Tennis Forum banner

101 - 120 of 305 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,968 Posts
Look, I do my best to assess your views as objectively as possible but sorry - you simply reiterating that there's lots of evidence doesn't mean squat. And the rest of your post is just strong opinions.

BTW Assad has used gas many times. I don't get the "why would he" tack some are taking. As if they have been privy to long and deep conversations with Assad and know how he thinks. Whatever the state of things has become, the war was started by Assad because he didn't think he could continue to hold power via political means.
After they are through with Syria it will be the leaders of Iran and Lebanon (the next ones on the list) that will "kill their own people." And as per usual the masses will fall for the western war propaganda machine and their no hair out of place, thoothpaste smile, smooth talking suits in the media.

It's mindboggling to me that people still accept the explanations of western officialdom. That they still don't get what the game is, although it's been biting them in the nose for over 15 years now.

Of course this latest chemical attack by Assad was a blatant false flag to provide the excuse to keep on bombing away in Syria. I predicted something like this happening on facebook and several other forums when Aleppo was liberated. I said at the time "The US/the west is scared shitless at the idea of peace breaking out in Syria. Expect a false flag to give them the excuse to keep it going."

Any detective will tell you that a crime needs a motive. That's the first question he will ask himself, "Who benefits from the crime?" Assad was in a strong position pre-"chemical attack." He (the Syrian army and Russia) had pushed back isis/al-qaida (which in the western narrative morph into 'moderate rebels' depending on the story the're trying to sell). He had the support of Putin, and Trump, who changes his narrative every five minutes seemed to be ok with him too. In the light of all that it makes no sense (none whatsoever) for Assad to do this. He had nothing to gain.

But who did have something to gain? Isis, al-qaida, the "moderate rebels" and the imperialist/capitalist west that is eager to continue this madness. About two weeks before the "chemical attack" terrorists kidnapped over 200 civilians from two Syrian villages. The victims of the "chemical attack" were people from these 200. You ask for evidence. I'm not in the habit of bookmarking everything I read or watch, and I'm not going to waste my precious time on trying to find back what I already know myself. Do your own research and you will find.

And another thing. Sarin gass is said to be deadly seconds after you come into contact with it. Yet the "rescue workers" were wearing no protective clothing, no gass masks, etc. But it's not necessary. It's obvious by now that the masses will always believe the official line as long as the BBC or CNN is telling it to them.

I hadn't intended to post something like this because I know it will be dismissed and laughed away anyway, so what's the point? You are one of the few with a mind of his/her own. If even people like you buy the official line there's no point in resisting. The military-Industrial complex has won. Congrats to them. They will be our downfall, but that's down to people's own "Yes sir! No sir! Anything you say sir!" mentality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35,934 Posts
I hadn't intended to post something like this because I know it will be dismissed and laughed away anyway, so what's the point? You are one of the few with a mind of his/her own. If even people like you buy the official line there's no point in resisting. The military-Industrial complex has won. Congrats to them. They will be our downfall, but that's down to people's own "Yes sir! No sir! Anything you say sir!" mentality.
As I see it, you and @bruce goose continue to make a grievous error. That error is seeming to think that having an open-mind means one will accept the view that you both prefer. It doesn't.

I don't buy the official line. I also don't buy the line you and he offer either. I don't buy any line. What I do is read a variety of sources, none of which IMO have all the facts, and try and extrapolate as best I can what seems closest to actuality. I emphasized seems because of course my conclusions about the situation could be incorrect. And even if they are correct, they're incomplete.

But you two seem to have lost that "could be incorrect/incomplete version" aspect. IOW you are not at the moment having an open-mind. You hold to the versions you deem accurate as (or even more) strongly than do those people who do accept whatever the official story is.

