It must be slowly becoming clear to most people where ISIS are coming from and in whose interests this monstrosity was created.
Now official :
2012 Defense Intelligence Agency document: West will facilitate rise of Islamic State “in order to isolate the Syrian regime”
Newly-Declassified U.S. Government Documents: The West Supported the Creation of ISIS
http://levantreport.com/2015/05/19/2012-defense-intelligence-agency-document-west-will-facilitate-rise-of-islamic-state-in-order-to-isolate-the-syrian-regime/
Here is what Ron Paul had to say : Former Republican congressman, and Republican presidential candidate, claims : New Evidence US Backed ISIS
http://truthinmedia.com/dr-ron-paul-new-evidence-us-backed-isis/

Ron Paul? Levant Report?

Pat, you need to broaden your horizons. Quoting those two as fact is the same as citing a Fox News article as evidence.

Obama slips up… https://youtu.be/p2NkjNvwuaU

@ Jason ; This is an official document from the Defense-intelligence-agency If you Google you can find it on many more outlets. You can hardly expect the New York Times or the Washington post to print this highly embarrassing document on their front page. Ron Paul is one of the few honest politicians left in the US.

Next thing you’ll be telling us alien lizards are ruling all this up to build human farms to suck out our brains or something….

Nuts want control of the nuthouse.

This is the nut Trump trying to throw muck such as Obama is a Muslim, not an American now he is a founder of ISIS. Sadly there are unstable people commenting here agreeing with Trump

@Tom Burke

ISIS wouldn’t have become so powerful if Nouri al-Maliki hadn’t alienated Sunni Arabs. He was ISIS’s best “recruiting sergeant”.

its far to easy to say person X or Y was responsible (bush, obama or whoever), in reality there is a hugely complex matrix of fact with factors working together and against each other stretching back decades. that doesnt make a good soundbite though

ISIS went from non-existence to spreading to 34 countries on Obama and Hillary’s watch.

When Obama and Hillary were gun running arms to the Syrian rebels from Benghazi they were in essence creating ISIS, plain and simple.

Not only did Bush start the Iraq War he made the very intelligent plan of rounding up all the top high level Jihadists from Al Qaeda and the like in Iraq at the time and put them in the same POW camp were they could all congregate and discuss plans and so on. What could possibly go wrong…..

@Chlorine
What do you want America to do? Right now. Its year zero and the world is as it is. What are the steps forward.
America just backs off and does nothing? Hide behind its borders and stops helping NATO countries? This is what Trump wants. Do you think that just because America retreats from the world stage that things will get better?
That Sunni and Shiite will live in peace?
That Iran and Saudi Arabia will go about the business.
That Russia wont invade anymore countries?
That the corrupt leaders of certain African states will start treating their citizens with dignity?
That North Korea will decide that peace is a better option than accumulating arms?

Not that it matters what you think really because in another 2 months your profile will be gone and you will start all over again. You wont stand behind what you say because you wont put your name to anything. Makes me think you don’t really believe what you say.

Stephen, America has meddled and invaded/destroyed more countries than Russia ever have, but don`t let that get in the way of your BS.
Here, read this and educate yourself, might make you take off those uncle sam glasses
The Special Ops Surge
America’s Secret War in 134 Countries

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37388.htm

Also Stephen, The last time Iran invaded another nation was in 1738.
Did you know that?? Or do you believe them to be the big bogeyman because america says so??

I recon trump is right lets face facts here the war in the east is all about business.its not about helping anybody is it.America is gone rough.

Chlorines that is the problem, it is not simple, and to try to reduce it to some simple factors is either evidence of partisanship or ignorance

Motherof, did you notice that Stephen just asked questions? He didn’t make any statements. He’s just asking what would happen if America withdrew from the world. You know, since it’s last withdrawal according to one presidential candidate caused ISIS

Today I watched people arguing with the human equivalent of a brick wall and a cement wall. As of yet I am unable to determine which is the thicker structure.

