do the exact same thing that you ask those criticizing Israel to do.
 
I will accept your apology if you admit that (1) you've held anti-Semitic views; (2) you've made anti-Semitic comments; and (3) you publicly renounce those anti-Semitic views and comments.

The first two conditions should be easy to meet. The third will be a little more difficult.
Yes ,as I stated before I have said very extreme things that bordered on racist. Do I beleive as strongly as I used to? No, I'd say that my extreme disdain for Jewish people was misdirected and where I beleived that 'Jews' were to be blamed I now beleive the Israeli lobby is to blame individual of Jews as a people. And as such I renounce criticism of Jewish people but I'd argue that my disliking for Netanyahu and the Israeli lobby (AIPAC) is justifiable given their influence on my country as an American.

Or is it racist to criticize Israel politically?
 
Ok then how do we accurately do this then? Trust a journalist that is employed by a questionable western news source?

Nice job taking my words out of context. I said: "But provided their work is verifiable and subject to scrutiny, it's as close as you're going to get truly objective reporting."

The fact is, you throw non sequitur after non sequitur stating what one must abide by in order to remain objective but you fail to do the exact same thing that you ask those criticizing Israel to do.

(1) Look up the definition of non sequitur before using it.

(2) Give me one example where I did "the exact same thing that ask those criticizing Israel to do."
 
Last edited:
Nice job taking my words out of context. I said: "But provided their work is verifiable and subject to scrutiny, it's as close as you're going to get truly objective reporting."



(1) Look up the definition of non sequitur before using it.

(2) Give me one example where I did "the exact same thing that fail to do the exact same thing that you ask those criticizing Israel to do."

Well again, I think we can now come to agreement that we really aren't going to be able to come to an agreement on sources for more or less the details of the situation in the Middle East because in the same way that you see our opinions and sources we see yours. For example, you see Hamas and 'conspiracy' websites as questionable because they have biased reason to fabricate evidence and even then it wouldn't be worth the effort to find what they have not fabricated. In the same way, it seems to me unacceptable that you cite known mainstream media sources that are no doubt influence by the Israeli lobby and thereby would have a bias and motivation for fabrication as well.
 
Everything. There is no way to know the number of deaths because it's in Israel's best interest to minimize them and Fatah and Hama's to exaggerate them.



Writer's and journalist's individual biases are going to influence their work. I don't think anyone would suggest otherwise. But provided their work is verifiable and subject to scrutiny, it's as close as you're going to get truly objective reporting. Is it perfect? No, but it's the best we've got and it's a hell of a lot better than what Global Research does.

Your two statements here contradict each other. On one hand we have each side exaggerating lives lost bc it is in their best interests to do so. On the other hand we have writer's biases coming through their work so 'it's the best we got....' Making an assumption based on your previous posts, I would wager YOUR sources would minimize Israeli duplicity like you claim mine exaggerate them.

Once again, the number of deaths is objective and verifiable. Just bc you claim it is ABLE TO BE INFLUENCED AND BIASED by each side does not mean that actually happened although I do admit it's a possibility that does indeed happen. You never made mention which amount of deaths, which amount of destroyed hospitals, which amount of children murdered was exaggerated you just dismissed everything. I can only think you did so bc it paints one side as war mongers; a term most are afraid to use for that side bc of past atrocities.
 
ISIS in Ukraine
Kiev and the jihadists: a dark alliance

by Justin Raimondo, March 06, 2015

While we’re fighting the Islamic State, a.k.a. ISIS, in Iraq and Syria, and American officials tout the alleged danger of an attack on the US homeland, in Ukraine Washington and the Caliphate are fighting on the same side. A remarkable series of articles by Marcin Mamon in The Intercept has documented an aspect of the Ukraine conflict that no one else has paid any attention to: the role played by the "Dudayev Battalion," a fighting force of radical Islamists consisting of Chechens, but also including fighters from throughout the Caucasus as well as some Ukrainains.

The keys to Ukranie’s Islamist underground were handed to Mamon by a contact in Istanbul, "Khalid," who commands the ISIS branch there. "Our brothers are there," he told Mamon, and the reporter traveled to Ukraine where he was put in touch with a contact named Ruslan, who led him to Munayev’s clandestine camp.