To emphasize the point - in these types of issues once you've convinced yourself that the way you see it is the entirely correct way and that those who see it otherwise are duped fools - you are as suckered as they are. An open-mind means accepting and being okay with the fact that you do not know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #104
As I see it, you and @bruce goose continue to make a grievous error. That error is seeming to think that having an open-mind means one will accept the view that you both prefer. It doesn't.
But you're dead wrong on that point because I'm simply disagreeing with your stance, NOT telling you to shut up or go away. While I can't speak for Chrissie-fan, my primary point is that you reacted with shock(more specifically, with an :eek: emoticon) when I suggested that the US gov't/intelligence cadre was helping ISIS. In return, I offered you proof that the US has ADMITTED to supporting "moderate rebels", a VERY dubious claim unless someone is naive enough to believe that US agents just blindly trusted--funding and arming--in the good nature of militants without checking their background at all. Then we have the "co-incidence" that ISIS always shows up(WITH UK or US weaponry) whenever there's a military maneuever against Assad. Then I informed you of how reporter Marwa Osman relates MANY interviews with Syrian citizens that their only sighting of White Helmets was when they were HELPING Daesh forces. Perhaps Chrissie-fan suspects, as I do, that you simply haven't researched into these issues as deeply as he and I have(You might be busy with work and/or studies and don't always have time to look into the Middle East).That's NOT intended to shut you up or deny you the right to express yourself.

As for Yemen, the reportage has been an absolute joke; they had a president, Abdullah Saleh, who served for over 30 years and made himself filthy rich in similar fashion to what the Shah of Iran did. When he was ousted by the people, the UN resolution held an election WITH ONE CANDIDATE, the vice-president(named Hadi) who served at the end of Saleh's regime and enriched himself by taking bribes from the Saudis. Near the end of Saleh's run, the Yemeni congress tried to outlaw marriage between adults and children, but the measure was undercut by the Saudi-backed, Muslim Brotherhood-led opposition party that condones grown men having preteen wives and girlfriends so, naturally, the Saudi-supported sex-slave trade only flourished. Now, there are many stooges in the corporate mainstream media who pretend that it was "terrorists" who ousted the puppet Hadi and sent him on his way to Riyadh where he belongs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35,934 Posts
But you're dead wrong on that point because I'm simply disagreeing with your stance, NOT telling you to shut up or go away. While I can't speak for Chrissie-fan, my primary point is that you reacted with shock(more specifically, with an :eek: emoticon) when I suggested that the US gov't/intelligence cadre was helping ISIS.
:eek: I'm always perplexed when I post one thing and the response seems to reference something else. I don't think nor do I state anything near to either of you two wanting me to "shut and go away." Though some other posters do. :lol: But yeah that never even crossed my mind so I don't get how you got on that tack.

My post was about what is meant by the term "open-minded". My point is that it doesn't mean "strongly believe all non-official info" any more than it means "strongly believe all official info." It means "willing to look at and assess without becoming emotionally or even logically attached to one prevailing viewpoint."

Yes, I do see the claim that the US is training and funding Daesh as silly. And no, you have not provided any strong evidence much less proof. Mentioning the well-known, very public and (I think) Congress approved funding of rebel factions as "evidence" makes the claim even less credible. It's as if you're claiming that all the rebel factions in Syria are Daesh. And that the US government knows that and is still publicly funding them. Sorry but to me that's ridiculous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #106
:eek: I'm always perplexed when I post one thing and the response seems to reference something else. I don't think nor do I state anything near to either of you two wanting me to "shut and go away." Though some other posters do. :lol: But yeah that never even crossed my mind so I don't get how you got on that tack.

My post was about what is meant by the term "open-minded". My point is that it doesn't mean "strongly believe all non-official info" any more than it means "strongly believe all official info." It means "willing to look at and assess without becoming emotionally or even logically attached to one prevailing viewpoint."

Yes, I do see the claim that the US is training and funding Daesh as silly. And no, you have not provided any strong evidence much less proof. Mentioning the well-known, very public and (I think) Congress approved funding of rebel factions as "evidence" makes the claim even less credible. It's as if you're claiming that all the rebel factions in Syria are Daesh. And that the US government knows that and is still publicly funding them. Sorry but to me that's ridiculous.
Well, pov, I think your standard of proof is ridiculous; no, I don't have an audio clip of a phone call between Donald Trump and a Daesh field officer in which Donald offers undying support. So, TECHNICALLY, you're right: There's absolutely zero, LEGAL proof that the US, UK or KSA is doing anything remotely dishonest in the Middle East. As long as you maintain THAT type of standard, you'll always be able to maintain your claims......And, no, you didn't claim, verbatim, that anyone was trying to shut you up, yet accusing people of not being open minded is, IMO, tantamount to that, as it implies that someone is only tolerant of certain viewpoints and wishes to silence those who aren't in line with those views. You're playing games with semantics there.