@ Dave he asked would Iran go about it`s business if america weren`t there.
which is insinuating that without America Being so highly active in the ME, they would somehow run amok – I have pointed out that Iran hasn`t invaded another country in over 275 years.

@Mother
Never said anything about Iran invading….where did you pull that from? In fact I probably have an idea.
What I said was Iran and Saudi Arabia will go about their business, meaning they will stop trying to outdo each other for territorial advantage by arming and financing factions in the middle east that destabilise it. In fact I support the lifting of sanctions from Iran and think America have been quite one sided in their approach to them.
But look there goes me trying to look at it from other angles, something which you are clearly incapable of. I’ll name lots of things America and Europe have done that I disagree with. Can you name 2 things that the Russian government have done which you disagree with?

I can name a lot of things Russia has done that i disagree with Stephen,
I don`t agree with how Russa treated Georgia for a start, and i don`t agree with how they use their vast stores of natural gas that they can turn off at a whim to pressure other countries for start. and i do look at things from different angles,
but in the last 10 to 15 years i can`t see much in the way of america being the good guy anywhere in the world. they are the agressors everywhere, from china to Russia to their selective picking of countries to protect in the ME , Countries like Israel and Saudi Arabia who between them have some of the worst human rights records in the world.
I just like to debunk all this bullshit in the western world that america is somehow the great saviour of democracy and protector of freedom, when the facts are , that america destabilises, interferes, destroys and usurps any country that doesn`t follow it`s narrative or indeed has natural resources that they envy.

If countries don`t follow americas idea of “Freedom”, they usually come up with the excuse that somehow the people of those countries are under the cosh and they will come to the rescue and “freedom the shit out of you” in the shape of bombs.

@Mother
Well at least you are honest and I have a lot more respect for commenters who will point out flaws of all sides (USA, Russia, UK, France, Saudi, Iran, etc) instead of hammering one, and lets be honest America is an easy target for this due to a relatively free press, which can investigate into government operations, and free speech.
There are big mistakes made, and deliberate questionable actions taken by America, but to think that the world would be a safer place without them “interfering” is a big leap to make and is impossible to prove since they do put themselves in positions where there is sometimes no “right” decision.
As for the Saudi question, yes I think its wrong to back a country that does such things to their citizens and with the Sunni link these days has to be looked into. I think that its not about oil, which again people will scream about, as the number just don’t add up to what the US receive these days from Saudi Arabia. I think its about having leverage in the Middle East. And Saudi is the power in the Middle East. But then what happens if America cuts all ties with them, will they start to throw their weight around even more? Are the US holding the rein on them in relation to Iran’s nuclear programme (that they would attack if felt threatened)? When you delve down further I think its far to intricate to assume anything.

@Mother
Well at least you are honest and I have a lot more respect for commenters who will point out flaws of all sides (USA, Russia, UK, France, Saudi, Iran, etc) instead of hammering one, and lets be honest America is an easy target for this due to a relatively free press, which can investigate into government operations, and free speech.
There are big mistakes made, and deliberate questionable actions taken by America, but to think that the world would be a safer place without them “interfering” is a big leap to make and is impossible to prove since they do put themselves in positions where there is sometimes no “right” decision.
As for the Saudi question, yes I think its wrong to back a country that does such things to their citizens and with the Sunni link these days has to be looked into. I think that its not about oil, which again people will scream about, as the number just don’t add up to what the US receive these days from Saudi Arabia. I think its about having leverage in the Middle East. And Saudi is the power in the Middle East. But then what happens if America cuts all ties with them, will they start to throw their weight around even more? Are the US holding the rein on them in relation to Iran’s nuclear programme (that they would attack if felt threatened)? When you delve down further I think its far to intricate to assume anything.

Hillary is corrupt and deserves to be booted out of the race.

