http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2014/09/...p-khorasan

On Monday night, the US military bombed ISIS, the radical group taking over chunks of Iraq and Syria. As a "last-minute add-on," as NBC put it, the US also targeted an organization called the Khorasan Group, a shadowy outfit composed of Al Qaeda veterans. After the bombing, the White House and the Pentagon noted that the Khorasan Group was in the "execution phase" of planning attacks on the West.

But some conservatives made sure not to give President Obama any credit for possibly thwarting a terrorist threat. Instead, they hatched yet another anti-Obama conspiracy theory: The president had concocted a supposedly new terrorist organization to destroy. That is, he and his aides were calling this new target the Khorasan Group, and not Al Qaeda, so they would not have to acknowledge that Al Qaeda—which the president in 2012 said was "on the run"—was still a threat.

Flaming the board now? Losing too many arguments?

(09-25-2014 03:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  yet another anti-Obama conspiracy theory

You're not even trying today. Post something of substance or GTFO.

Hey Fit, did you hear that the buildings Obama bombed were all empty?

The spin you guys go to is really impressive.

Conspiracy? Hardly. Spin? Absolutely.

The fact is that Bush went to great lengths to put all of these groups under one blanket... If your goal is to cause harm to the US, then you are the enemy... Evil-do-ers. The Obama administration has gone to great lengths in the opposite direction... implying that despite having virtually identical goals, these are all independent groups and NONE of them are what everyone previously understood to be Al-Qaeda.

Black Beard, Long Ben, Black Bart or Calico Jack were all different Pirate crews. But if you came across them, it didn't make you any safer that it was one and not the other.

These are all militant and dangerous Islamic extremist groups... they are not 'fake' terrorists.

Conspiracy? Who said that. Someone is misquoting me again.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Hmmm. So terrorists that used to be known as Al Qaeda but now go by a different name are less dangerous? Or are they more dangerous now and that's why they warranted a bombing? I'm confused. They're terrorists, hopefully now dead terrorists, so that's a good thing right? Sounds tonme like the administration is kinda telling on themselves by mentioning that they used to be Al Qaeda. Doesn't that mean that Al Qaeda ia still a threat, but juat may be calling themselves something else? I don't know, i guess it plays better for the left to cast it as a conspiracy theory instead of juat spinning it and hoping nobody noticed. All i know is dead terrorists= good terrorists, regardless what they call themselves.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I think it's the right that believes this is a conspiracy.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(09-25-2014 03:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  But some conservatives made sure not to give President Obama any credit for possibly thwarting a terrorist threat. Instead, they hatched yet another anti-Obama conspiracy theory: The president had concocted a supposedly new terrorist organization to destroy. That is, he and his aides were calling this new target the Khorasan Group, and not Al Qaeda, so they would not have to acknowledge that Al Qaeda—which the president in 2012 said was "on the run"—was still a threat.

Dunno. Fit, Susan Rice opened her mouth and called Khorasan the "core of AQ" this week, so there is some credence to the theory. I'd have to find the video link, I think it was on Breitbart.

(09-25-2014 03:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2014/09/...p-khorasan
On Monday night, the US military bombed ISIS, the radical group taking over chunks of Iraq and Syria. As a "last-minute add-on," as NBC put it, the US also targeted an organization called the Khorasan Group, a shadowy outfit composed of Al Qaeda veterans. After the bombing, the White House and the Pentagon noted that the Khorasan Group was in the "execution phase" of planning attacks on the West.
But some conservatives made sure not to give President Obama any credit for possibly thwarting a terrorist threat. Instead, they hatched yet another anti-Obama conspiracy theory: The president had concocted a supposedly new terrorist organization to destroy. That is, he and his aides were calling this new target the Khorasan Group, and not Al Qaeda, so they would not have to acknowledge that Al Qaeda—which the president in 2012 said was "on the run"—was still a threat.

I'd really be interested in knowing where in all that you find evidence that Obama did anything to thwart the terrorist attack that he is not being given credit for thwarting.

[quote='Fitbud' pid='11167155' dateline='1411689994']
Conspiracy? Who said that. Someone is misquoting me again.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App
[/quote]

I quoted you saying that? Someone is paranoid again.

Post number 1

[quote='Fitbud' pid='11167155' dateline='1411689994']But some conservatives made sure not to give President Obama any credit for possibly thwarting a terrorist threat. Instead, they hatched yet another anti-Obama conspiracy theory:
[quote]

You quoted the mother jones article that called it a conspiracy theory hatched by the right.

NOW you're saying 'the right' believes it... so now apparently the RIght is responsibe for Mother Jones' quotes??

Seriously, Fit. Put down the crack pipe. The paranoia is seeping in.

All I said was conspiracy? Hardly. Did I say YOU called it one? No. But you certainly quoted a leftist who said it was.

[quote='Hambone10' pid='11168550' dateline='1411744934']
[quote='Fitbud' pid='11167155' dateline='1411689994']
Conspiracy? Who said that. Someone is misquoting me again.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App
[/quote]

I quoted you saying that? Someone is paranoid again.