There are lots and lots of credible, respected reporters in the alternative media--along with average citizens--such as David Icke, Max Igan, Richie Allen, Meria Heller, Catherine Shakdam, Marwa Osman, Chris Passio, etc. who feel that there is ABUNDANT circumstantial evidence to accuse the Coalition of wrongdoing. Of course, just because they are widely respected doesn't mean that they're incapable of being wrong or even having a ridiculous viewpoint. However, after analyzing the situation in Yemen and Syria, I'm happy to be in such "ridiculous" company in this case:cool:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,968 Posts
As I see it, you and @bruce goose continue to make a grievous error. That error is seeming to think that having an open-mind means one will accept the view that you both prefer. It doesn't.

I don't buy the official line. I also don't buy the line you and he offer either. I don't buy any line. What I do is read a variety of sources, none of which IMO have all the facts, and try and extrapolate as best I can what seems closest to actuality. I emphasized seems because of course my conclusions about the situation could be incorrect. And even if they are correct, they're incomplete.

But you two seem to have lost that "could be incorrect/incomplete version" aspect. IOW you are not at the moment having an open-mind. You hold to the versions you deem accurate as (or even more) strongly than do those people who do accept whatever the official story is.

To emphasize the point - in these types of issues once you've convinced yourself that the way you see it is the entirely correct way and that those who see it otherwise are duped fools - you are as suckered as they are. An open-mind means accepting and being okay with the fact that you do not know.
Bruce and me have our differences - and significant differences at that, in terms of the socio-political, spiritual and temperament. But we get along well despite those differences. He's more motivated than me in trying to convince others than I am, I must admit.

But you are correct in that I believe that the way I see it is how it is. Most likely not down to the very last detail, but definitely where the main narrative is concerned. But what I like about you is that you indeed have a mind of your own. You don't let your sense of reality be dictated by anyone else, and I can respect that. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #108
But you are correct in that I believe that the way I see it is how it is. Most likely not down to the very last detail, but definitely where the main narrative is concerned. But what I like about you is that you indeed have a mind of your own.
And, contrary to "pov" 's false assumption, I'm willing to listen to contrary viewpoints, but I'd at least like to hear that there's some sound basis for any opinion, rather than 'well, that's just what I believe. ' I have no idea how patriotic "pov" is, or isn't, at heart, but it might be hard for him/her to be objective as an American citizen. However, if you found some educated foreigners who neither liked nor despised the US(and the 2nd criterion would be hard to meet nowadays;)), I think that very,very, VERY few of them would look at all of the evidence and find it co-incidental that al-Qaeda and Daesh pretty much ALWAYS benefit from US policy in the Middle East.

Let me give you a Mexican, analogous situation: We have several youth gangs in larger cities like mine, so there's no neat, orderly battle pitting each of two sides against the other. Let's say that two separate gang leaders were almost simultaneously motivated to attack a third gang's territory. If, while advancing, each gang saw their other enemy in close proximity, they would suddenly abandon their earlier plans and attack the enemy who was in plain sight. The mortal enemies wouldn't "forget their differences" and decide to work together for a common cause:rolleyes:.