@Joe Mc…….ISIS was there all along in one form or the other since IN 622 when Mohammed decided to get tough and torture,behead ,rape,enslave ,plunder,etc.,etc.,etc.,and to make all toe the line or else.

—” It was after the hijrah that Muhammad for the first time became not just a preacher of religious ideas, but a political and military leader. That was what occasioned his new “revelations” exhorting his followers to commit violence against unbelievers. Significantly, the Islamic calendar counts the hijrah, not Muhammad’s birth or the occasion of his first “revelation,” as the beginning of Islam, implying that Islam is not fully itself without a political and military component….”
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260019/hijrah-europe-robert-spencer

hi Patrick is it waking up time in Alberta?

Simon

At least I am not posting from Tel Aviv with multiple accounts like yourself.

@Jester VonDoom….dedicated posters never sleep so…………………

try making a comment about the rights of offenders or migrants Chlorines and see how balanced the response is

Ah here.

Dunno what you’ve been reading Chlorine but there has definitely been a shift.
I hate radical Islam as much as anyone, am anti immigration in its current form and I’m vocal about it…but it’s gotten bad here, it’s deteriorated into generalisations about all Muslims, exactly what daesh wanted to happen.

There are plenty of people who support the rights of genuine migrants Jester. I’ve no issue with economic migrants who enter Europe through the proper immigration channels or genuine refugees. So long as they integrate with our society and become contributing members of their host state they’re more than welcome.

It’s the economic migrants who try to exploit the asylum channel or those who refuse to integrate and create social issues that draw ire on this site.

This place has been taken over with the likes of the vvankers that one would find on Facebook pages like – “‘Irish” “Patriots”"..

Any article on here about people with different skin colour-and the comment sections become a place where you would have to put a clothes peg on your nose …

Just a couple of weeks ago on here- there were plenty of vvankers that were liking a vvankers comment for saying -’that it was immigrants that carried out the rape of that woman in Dublin …’

To be fair, the attitude towards women is appalling too

any mention of feminism and lads literally froth at the mouth

Irish people, great at being themselves…. Anonymously

Bush signing the U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement meant the U.S. had to pull out of Iraq by the end of 2011. If the U.S. were to retain troops there it would have to have been at the request of the Iraqi government.

But would they have rose to such prominence without Bush’s invasion? I highly doubt it.

Iraq was at least as opened up (arguably) by removing Saddams internal security structure

There would be no ISIS worth talking about if Bush had not invaded Iraq and destabilised the entire region thereby allowing ISIS the room to grow. Criticising Obama for pulling US troops out of Iraq on the basis that this allowed ISIS to grow is missing the point entirely. The real reason that ISIS exploded onto the world stage instead of remaining a bit player on the margins was down to the invasion of Iraq by Bush on a false premise (weapons of mass destruction) and the destabilisation of the region. This can be allied to the insistence by republican party hawks that the region could be democratised in the face of criticism to the contrary by the likes of France (the “cheese eating surrender monkeys”) who proved to be right. Republican party policies created the space and the means for ISIS to grow. But in typical fashion they blame Obama for the consequences of their own imperialist policies. They take responsibility for nothing.

The invasion of Iraq wasn’t under false pretenses per se:

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/bombshell-new-york-times-reports-wmds-found-iraq/

While Iraq didn’t have an active WMD programme at the time of the invasion, it still had large stockpiles of chemical weapons stored away in hidden caches and military bases. Ballistic missile components and chemical stockpiles which could be turned into chemical weapons were also found, which meant that Iraq had all the hardware it needed to kickstart a WMD programme with some active weapons ready to go.

Was the US wrong in saying that Iraq had an active WMD programme? Absolutely. Were they wrong in saying that Iraq had WMD’s? No and indeed plenty were found to justify that claim.

