Hillary as Sec of State

Billy Batts said:
Classic. In this post the conspiracy theorist has actual thrown out the thread topic "Hillary as Sec of State" to make the topic the conspiracy theory he has actually worked hours on building, with misinformation gathered from non tradutional sources (comic books,and such).

In the conspiracy theorist world the actual topic is their ill informed position on Libya, not "Hillary as Sec of State". In the conspiracy theorist world Hillary as Sec of State, stops at the Libyan border,and cross over to bogus sites on the internet. Again we see the same lame attempt at humor, and not much else, the declaration of "I am right" with nothing more than a conspiracy theory to back up his position.
Click to expand...

Yup anatta's m.o. all the way.
 
anatta said:
"Comic books" - like anti-war.com? The topic is "Hillary as Sec of State" and Libya was her primo move. The Russian reset was the other.

She was prime US advocate ( Gates called her the 51% voice in the White House NSC) & international organizer as evidenced
by the "tic toc on Libya" State dept memo.

There is also the 2 parter by the NYTimes.
There is also Obama's own statement that "Libya was his greatest failure".

Virtually every article about Libya today summarizes with "Libya has been in chaos since the death of Qaddafi' -it's boiler plate.
Clinton agitated for regime change ( making Qaddafi a military target) . She did the same (similar) in Iraq.

any attempts to down play the importance of Libya as a failed terrorist state heavily leveraged by HRClinton
is partisan scurrying -deflecting to such 'hot spots' as the Strait of Malacca
Click to expand...

LMFAO@anatta
 
anatta said:
"Comic books" - like anti-war.com? The topic is "Hillary as Sec of State" and Libya was her primo move. The Russian reset was the other.

She was prime US advocate ( Gates called her the 51% voice in the White House NSC) & international organizer as evidenced
by the "tic toc on Libya" State dept memo.

There is also the 2 parter by the NYTimes.
There is also Obama's own statement that "Libya was his greatest failure".

Virtually every article about Libya today summarizes with "Libya has been in chaos since the death of Qaddafi' -it's boiler plate.
Clinton agitated for regime change ( making Qaddafi a military target) . She did the same (similar) in Iraq.

any attempts to down play the importance of Libya as a failed terrorist state heavily leveraged by HRClinton
is partisan scurrying -deflecting to such 'hot spots' as the Strait of Malacca
Click to expand...

This is classic conspiracy theory razzel dazzel, hockus pockus , presto. The conspiracy theorist shifts from the main thrust of his original argument; Citing the previously unreliable main stream Media. Claiming:

"Virtually every article about Libya today summarizes with "Libya has been in chaos since the death of Qaddafi' -it's boiler plate.
Clinton agitated for regime change ( making Qaddafi a military target) . She did the same (similar) in Iraq."

Set aside the fact that the statement more than likely is not true. The question is what was the conspiracy theorist original claim,and does today's headline prove the conspiracy theory? The answer is absolute not here is why.

Original conspiracy theory short version:
1) Muammar Gaddafi was a benevolent, efficient dictator well loved by his people. A true friend of the West that always assisted the CIA, and the British foreign office. The conspiracy theorist disregards main stream sources to draw this conclusion, in favor of comic books.

2) The fall of Muammar Gaddafi had little or nothing to do with a revolution in Libya opposing Muammar Gaddafi. The entire fall was due to NATO, and of course Obama,and Hillary Clinton with no Libyan public support. Again to make his point he falls back on his comic book links. Because hey you can not trust legitimate news sources.

Now the conspiracy theorist claims his conspiracy theory is now correct because "Virtually every article about Libya today summarizes with "Libya has been in chaos since the death of Qaddafi'
But all that really shows (if true) is every article about Libya today summarizes "Libya has been in chaos since the death of Qaddafi' That does not in any way indicate his original conspiracy theory laid out above (points 1,and 2) is true. All it shows is Libya is in chaos after the revolution. Not that the revolution was a product of the Obama administration, Clinton,and NATO.
 
Billy Batts said:
This is classic conspiracy theory razzel dazzel, hockus pockus , presto. The conspiracy theorist shifts from the main thrust of his original argument; Citing the previously unreliable main stream Media. Claiming:

"Virtually every article about Libya today summarizes with "Libya has been in chaos since the death of Qaddafi' -it's boiler plate.
Clinton agitated for regime change ( making Qaddafi a military target) . She did the same (similar) in Iraq."

Set aside the fact that the statement more than likely is not true.
Click to expand...
you are unable to even make your own case. You don't even know enough to support your own claims. Pathetic. Really I feel almost sorry for you.

Original conspiracy theory short version:
1) Muammar Gaddafi was a benevolent, efficient dictator well loved by his people. A true friend of the West that always assisted the CIA, and the British foreign office. The conspiracy theorist disregards main stream sources to draw this conclusion, in favor of comic books.
Click to expand...
This from LA Times -is this MS enough for you?