Named after the first "president" of breakaway Chechnya, Dzhokhar Dudaev, the Dudayev Battalion was commanded by Isa Munayev, recently killed in a east Ukraine. Imbued with a fanatical hatred of the Russians, who are backing the rebels in the east, Munayev’s men also feel they are paying back a debt, since the ultra-nationalist Right Sector battalions now fighting for Kiev apparently helped the Chechens in the past. Right Sector is an openly neo-fascist paramilitary group which provided much of the muscle that made the coup against Viktor Yanukovych, former Ukrainian president, possible. Organized into various battalions, including the notorious Azov Brigade, they idolize the World War II collaborators with the Nazis, who fought Soviet troops: the ultra-nationalists have been accused of carrying out atrocities in the Donbass, as well as terrorizing their political opponents on the home front. According to Mamon, they also have been involved in fighting the Russians in far-off Chechnya, where former Right Sector bigwig Oleksandr Muzychko fought alongside Munayev and "the brothers" against the Russians. As Ruslan told Mamon:

"I am here today because my brother, Isa, called us and said, ‘It’s time to repay your debt. There was a time when the brothers from Ukraine came [to Chechnya] and fought against the common enemy, the aggressor, the occupier."

Aside from this solemn warrior ethic, another likely reason for ISIS support to Kiev is the access this gives the terrorists to Western targets. As Mamon puts it:

"Ukraine is now becoming an important stop-off point for the brothers, like Ruslan. In Ukraine, you can buy a passport and a new identity. For $15,000, a fighter receives a new name and a legal document attesting to Ukrainian citizenship. Ukraine doesn’t belong to the European Union, but it’s an easy pathway for immigration to the West. Ukrainians have few difficulties obtaining visas to neighboring Poland, where they can work on construction sites and in restaurants, filling the gap left by the millions of Poles who have left in search of work in the United Kingdom and Germany."

We are told that ISIS is planning terrorist attacks in Europe, and security forces are busy rounding up suspects all across the continent – and yet here is this gaping hole in the West’s defenses, where "the brothers" are quietly infiltrating without much notice in the Western media. In cooperation with ultra-nationalist groups like Right Sector, which have also formed their semiautonomous battalions, the Islamists of Ukraine, brandishing Ukrainian passports, have opened a gateway to the West.

Demands that Washington start giving lethal aid to the Ukrainian regime are now part of the foreign policy debate in Washington, with the usual suspects urging the administration to open the weapons spigot. Yet the Ukrainians are saying they’re already getting lethal aid from countries they refuse to identify, according to Ukrainian national security council official Oleg Gladovsky:

"[The aid is coming from] places where we have no influence and where there’s no public uproar about it (which we ourselves have helped created in some places, unfortunately). It’s from these countries that we’re now receiving lethal aid."

So where is this aid coming from?

"In eastern Ukraine," writes Mamon, "the green flag of jihad flies over some of the private battalions’ bases." But how "private" are these fighting groups?

The tatterdemalion Ukrainian army, consisting of poorly-motivated and poorly-armed conscripts, is a poor match for the separatists, who are fighting on their home turf against an invader. The Kiev regime is dependent on these "private" armies to provide the backbone of its fighting force, and there appears to be an uneasy symbiotic relationship between the regular Ukrainian army and these volunteers, with a hands-off approach taken by Kiev to the latter. If the Ukrainian regime is now openly acknowledging getting aid from unnamed countries, it’s fair to ask: is the Dudayev Battalion getting direct aid from the same sources supplying Syria’s radical Islamist rebels with arms – Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and the Saudis?

As the US-funded-and –supported Syrian "moderate" rebels defect to ISIS in droves, the international jihadist network is extending its tentacles into Ukraine to take up the fight on behalf of their "brothers."

One of the key links between the Ukrainian ultra-nationalist factions and the Islamists was Oleksandr Muzychko, who fought alongside Chechen terrorist leader Shamil Basayev – the mastermind behind the Beslan school massacre – in the Chechen wars. Last year Muzychko was killed in a shoot-out with Ukrainian police, but before he went down he was the very visible public face of Ukraine’s ultra-nationalist movement.