Jason that is some incredibly after-the-fact justification even if i was to agree it is not specious. further ‘political insider’ is overtly politically aligned

Give me one source which isn’t overtly politically aligned Jester and I will happily prove you wrong. Every source is politically aligned. The key is taking information from multiple points and sifting through the rubbish to get to the facts.

The Political Insider is biased but the facts remain. The US did in fact find WMD’s and the components to make them in Iraq. That’s undeniable fact. What they didn’t find is an active programme to make new WMD’s, merely the components needed to start one.

While you are correct in WMD`s being found Jason “per se”
the rest is absolute Bullchit Jason,
once again you manipulate the truth and omit key parts in order to make your story more plausible.
Here, this will debunk your articles play on words.
This is just a couple of excerpts from this rather excellent article.

Much of the conservative media has seized on the Times articles as long-awaited, sweet vindication of Bush’s case for war. According to Rush Limbaugh, it is now proven that “Saddam Hussein was doing and had done pretty much everything he was being accused of that justified that invasion.”

And the conservative glee is understandable: after all, Bush said Iraq had WMD, and here they are. Unfortunately for the right, however, they are just as wrong about this issue now as they were in 2003 — but for a peculiar, little-understood reason: Saddam Hussein was not trying to hide the chemical munitions found by the U.S. Just the opposite,

And another piece…

The chemical ordnance described in the Times series falls into two categories:

The first was munitions that had been sealed in bunkers at Iraq’s Al Muthanna weapons complex by U.N. inspectors during the 1990s. The inspectors destroyed enormous quantities of chemical weapons at Al Muthanna between 1992 and 1994, including 480,000 litres of live chemical weapons agent, but some could not be incinerated because it was too dangerous to move it. The U.N. and U.S. knew these chemical weapons were there, Saddam Hussein knew they knew, and there was no way for the Iraqi military to access them without the world immediately finding out. But after the invasion the U.S. failed to secure the site, and insurgents broke into the bunkers to retrieve some of the munitions. This is well-known to anyone who follows this issue closely. However, the U.S. media, as Duelfer puts it, periodically “rediscover this and get excited about it.” (The Intercept explained some aspects of the remaining Al Muthanna munitions last fall.)

By manipulating and omitting important parts, you make yourself a more dangerous liar than anything else.
Time and Time again i see this with you.

Sorry, i forgot the link for anyone interested in reading the full article..
https://theintercept.com/2015/04/10/twelve-years-later-u-s-media-still-cant-get-iraqi-wmd-story-right/

I’ve already read the article you posted. Shame you couldn’t post a link to it for people to make up their own minds.

This article here goes into detail about how the climate at the time made it very easy for the US to say that Iraq had an active WMD programme. Iraqi generals believed they had an active WMD programme, hell even Bernie Saunders admitted at the time that Iraq most likely had a WMD programme active:

http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2016/02/21/show-this-column-to-anyone-who-claims-bush-lied-about-wmds-in-iraq-n2122278

This article you refer to also fails to take note of Operation Avarice: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/16/world/cia-is-said-to-have-bought-and-destroyed-iraqi-chemical-weapons.html?_r=0

Note that the article specifies that these were Gulf War era weapons that were unaccounted for, meaning the bunkers you refer to would not have contained these weapons.

You accuse me of selective posting, however it seems you’re just behind on your information.

Err, i posted the link 11 minutes before you wrote this jason…

Bernie sanders admitted that they “MOST LIKELY”" ad a programme – see the words in capitals??

Your second link without even clicking on it reads,
Ths Cia is “SAID TO HAVE BOUGHT” – again not proven to be true .

Jason: The munitions that were found were not ‘hidden’ but were lost during the Iran-Iraq war in the 80s which even the CIA have concluded. The main case for war was not that Iraq had old weapons from pre-1991 but that they had a WMD program in operation in violation of UN security resolutions. This in addition to the false claims about Saddam and his deep connections with Al-Qaeda make it undeniable that the Bush administration misled the American public to support a brutal and illegal war.

