Antonio, you're neither as informed or well read as you pretend

Where have I 'pretended' to be informed or well-read, and what was the extent of that pretense?

This is not even a gotcha.

You might want to re-evaluate your news sources for purposefully deceiving you and leading you by the ear.

This, however, is very good advice. But I already take it for granted that any news source is purposely deceiving me. This does not mean that I have to follow the 'anti-establishment' line on everything though. They can be wrong too.

Here's the Obama speech about training & arming ISIL https://twitter.com/robertsepehr/status/1771369834225573915

1. I have no doubt that the US was in league with ISIS, at the very least tacitly. They were explicitly in league with Al Qaeda, admitted by Jake Sullivan as you well know.
2. This statement is very likely just misspeaking.
3. This has very little to do with the topic at hand.

According to the White House website, this is what came before:

Meanwhile, we continue to ramp up our training and support of local forces that are fighting ISIL on the ground. As I’ve said before, this aspect of our strategy was moving too slowly. But the fall of Ramadi has galvanized the Iraqi government. So, with the additional steps I ordered last month, we’re speeding up training of ISIL [Iraqi] forces, including volunteers from Sunni tribes in Anbar Province. src

It is highly unlikely, to put it mildly, that this was an actual 'admission'. Now, you could call it a Freudian slip, but I also doubt that the US was actually training ISIS forces.

I want to go back to the 1990's internet, where there was an IQ test simply to connect to the board.

Sadly, now you and your vastly superior intellect have to tolerate my meager capabilities.