In that same sense, the US government's explanation is insultingly asinine; i.e., that al-Qaeda forces just "snuck into the territory" in Yemen while Coalition troops were busy attacking, so they just happened to advance almost side by side against the Yemeni forces:rolleyes:...or at least within firing range of each other. We're lucky that enough photogs were on the scene to expose that sham and force that knee-jerk,absurd alibi out of the US regime. What's FAR more likely is that the al-Qaeda troops and commander were overanxious and attacked too early, thus undermining the BS pretext and propaganda that al-Qaeda and Daesh are the #1 enemies of Western democracy. Every once in a while, we get a report from the MSM that an al-Qaeda or ISIS sniper took out a Coalition soldier, but we never see any proof of damaging attacks on either of the "terrorist mastermind" groups...except by the Russians, of course. Assuming that the MSM reports aren't complete hoaxes(which would be generous leeway on our part:rolleyes:), it's no setback at all for the imperialist nations to sacrifice one of their soldiers on rare occasions to maintain the grand sham. After the deliberate, calculated fraud with phony WMDs in Iraq(amongst other massive lies), no one with an ounce of common sense would take the Americans or Brits at their word in re Houthi "terrorists" OR the alleged sarin bombing in Syria. They owe us concrete proof on THOSE accusations
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #109
For a couple of weeks now, I've been thinking about delving into the roots of the al-Qaeda sex-slave trade(in Yemen AND other countries). To understand a problem in detail, it's important to not only know the WHATs but also the WHYs that help explain how everything originated. First of all, most of us can probably agree that the percentage of sick bastards who grasp that something is wrong--yet just don't give a shit and do it anyway--is relatively small(likewise, the number of crazed people who have no clear concept whatsoever of right and wrong). For the sake of academic discussion, let's also eliminate older boys who prey upon young girls--and that includes 18- and 19-year-olds who, technically, are adults yet only have the mentality of juvenile boys. Because they lack maturity(for various reasons), it's easy to see why they engage in such conduct. Let's list some of the fundamental causes amongst adults:

1.Many people have heard the jokes about farm girls(or girls in other rural communities) having to run from their horny fathers and brothers. Well, for MANY girls, this is no joke but rather a sad reality, and that huge socio-economic disparity between urban/suburban life and rural life is significant in many predominantly-Muslim nations. These warped 'traditions' existed for centuries before Islam became entrenched as the national religion there.

Education is no magic solution, either, if we're talking about government-backed, public education: In the US, for example, government-funded Planned Parenthood clinics--located RIGHT NEXT TO schools--encourage junior high school students to experiment with sadomasochism involving whips and chains, and they even tell elementary-school kids that it's okay to try sexual intercourse without ever talking with their parents.

2.The life of Muhammad, who is considered as a man sent by their god and whose conduct is seen as a model for Muslims to imitate. Though it's basically impossible to determine whether he had sex with his wife Aisha(one of seven) when she was a young girl OR in her late teens, it's a FACT that many Muslims BELIEVE Aisha was just a girl...and that it was okay because, supposedly, Muhammad was their god's Chosen One. In my personal opinion, religion is no excuse for making morally-questionable decisions. If a man needed to have seven wives to sleep with, then JUST MAYBE he wasn't so holy and isn't worth following;), but that's a choice that each individual has to make within him/herself. In the end, religious simple-mindedness contributes to sexual abuse: If my god's chosen one did it, then it's all right for ME to do it.

3. Greed. Tons of money is made by selling sex slaves and, obviously, the ones at the top benefit the most, financially. Selling harem girls existed long before Islam, and you coud argue that the religious system only INCREASED the slave trade rather than slowing it down. The men with the most money and power can afford to buy the most marketable slave girls and young, virgin boys. Anyone with half a brain can figure out that many government officials are CLIENTS, but even the ones who don't directly participate can have their complicit silence bought off.

4. Wahabbism. Anyone who's halfway motivated can do a google search on this apostate version of Islam that was invented in Saudi Arabia by some sick POS(whose name slips my mind at the moment) back in the 19th century. In simpler terms, Wahabbism does for Muslims what Catholicism did for Crusaders a few centuries back. Essentially, you receive an indulgence to commit otherwise-sinful acts as long as you are a warrior for God(or, in this case, "Allah"). You can guess what an attractive offer it is for slimebags(i.e., al-Qaeda recruits) to do whatever they want with blessing from a priest(or imam).