To claim Obama is more responsible for the rise of ISIS than Bush is pure fantasy. US withdrawal in 2011 was proposed by the Bush administration in 2008 and was strongly supported by the Iraqi people who viewed the US as illegal occupiers. If they didn’t withdraw, another uprising would have been inevitable as the Iraqi people harboured a lot of hostility for the US military. The reason ISIS have been so successful in Iraq is because of the deep divisions between Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims which the US fomented when they invaded in 2003; the de-bathification of Iraq coupled with the installation of a deeply sectarian prime-minister provided the conditions for Al-Qaeda to exploit. It wasn’t the withdrawal of US troops that led to ISIS but the increasing extremism from the Al-Malaki government that alienated a significant number of Sunnis in Iraq. It was the Bush administration that put him there, not Obama. I would agree that Obama turned a blind eye to what Al-Malaki was doing because he wanted to forget about Iraq.

Charles Duelfer, head of the CIA’s definitive post-war investigation of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs, explained that “Saddam didn’t know he had it … This is stuff Iraqi leaders did not know was left lying around. It was not a militarily significant capability that they were, as a matter of national policy, hiding.”

https://theintercept.com/2015/04/10/twelve-years-later-u-s-media-still-cant-get-iraqi-wmd-story-right/?comments=1#comments

Are you that desperate Jebus? Operation Avarice was declassified and is fully proven to have taken place. The fact that you’re desperately trying to use wordplay to pretend that it didn’t happen is laughable.

There are multiple sources verifying that Operation Avarice took place.

“But defense officials said that the weapons were not considered likely to be dangerous because of their age, which they determined to be pre-1991.

Pentagon officials told NBC News that the munitions are the same kind of ordnance the U.S. military has been gathering in Iraq for the past several years, and “not the WMD we were looking for when we went in this time.”

http://www.salon.com/2014/10/15/no_bush_was_not_right_about_iraq_how_conservatives_misread_new_times_bombshell/

To suggest the presence of those munitions exonerates Bush for his lies is a complete distortion of that Times piece. You seem fond of mendacity, Jason.

Those Borak rockets you refer to contained Sarin. Who helped Saddam use chemical weapons against the Iranians in the 80s?

Wouldn’t have been your beloved US government, would it Jason?

Thank you Monty, very well said, I`m glad i am not the only one trying to sine a light through Jason

Jason I think they told everyone that there was an active program and as you say there wasn’t so they did start a war under false pretenses.

@Jason Culligan……….Hussein Obama’s dastardly mistake in recklessly running out of Iraq definitely gave ISIS a decisive boost…
…”ix.
ISIS is “the Islamist phoenix,” in the description of the oil and energy specialist, Loretta Napoleoni. It has arisen from the depredations of the Iraq War and the worsening conflict inside Syria following the “Arab Spring” uprising of 2011. The difference between al Qaeda and ISIS is that the former remained a network of jihadi warriors and the latter is a state in formation….”
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5956/isis-saudi-arabia-iran

Chlorine just accept it, you’re backing a loser. You really are, believe me.

Yeah, think of Hillary naked or something.

Trump has said this several times so who’s implying what?

While USA Today noted that Trump’s comment drew laughs from the crowd, Trump’s representative nonetheless felt the need to issue a statement after the episode aired to make absolutely sure that people knew The Donald was just joking:

[Donald Trump] was absolutely joking. He was making fun of himself for his tendency to date younger women. It’s a sense of humor that people don’t see [from him] all the time.”

http://www.snopes.com/donald-trump-date-daughter/

Chlorines, we get it was a joke. It is just a very disturbing joke to say on national television. Just plain creepy thing to say. There is no defence to it because it just is how feel about the suggestion whether a joke or not.

This one is worse https://youtu.be/zqE4hKIP4n0

the statement made by reagan’s daughter is well worth reading, she makes very good points even taking trump’s explanation/excuse at its height

Three lawsuits against him for sexual assault of a minor don’t seem to be getting much news… http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/third-woman-alleges-she-was-sexually-assaulted-donald-trump ..