In a video that went viral, Muzychko and a group of his fellow Right Sector stormtroopers entered the state prosecutor’s office in the city of Rivne, in northwestern Ukraine, and slapped the prosecutor around for not doing his job to Muzychko’s satisfaction. He also broke into a meeting of the Rivne city council, brandishing a gun, and declaring Right Sector would never disarm. While the authorities no doubt found Muzychko’s antics annoying, this sort of thing is "normal" in the new Ukraine, and it’s likely his involvement with the ISIS underground, rather than his public antics, brought down the ire of the authorities, who ambushed and shot him down on March 24 of last year. Was his involvement with the ISIS cell in Ukraine was becoming increasingly obvious, even to those in the West who had been content to look the other way?

That the Kiev authorities are working with the ISIS outpost is implied throughout Mamon’s piece: as Mamon made his way Munayev’s encampment in the company of Ruslan, they had no trouble at Ukrainian army checkpoints, where the opportunity to collect bribes was foregone and they were waved right through. Throughout Mamon’s piece we hear Munayev’s complaints of poverty: the Dudayev Battalion, we are told, must depend on criminal activities to finance their jihad. Yet one minor oligarch, named "Dima," hands them $20,000, and there is talk of selling black market amber to "buyers in the Persian Gulf, including wealthy sheikhs" – perhaps the same wealthy donors who have so generously funded ISIS.

The links between the Kiev regime and the ISIS enclave in Ukraine are numerous, and only half-hidden. When Mamon arrived at Munayev’s camp, he was met by an armored car that, we are told, was donated by Ihor Kolomoisky, one of the richest men in Ukraine who was recently appointed governor of Dnipropetrovsk. Kolomoisky, despite his Jewish heritage, has no compunctions about allying himself with openly anti-Semitic groups like Right Sector, whose battalions he has financed: like the ISIS-affiliated jihadists he gifted with an armored car, all he cares about is the fight against Vladimir Putin, whom he despises.

Another indication of the ISIS-Kiev alliance is the escape of Adam Osmayev, deputy commander of the Dudayev Battalion, from a Ukrainian jail, where he had been serving a sentence for plotting Putin’s assassination. After the coup in Kiev, Munayev and his fellow fighters broke Osmayev out of prison: when they were confronted by Ukrainian police at a checkpoint, they were mysteriously allowed to pass. As Mamon reports:

"After a dramatic standoff, the Ukrainians allowed the Chechens to go free. (There is no way to confirm Ruslan’s account, but in the fall of 2014, the Odessa court suddenly declared that Osmayev had fulfilled enough of his sentence and had been set free). Osmayev and Munayev came back to Kiev, and the Dudayev battalion was created."

"From time to time," writes Mamon, "Munayev met with representatives of the Ukrainian Security Service, known as the SBU."

The Dudayev Battalion numbers around 500 fighters, but there are also other jihadist brigades in Ukraine, organized into "the Sheikh Mansour battalion, which broke off from the Dudayev battalion" and "is based close to Mariupol, in the southeast of Ukraine," as well as two other groups composed of Crimean Tatars, each consisting of about 500 jihadists.

As US aid flows into Ukraine, how much of it will trickle down to these allies of ISIS – and to what future use will it be put? If John McCain and Lindsey Graham have their way, US arms will soon find their way into the hands of these terrorists, whose jihad against the Russians is bound to turn westward and strike at the capitals of Europe.

This is blowback with a vengeance: we are creating our own enemies, and giving them the weapons to harm us, even as we claim the need for universal surveillance in order to fight them. The mad scientists formulating US foreign policy are raising an army of Frankenstein monsters – who are sure to come after their deluded creators.
 
This is a hot topic with me right now. I have always said I would like to return to mosul and fight ISIS. Well as of just a days ago I got the offer to do just that.
The message I received reminds me of ordering gear online. Except instead of sending money its actually me who goes to some location and then to another and another. I tell you for certain that these foreign fighters who are showing up have some huge ass balls.
Am I going ? Not 100% sure yet. There is a chance that since one would be fighting along side of PKK/YPG "The lions of rojava" that one would be considered fighting with a terrorist group. Not so stoked on not being able to return home.
 

Sponsors

Latest posts

Back
Top