5. A complicit upper ranks of the media. Only the wealthiest, elite families own the top media agencies, and most all of those families have Masonic ties. Satanism is the overwhelming religion of freemasonry, and satanic rituals involve the sexual abuse of children or virgin women. That being the case, how eager will a media agency owner be to condemn something that he, himself, regularly indulges in? It's a case of "out of sight, out of mind": Because the average citizen rarely sees reports of the sexual abuses that occur in Saudi Arabia and its proxy states, they don't have a chance to get outraged at their government aligning with such a vile regime
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #110
Yemen ? the New Graveyard Where Empires Come to Die | New Eastern Outlook

Potentially GREAT news in the article above if, in fact, the Saudis are truly looking for an escape route from their imperialist war. Despite their violent religious rhetoric and strong support for terrorism, the Saudis have always been wussies when it came to head-to-head fighting with even slightly level odds. They, and the Israelis, helped push the Americans to oust Saddam Hussein partly because the Saudis feared that Saddam's troops would come marching in and bitch-slap them all the way to the Riyadh capital. There are also reports that the KSA--despite the vast wealth they've accumulated from petroleum--are in serious financial trouble due to rampant corruption and abysmal budget management, and that certainly doesn't boost their war effort.

If I had to guess, one of the stipulations to the truce referred to in the article would be withdrawal with at least a shred of dignity for the Saudis. They finally found an iota of courage to fight a conventional battle instead of sending in terrorist thugs to infiltrate another nation or asking the Americans and/or Brits to conquer on their behalf....They chose a target with far inferior economic resources and military weaponry....They got tons of support from Western aerial bombardment, not to mention arms and advisors....They were given the hands-off treatment from the chickenshit mainstream media and UN, despite a multitude of human rights violations......and they STILL haven't been able to win:lol:.

It reminds me of History class when I read about how some of the foreign press mocked Mussolini when he had to invade Ethiopia...because he couldn't find anyone else who wasn't capable of stomping a mud-hole in the Italian army's ass. Well, maybe the Saudis are still searching for their Ethiopia;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #111
Reinventing Reality: Saudi Arabia Says It Did Not Declare War on Yemen - American Herald Tribune

Good article on how the Saudis(KSA) invent their own alternate version of reality whenever their puppet diplomatic reps talk to the Western media, and it sort of suggests that the mainstream is complicit for pretending that those KSA press statements have even a shred of legitimacy.

KSA asswipes tell the West that "Houthi rebels" are causing the starvation problems in Yemen...as if they would willfully cut off their very own food supply:rolleyes: or blatantly contribute to the starvation of thousands of their countrymen while fighting for the freedom of that country. It would be no sweat whatsoever for neutral humanitarian aid workers to negotiate a delivery plan with Yemen's resistance fighters w/o compromising rebel positions, yet that is currently virtually impossible because KSA and Coalition forces are blockading Yemen and trying to prevent ANY aid from entering

.....And the cowardly mainstream media just regurgitates the KSA's lame 'Houthi rebels' alibi to justify the Saudi invasion and human rights violations. It's not much different from the BS spewed out by the US State Dept. that the KSA has merely "failed to monitor" the sex-slavery trade that goes on openly in their street markets, when the reality of its Wahabbist teachings shows that it CONDONES and APPROVES of that black market......You can imagine for yourselves how many Saudi politicians and police officials are clients of that trade and would never want to see it ended
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #112
A country ?on its knees?: Cholera takes hold in war-weary Yemen | Shafaqna English

First, a disclaimer: I don't have any concrete proof of a planned cholera outbreak by Coalition forces in Yemen, nor do I have adequate circumstantial forensic evidence at this point. What we DO have is an interested party whose CIA has most definitely studied, rehearsed and even applied controlled outbreaks on previous occasions. With THAT in mind, we certainly can't write off the possibility that history is repeating itself, yet the article linked above takes an academically neutral stance.