5 times now the Clintons have escaped federal charges.

Dave, if new evidence comes to light after that ruling wouldn’t you agree that it’s grounds to re-open an investigation?

Without a doubt. If beware compelling evidence come out absolutely.

You should go to the gardai with this information and they will contact the fbi directly.

id hop a taxi to garda HQ immediately tbh before youre assassinated like that fellow who had couriered wikileaks info

He might be able to set up a Skype call to the fbi directly from Garda hq…

DT is barking mad…

It wasn’t their departure that caused it,it was their arrival

Read the comments on Hilary’s very own Facebook page.

She is reviled.

https://www.facebook.com/hillaryclinton/

Chlorines, how’s your source in Brooklyn?

Obama botched the withdrawal from Iraq totally. He gave them a time table for withdrawal to start with an then failed to negotiate a status of forces agreement to allow for any residual force to aid the transition this created a vacuum in Iraq. Not happy with that he and Hillary decided to depose Gaddafi and turn Libya into an unstable hell hole. Obama and Hillary are to blame for ISIS.

Her emails reveal she is truly wicked !
Can’t say I admire Trump though

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/

Dave its obvious to me where you are from and where your true loyalties lies. It isn’t America thats for sure!

In fact you hate the thought of Trump putting America first and making it great again.

Could you put a link to one of the truly wicked emails. They all seem fairly innocuous?

Those who blame the US invasion of Iraq for creating ISIS seem to struggle with the concept of linear time.

ISIS as an organisation first appeared in 1999. Their stated goal at the time was the overthrow of the Iraqi government then headed by Hussein and it’s replacement with an Islamic Caliphate. The US invasion in 2003 gave ISIS more room to grow than it would have otherwise had, but it was still nowhere near the size that it is now.

ISIS were growing until the 2007 troop surge which saw a massive increase in the number of US troops available to crack down on extremism. This kept them down until the US withdrawal, which saw ISIS branch into Syria (gaining a large amount of equipment and recruits), splitting from Al-Qaeda and launching an offensive into Iraq.

While Bush or Obama mightn`t have created them, they have definitely made the ground a lot more fertile for them to grow and grow, there is no doubt about that.

The fact that the United States has a long and torrid history of backing terrorist groups will surprise only those who watch the news and ignore history.
The CIA first aligned itself with extremist Islam during the Cold War era. Back then, America saw the world in rather simple terms: on one side, the Soviet Union and Third World nationalism, which America regarded as a Soviet tool; on the other side, Western nations and militant political Islam, which America considered an ally in the struggle against the Soviet Union.

Also Jason,
The 2003 American invasion and occupation of Iraq created the pre-conditions for radical Sunni groups, like ISIS, to take root. America, rather unwisely, destroyed Saddam Hussein’s secular state machinery and replaced it with a predominantly Shiite administration. The U.S. occupation caused vast unemployment in Sunni areas, by rejecting socialism and closing down factories in the naive hope that the magical hand of the free market would create jobs. Under the new U.S.-backed Shiite regime, working class Sunni’s lost hundreds of thousands of jobs

Upper class Sunni’s were systematically dispossessed of their assets and lost their political influence. Rather than promoting religious integration and unity, American policy in Iraq exacerbated sectarian divisions and created a fertile breading ground for Sunni discontent, from which Al Qaeda in Iraq took root.

BTW, This in`t my work, but i am taking excerpts from another article which perfectly explains what the hell is going on, and just how much of all this has been created by your pin up poster child of International terrorism – AKA the good old US of A

@Sam Hunt …………And all on the advice of her so very close friend and ‘confidante!’ Muslim Brotherhood connected-to-the-hilt Huma Amedin whose advice on Mid-East Policy was always sought as former State Sec. Hillary Clinton readily admitted.
There will be no more Muslim Brotherhood moles/confidantes in the White House with Donald Trump as President. You can be sure of that!