Post number 1

[quote='Fitbud' pid='11167155' dateline='1411689994']But some conservatives made sure not to give President Obama any credit for possibly thwarting a terrorist threat. Instead, they hatched yet another anti-Obama conspiracy theory:
[quote]

You quoted the mother jones article that called it a conspiracy theory hatched by the right.

NOW you're saying 'the right' believes it... so now apparently the RIght is responsibe for Mother Jones' quotes??

Seriously, Fit. Put down the crack pipe. The paranoia is seeping in.

All I said was conspiracy? Hardly. Did I say YOU called it one? No. But you certainly quoted a leftist who said it was.
[/quote]

Mother Jones may have used the term but who in fact is believing that Obama is doing this for some alternative reason?

Good honkin' gravy, it's a Mother Jones article...

(09-26-2014 11:05 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  [quote='Hambone10' pid='11168550' dateline='1411744934']
[quote='Fitbud' pid='11167155' dateline='1411689994']
Conspiracy? Who said that. Someone is misquoting me again.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I quoted you saying that? Someone is paranoid again.

Post number 1

(09-25-2014 07:06 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  But some conservatives made sure not to give President Obama any credit for possibly thwarting a terrorist threat. Instead, they hatched yet another anti-Obama conspiracy theory:

Quote:You quoted the mother jones article that called it a conspiracy theory hatched by the right.

NOW you're saying 'the right' believes it... so now apparently the RIght is responsibe for Mother Jones' quotes??

Seriously, Fit. Put down the crack pipe. The paranoia is seeping in.

All I said was conspiracy? Hardly. Did I say YOU called it one? No. But you certainly quoted a leftist who said it was.

Mother Jones may have used the term but who in fact is believing that Obama is doing this for some alternative reason?

Much of the wisdom you learn through martial arts is when something appears to be something it really isn't.

(09-25-2014 04:52 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  The spin you guys go to is really impressive.

Conspiracy? Hardly. Spin? Absolutely.

The fact is that Bush went to great lengths to put all of these groups under one blanket... If your goal is to cause harm to the US, then you are the enemy... Evil-do-ers. The Obama administration has gone to great lengths in the opposite direction... implying that despite having virtually identical goals, these are all independent groups and NONE of them are what everyone previously understood to be Al-Qaeda.

Black Beard, Long Ben, Black Bart or Calico Jack were all different Pirate crews. But if you came across them, it didn't make you any safer that it was one and not the other.

These are all militant and dangerous Islamic extremist groups... they are not 'fake' terrorists.

Not according to BHO. He has yet to refer to them in those terms. All he has done is apologize and defend Islam.

(09-26-2014 11:05 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Mother Jones may have used the term but who in fact is believing that Obama is doing this for some alternative reason?

So first you quote mother jones saying it is a conspiracy, and then when someone says it's hardly a conspiracy, you say 'who said it was?'

Now you come up with this?

Foolish.

Obama certainly has a reason for doing what he does... and since you aren't Obama, you don't know any better than anyone else what that reason is. You assume the most benign of reasons, and then assume the most insane of reasons for those who reach different conclusions. As I said, Pot meet kettle.

As I said, It certainly seems that Bush tried to lump them all into one group... evil-do-ers... and Obama wants to separate them into individual tiny factions. Both have legitimate AND illegitimate potential reasons...and other than someone's opinion, there is no PROOF of any of them.

YOU, however seem to be the one who calls them Fake Terrorists. Now perhaps you're quoting Mother Jones... but obviously you seem to agree with it...

So I'd ask you...

Whether these are Khorasan or Al-Qaeda or the back street boys, in WHAT way are they 'fake' terrorists? If they aren't real terrorists, then why is Obama bombing them?

So... you've lied and deflected and then feigned indignation... and you think ANYONE takes you seriously?

(09-26-2014 12:59 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(09-26-2014 11:05 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Mother Jones may have used the term but who in fact is believing that Obama is doing this for some alternative reason?

So first you quote mother jones saying it is a conspiracy, and then when someone says it's hardly a conspiracy, you say 'who said it was?'

Now you come up with this?

Foolish.

Obama certainly has a reason for doing what he does... and since you aren't Obama, you don't know any better than anyone else what that reason is. You assume the most benign of reasons, and then assume the most insane of reasons for those who reach different conclusions. As I said, Pot meet kettle.

As I said, It certainly seems that Bush tried to lump them all into one group... evil-do-ers... and Obama wants to separate them into individual tiny factions. Both have legitimate AND illegitimate potential reasons...and other than someone's opinion, there is no PROOF of any of them.

YOU, however seem to be the one who calls them Fake Terrorists. Now perhaps you're quoting Mother Jones... but obviously you seem to agree with it...

So I'd ask you...

Whether these are Khorasan or Al-Qaeda or the back street boys, in WHAT way are they 'fake' terrorists? If they aren't real terrorists, then why is Obama bombing them?

So... you've lied and deflected and then feigned indignation... and you think ANYONE takes you seriously?

I didn't assume anything. I just found the article amusing so I posted it.

(09-26-2014 01:44 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I didn't assume anything. I just found the article amusing so I posted it.

Lie.

You assumed that the right believes this is a conspiracy... post #8 or so... even though the only person you quote that calls it a conspiracy is from the left.