How Kadafi Went From Foe to Ally
Common cause against Islamic radicals has woven U.S. intelligence ties with Libya, whose secular regime is still listed as a state sponsor of terrorism.
September 04, 2005
LONDON — As it struggles to combat Islamic terrorist networks, the Bush administration has quietly built an intelligence alliance with Libyan leader Moammar Kadafi, a onetime bitter enemy the U.S. had tried for years to isolate, topple or kill.

Kadafi has helped the U.S. pursue Al Qaeda's network in North Africa by turning radicals over to neighboring pro-Western governments. He also has provided information to the CIA on Libyan nationals with alleged ties to international terrorists.

[/U]http://articles.latimes.com/2005/sep/04/world/fg-uslibya4

2) The fall of Muammar Gaddafi had little or nothing to do with a revolution in Libya opposing Muammar Gaddafi. The entire fall was due to NATO, and of course Obama,and Hillary Clinton with no Libyan public support. Again to make his point he falls back on his comic book links. Because hey you can not trust legitimate news sources.
Click to expand...
Qaddafi was on the counter-offensive from the Bengazi NTC.
He was routinely winning cities - Sirte was encircled -and the battles were fierce in some cases -but there is no question he was advancing.

Tripoli ( west)is across the country from Bengazi(east). Qaddafi was organizing to attack the NTC in Bengazi

Then the US/NATO came into that civil war under the bogus bullshit the NTC's Jibril
sold her about "humanitarian crisis" ( premise that Qaddafi loyalists would bomb civilians in Bengazi)..
It was all crap. Qaddafi never bombed/shelled any civilians on his counter-offensive.

The US/NATO bombing ( with Tomahawks ) was extensive and went after Qaddafi, but also Libyan infrastructure.
In other words the WEST turned the tide of war against Qaddafi -and then they wern't satisfied with that -but went full bore "regime change"
(again this is all on "tic toc on Libya")

Now the conspiracy theorist claims his conspiracy theory is now correct because "Virtually every article about Libya today summarizes with "Libya has been in chaos since the death of Qaddafi'
But all that really shows (if true) is every article about Libya today summarizes "Libya has been in chaos since the death of Qaddafi' That does not in any way indicate his original conspiracy theory laid out above (points 1,and 2) is true. All it shows is Libya is in chaos after the revolution. Not that the revolution was a product of the Obama administration, Clinton,and NATO.
Click to expand...
look at the tic toc on Libya.
Since you can't seem to remember from 1 page to the next -here is the header. again this is Hillary's State dept.

from: Jake Sullivan [mailtc
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2011 7:40 PM
to: Mills, Cheryl D; Nuland, Victoria
Subject: tick tock on libya
this is basically off the top of my head, with a few consultations of my notes. but it shows S'Clinton leadership/ownership/stewardship of this country's libya policy from start to finish. let me know what you think. toria, who else might be able to add to this?

Secretary Clinton's leadership on Libya HRC has been a critical voice on Libya in administration deliberations, at NATO, and in contact group meetings — as well as the public face of the U.S. effort in Libya. She was instrumental in securing the authorization, building the coalition, and tightening the noose around Qadhafi and his regime.
 
Billy Batts said:
You expect me to base my opinion on that nebulous garbage? Anyone can post something bogus on You tube. Libya under Gaddafi was like North Korea. People had enough of it and over threw him. The only thing tangible NATO did was establish a no fly Zone so the rebels could overthrow him faster with less casualties. Gaddafi was a ruthless dictator, that imprisoned and killed a lot of Libyans.

The revolution began as peaceful public protests, and only when the urban crowds were subjected to artillery, tank, mortar and cluster bomb barrages did the revolutionaries begin arming themselves. When fighting began, it was volunteer combatants representing their city quarters taking on trained regular army troops and mercenaries.

The Great Man-Made River Project was started in in 1953, and is still ongoing. The funding for the project was from the U.N under Gaddafi. It was unfortunately bombed by NATO because Gaddafi had placed anti - aircraft guns at the site. But the entire system is still in place, my guess, now that Libya is free construction will resume,and the last two phases of the five phase project will finish with loans from European banks.
Click to expand...

Don't get this twisted brother. I don't expect you to believe anything you don't want to. What I clearly recognize about most Americans is that when it comes to war, there's little difference between a democrat and a republican. Both will only see what they want to see.

"Lies and a conspiracy theory" is EXACTLY what I heard from republicans when faced with the truth of Iraq.

What you think you know about the destruction of Libya .. clearly you don't know as much as you think you do.

You didn't know about the lie the Obama Administration presented to the UN to bolster their drums to war. I gave you the irrefutable facts .. that you ignored.

You claimed that Gaddafi didn't have the support of his own people. I gave you the facts that very clearly refuted your claim.

I've given you facts that clearly demonstrate that the US used Al Queda terrorists to fight our war in Libya.

Whatever you choose to believe brother is fine with me. I don't expect awareness, nor the ability to honestly criticize one's own political party from everybody. Sort of why I'm an Independent.

Yes, the US used Al Queda terrorists to fight Gaddafi.

Yes, we lied our way into war no differently than Bush did in Iraq.