Patrick, you could at least propelled people’s names properly when you insult them. You do also love to omit that Huma Abedin is married to a Jewish man.

*try to spell (the irony isn’t lost on me)

This her Dave???
New emails show Huma scheming for Hillary

Another 296 pages of Hillary Clinton’s emails were released Tuesday — exposing key Clinton aides doing favors for billionaires and, on one occasion, leaving the then-secretary of state’s daily schedule in an unlocked hotel room.

The documents were released by Judicial Watch, which is suing to recover Clinton’s emails under Freedom of Information Act laws.

In an April 2009 email to Clinton’s State Department aides Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, President Clinton’s former body man, Doug Band, the founder of corporate consultant Teneo, urgently asked them to set up a meeting with an ambassador for a major donor to the Clinton Foundation.

http://nypost.com/2016/08/09/new-emails-show-huma-scheming-for-hillary/

Huma Abedin Partial Bio-Read and decide for yourselves……….
—”When Huma was two, the Abedin family relocated from Michigan to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. This move took place when Abdullah Omar Naseef, a major Muslim Brotherhood figure who served as vice president of Abdulaziz University (AU), recruited his former AU colleague, Syed Abedin, to work for the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA), a Saudi-based Islamic think tank that Naseef was preparing to launch. A number of years later, Naseef would develop close ties to Osama bin Laden and the terrorist group al Qaeda. Naseef also spent time (beginning in the early 1980s) as secretary-general of the Muslim World League, which, as journalist Andrew C. McCarthy points out, “has long been the Muslim Brotherhood’s principal vehicle for the international propagation of Islamic supremacist ideology.”

It is vital to note that IMMA’s “Muslim Minority Affairs” agenda was, and remains to this day, a calculated foreign policy of the Saudi Ministry of Religious Affairs, designed, as Andrew C. McCarthy explains, “to grow an unassimilated, aggressive population of Islamic supremacists who will gradually but dramatically alter the character of the West.” For details about this agenda, click here.—’
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/259805/huma-abedin-security-breach-hillary-still-hiding-frontpagemagcom

Motherof, yes, a former employee of Clintons asked a current employee to set up a meeting for someone else. I fail to see what the problem is. Just because it was asked for doesn’t mean it happened. Also since when are charities not allowed to meet donors?

@Dave O Keeffee… What insult? The evidence is overwhelming that Huma Abedin is well-conected to the Muslim Brotherhood.
—-”Abedin has the ability to leak highly sensitive state secrets; she is closely associated with her Muslim Brotherhood family; she even joined Clinton at an event with Saleha at Dar El-Hekma College in Saudi Arabia and another leader who appeared on the list of 63 as an associate of Saleha Abedin—Suheir Qureshi. Huma’s brother—Hassan Abedin—has also collaborated with an al-Qaeda godfather Omar Naseef and Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, two of the most influential terror supporters in the world.—”
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2012/07/04/walid-shoebat-tells-us-why-huma-abedin-daughter-of-a-muslim-brotherhood-member-would-marry-anthony-weiner-a-jew/

Patrick, so because her father was once employed by a guy that later may have had ties to bin laden she’s a risk? All the quotes are about somebody unrelated to her

President bush invading iraq in the first place and the Syrian civil war created Isis.And withdrawing from iraq was actually Obama keeping and election promise the Americans wanted out he took them out, be careful what you wish for I suppose.

I think it’s being audited

If trump is heading for a mental meltdown so am I and at least 40% of American voters. The rights of American and European people have been taken away in the space of a few years. They want too climate change supporting candidates, but failed to get it. That’s the fact. Hillary is a criminal, a security risk and has the blood of a lot of innocent people on her hands. Yet modern Irish see nothing wrong with her. We really are a pussy people