Though ex-prisoners have described al-Qaeda members as--overwhelmingly--dim-witted punks who just follow orders from whoever is their appointed master, I hope that at least one of those losers wanders over here when he finishes masturbating at his favorite porn site. If the aforementioned scumbag has the intellect to comprehend English(though most are likely illiterate in even their native tongues), he can share my message with his fellow lowlifes. That is, despite the flattering portrayal from the UK/US media of al-Qaeda as fearless soldiers who fight to the death, I am quite UNimpressed with their results whenever they face off with anyone who's armed and has the will to fight back, such as the Yemeni Resistance. Al-Qaeda is pretty tough when launching surprise attacks on women and children:rolleyes:, but they turn tail and run like cowards at the first bitch-slap they receive from anyone with the backbone for face-to-face battle.......All of the US weapons that miraculously jump into their hands;););)...not to mention the Coalition blockade to keep vital supplies out of Yemen...and let's not forget the aggressive Western-led air bombing campaign......haven't been enough to win the war for these third-rate wannabe soldiers. So, perhaps, they went back to their not-so-secret buddies in the Western intelligence agency ranks and pleaded for more help...and GOT it in the form of a contrived cholera epidemic. We'll see what evidence comes forth in the near future
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #113
A country ?on its knees?: Cholera takes hold in war-weary Yemen | Shafaqna English

First, a disclaimer: I don't have any concrete proof of a planned cholera outbreak by Coalition forces in Yemen, nor do I have adequate circumstantial forensic evidence at this point. What we DO have is an interested party whose CIA has most definitely studied, rehearsed and even applied controlled outbreaks on previous occasions. With THAT in mind, we certainly can't write off the possibility that history is repeating itself, yet the article linked above takes an academically neutral stance.

Though ex-prisoners have described al-Qaeda members as--overwhelmingly--dim-witted punks who just follow orders from whoever is their appointed master, I hope that at least one of those losers wanders over here when he finishes masturbating at his favorite porn site. If the aforementioned scumbag has the intellect to comprehend English(though most are likely illiterate in even their native tongues), he can share my message with his fellow lowlifes. That is, despite the flattering portrayal from the UK/US media of al-Qaeda as fearless soldiers who fight to the death, I am quite UNimpressed with their results whenever they face off with anyone who's armed and has the will to fight back, such as the Yemeni Resistance. Al-Qaeda is pretty tough when launching surprise attacks on women and children:rolleyes:, but they turn tail and run like cowards at the first bitch-slap they receive from anyone with the backbone for face-to-face battle.......All of the US weapons that miraculously jump into their hands;););)...not to mention the Coalition blockade to keep vital supplies out of Yemen...and let's not forget the aggressive Western-led air bombing campaign......haven't been enough to win the war for these third-rate wannabe soldiers. So, perhaps, they went back to their not-so-secret buddies in the Western intelligence agency ranks and pleaded for more help...and GOT it in the form of a contrived cholera epidemic. We'll see what evidence comes forth in the near future
Update: I just heard from a news junkie who lives in the US, and he says that he hasn't heard one single report about the cholera epidemic. That doesn't mean that there are absolutely zero reports amongst the US media, but the news damned sure isn't widespread. You'd think--with all of the US soldiers who are dragged into this Middle Eastern mess--that the media would find the need to alert familymembers. Then again, what else would you expect from gutless cowards who invariably toe the party line:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #114
https://www.gofundme.com/yemenfund

Though I've never been a huge fan of Islam, in general, it's clear that it has millions of followers who neither wish nor DO harm to others. For those individuals, it must be disheartening to see Yemenis suffer from starvation(or come to the doorstep of it) on the first day of their Ramadan holiday.

For those interested in charitable help(or know others who might be), the link at the top connects to a group that has had SOME degree of success, albeit limited, in spite of the insane, inhumane blockade engineered by the Western allies of the despicable Riyadh regime...and mostly ignored by the utter cowards in the mainstream media. When starvation is at hand, even feeding a few desperate souls is a small victory worth rejoicing in...though we can never lose sight of the less fortunate who still haven't been reached. A victory for Yemen in this vile war of Saudi imperialism would truly be a win for 'the little guy'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,573 Posts
Hi bruce goose. Are you Arab Mexican? From where this profound interest in Middle East?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #116
Hi bruce goose. Are you Arab Mexican? From where this profound interest in Middle East?
No Arabic familial ties but several good friends from the Middle East
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #117
https://sputniknews.com/radio_trendstorm/201705271054014913-trump-salman-alliance-all-eyes-on-yemen/

Anyone interested in the truth has the right to ask how the UK and US could dare posture as defenders of democracy while offfering blanket support for a despicable regime that represents the polar opposite of freedom and respect for human rights. Though there are several selfish motives behind that, another one is mentioned in the article above. That is, despite being a funder, creator and promoter of both terrorism and also an extreme, apostate version of Islam called Wahabbism, the KSA gets carte-blanche to do their vile deeds because they offer the UK and US a sort of buffer and a willing spy against Iran.