"loans from European banks" :0) .. now a Rothschild Bank .. and the West has its hands on Libyan Oil.

Libya was prosperous and its citizens enjoyed the prosperity from their oil .. and had a high standard of living. They didn't need loans from European banks, didn't need a Rothschild Bank .. and sure as hell didn't need the West to profit from Libyan oil more than the Libyan people.

I posted facts .. I don't expect you to believe anything.
 
Last edited:
Billy Batts said:
This is classic conspiracy theory razzel dazzel, hockus pockus , presto. The conspiracy theorist shifts from the main thrust of his original argument; Citing the previously unreliable main stream Media. Claiming:

"Virtually every article about Libya today summarizes with "Libya has been in chaos since the death of Qaddafi' -it's boiler plate.
Clinton agitated for regime change ( making Qaddafi a military target) . She did the same (similar) in Iraq."

Set aside the fact that the statement more than likely is not true. The question is what was the conspiracy theorist original claim,and does today's headline prove the conspiracy theory? The answer is absolute not here is why.

Original conspiracy theory short version:
1) Muammar Gaddafi was a benevolent, efficient dictator well loved by his people. A true friend of the West that always assisted the CIA, and the British foreign office. The conspiracy theorist disregards main stream sources to draw this conclusion, in favor of comic books.

2) The fall of Muammar Gaddafi had little or nothing to do with a revolution in Libya opposing Muammar Gaddafi. The entire fall was due to NATO, and of course Obama,and Hillary Clinton with no Libyan public support. Again to make his point he falls back on his comic book links. Because hey you can not trust legitimate news sources.

Now the conspiracy theorist claims his conspiracy theory is now correct because "Virtually every article about Libya today summarizes with "Libya has been in chaos since the death of Qaddafi'
But all that really shows (if true) is every article about Libya today summarizes "Libya has been in chaos since the death of Qaddafi' That does not in any way indicate his original conspiracy theory laid out above (points 1,and 2) is true. All it shows is Libya is in chaos after the revolution. Not that the revolution was a product of the Obama administration, Clinton,and NATO.
Click to expand...


Is that a comic book?

Photoshopped maybe?

A conspiracy theory perhaps?

OR .. could that actually be almost 2 million Libyans standing in protest against NATO bombing and US intervention .. and standing FOR Gaddafi?

All that green you see is the symbols and colors of the Jamahiriya -- Gaddafi.
 
This message is hidden because blackascoal is on your ignore list.

Sorry bud I only have patients for one conspiracy theory at a time. And zero tolerance for propaganda from extremists. Anyone telling me Ghaddafi was a great man, whose only concern was his people; well we part company.
 
Part company .. who the fuck cares?

You've not only demonstrated yourself to be seriously uninformed .. you've also demonstrated yourself to be a coward.

Thanks for playing.
 
blackascoal said:
Part company .. who the fuck cares?

You've not only demonstrated yourself to be seriously uninformed .. you've also demonstrated yourself to be a coward.

Thanks for playing.
Click to expand...
good try.
at this point I'm treating him like any other revisionist, Shove that crap right back at them.
I've been doing it since 2011.

If they wanna get froggy -shove it down their throat again - in hopes that other open minds might see the truth.
We created a failed terrorist state. Obama/Clinton legacy
 
I'm really not trying to be argumentative. But facts are facts no matter how inconvenient those facts may be.

Obama / Clinton
Bush / Cheney

Two sides of the same coin.

America's penchant for war isn't partisan .. it's American.

We should have listened to Eisenhower .. but we didn't.
 
it's neocon. not American per se'
Clinton/Obama are neocons -clinton more so.
She basically talked him into Libya. She still wants a no fly in Syria. She wanted to arm the Syrian rebels
 
anatta said:
it's neocon. not American per se'
Clinton/Obama are neocons -clinton more so.
She basically talked him into Libya. She still wants a no fly in Syria. She wanted to arm the Syrian rebels
Click to expand...

Words have actual meanings dopey.
Hillary is not a neo-con.
 
Rune said:
Words have actual meanings dopey.
Hillary is not a neo-con.
Click to expand...
neocon ="spreading democracy at the barrel of a gun"

The reason (one main reason) Clinton bought into the NTC's ( Libya Council) Jalil was his promises of a democratic Libya.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...transform-libya/2011/03/14/ABdDPtV_story.html
Rebel council seeks to transform Libya
Clinton and Libyan council representative Mahmoud Jibril met privately for 45 minutes, discussing how the United States and its allies could help anti-Gaddafi groups withstand an increasingly brutal assault by Libyan troops and planes. The meeting in a central Paris hotel was Clinton’s second with a Libyan opposition figure in less than a week, coming four days after she met with Libya’s former ambassador to the United States, Ali Aujali, who now opposes Gaddafi.

The Libyan council is made up of lawyers and intellectuals who profess ambitions of creating a Libya governed by democratic ideals, possibly altering the face of the Arab world and inspiring more autocratic regimes to fall. Mustafa Abdul Jalil, who quit as Libya’s justice minister last month to protest the regime’s suppression of protesters, heads the national council.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top