This means that almost unspeakable acts against women and the merchandising of children as sexual exports doesn't even get the 'kid gloves' treatment from the cowardly Western mainstream media; it's more like the 'patty-cake oven-mitt treatment':rolleyes:. Unfortunately for Yemen, they were chosen as a reward for Saudi complicity in the asinine demonization and attempted overthrow of Iran.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Silent Bird

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #119
Much was/is made--rightfully so--of the brutality of the Axis powers during WW2, but Wahabbism takes the vileness several steps further because that warped sect's temples are spreading all over the world, with the outwardly legitimacy of supposedly being endorsed by an all-wise god. Just as Chinese children are taught to cheer the videotapes of the crushing of human bodies in Tiananmen Square...and just as German youth were taught to laugh at the sight of an 80-year-old Jewish shoecobbler being kicked to death in the street...Wahabbist disciples are indoctrinated that they're ENTITLED to rape virgins--including elementary-school-aged children--or indiscriminately murder any alleged infidels because it is their reward for 'fighting for the holy cause'.

Yemen #800DaysOfWar - when resisting oppression becomes an exercise of sovereignty | HuffPost

These bona fide terrorists(most notably al-Qaeda) are unleashed by the Saudis against any perceived enemy of the UK or US(i.e., any president who doesn't completely kiss their asses)...who then have the audacity to turn around and accuse the VICTIMS of sponsoring terrorism. However, thankfully, the Yemenis have refused to give in, and they have even made significant inroads onto Saudi soil. Sometimes, it's beneficial to look back at the memorable moments in an important struggle, and the article above puts into perspective the 800 days of war in Yemen this past Monday marked.Hopefully, by this time next year, we'll be able to look back on the moment when the Saudi bully/cowards finally surrendered:cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,255 Posts
Discussion Starter #120
Normally, old habits are hard to break; for example, drug addicts often relapse on several occasions before they can finally clean up for good. However, this week has seen a historically fast rehabilitation that belongs in Guiness, as Qatar went from being condemned as a major sponsor of terrorism, by the Trump regime, to receiving billions of dollars in US support only a few days later. WOW! They must have done an amazing job of convincing Trump & crew that they've gone on the straight & narrow:facepalm:

It's hard not to puke at the phony, self-righteous posturing of the US MSM or the BBC but--if anyone here can stomach that--I'd like to know if there have been ANY pieces, even ONE, on this appallingly shallow flip-flop. I also wonder if anyone in the MSM has challenged the asinine, self-serving accusation that Iran is supposedly a leader in worldwide terrorism...when you have to do an exhaustive search to find one single proven terrorist with Irani roots. In a bit of sick, twisted irony, the nations that HAVE well-established links to terrorism are practically bosom buddies with the US and UK, and their thugs miraculously find easy access to American and/or British weaponry...not to mention that they get entrenched pretty much 100% of the time whenever the US military has an incursion in whichever land. As Trump is utterly convinced of the stupidity of his populace, he is expected to name three new 'terrorist masterminds' next week. They are reported to be: Gilligan, Captain Kangaroo and the Geico Insurance gecko.

A senior Qatari official: ?We hosted Taliban on US request? | Shafaqna English
Now that the Qatar gov't. is on the US' Good Guys List, the article above which cites a senior Qatari official has even higher credibility. For those who were unaware, the Taliban committed a cardinal sin against the CIA at the beginning of the century: They refused to share any of their heroin supply or profits with CIA drug-runners, as that is the standard which determines which drug lords are left alone and which ones are targeted in the "War on Drugs". Once the Taliban was deposed in Afghanistan, they must have learnt from their thug brethren how simple it is to get along with the US gov't. and intelligence community by just co-operating with their imperialistic aims. The 2013 meetings mentioned in the article were likely part of that new lovefest:rolleyes:
 
101 - 120 of 305 Posts
Top