World Politics

[rhubroma]

Re: Re:

The sheik Nimr al-Nimr, sciite opposition leader of Saudi Arabia, was decapitated along with 46 others for supposedly inciting "sectarian violence." A noted opposer to the majority sunni monarchy, al-Nimr's death has triggered a vehement reaction from Iran, which said the Saudi monarchy shall pay dearly for his execution.

Saudi Arabia plays the double-handed game of being a US ally and sustainer of the jihadists.The rebel Houthi sciites of Yemen, the sciite Supreme Council of Lebenon and the Lebanese sciite Hezbollah movement, Iran's ally, have unanimously condemned the Saudi regime, adding that they retain "the USA and its allies" to be "responsible" for the executions, because they "cover the crimes of the Saudi Kingdom against its own people and those of the region." Oil can certainly permit anything, but I'm wondering what the US and Israeli reaction is to these facts.

The biggest mass execution in 35 years...the Saudis, you say? Our biggest and absolute (word used advisedly) bestest Arab good buddies, a regional pillar of strength and stability....nothing to see here, move along.

In fact, I find no US reports. Complete silence. At any rate, the level of incivility is compounded by a primordial hatred between Sciites and Sunni. Then you have the disastrous US policy in the region (dividing according to preference the "lambs" from the "wolves") that won't allow for a resolution to the rebus, if there is one.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/02/sheikh-nimr-al-nimr-shia-cleric-thorn-saudi-regime-side

http://www.theguardian.com/world/li...-condemns-saudi-execution-of-shia-cleric-live

 

[Amsterhammer]

Footage uploaded on Twitter showed angry Iranian protesters pillaging the ground floor of the Saudi embassy, tearing apart furniture, flags, and documents. It was then engulfed in one big blaze, seemingly after the angry mob, outraged over the Saudi execution of prominent Shiite cleric Sheikh al-Nimr, threw Molotov cocktails at the building.

https://www.rt.com/news/327755-saudi-embassy-iran-protest/

 

[rhubroma]

The anatomy of a disaster. To begin Saudi Arabia is involved in two wars right now. The first war is against ISIS. The Saudis and the Turks lead a coalition with Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Barein (that is the other states of the Arabian peninsula) against the Caliphate. This would appear to be particularly important, given that it means Sunnis against Sunnis of the Caliphate in Iraq and Syria, were it not for the fact that wealthy Saudis close to the regime are known to be financial backers of the same terrorist organization which the Arabian Kingdoms are supposedly combating. Naturally they are sworn enemies of Assad and thus of Putin and Sciite Iran (who, though, being both against ISIS, result as their comrades!). All are allies of the Great Satan America, however (but not Putin or Iran - well, sort of).

Second war: the one against Yemen. Here last March sciite rebels, called the Houthi, toppled the Sunni regime, resettling Sana'a and dividing the country in two. The Houthi are financed by Teheran. The Saudis are bombing them with bombs bought from the Pentagon. The Houthi, though, are enemies of the Caliphate, as is the Lebonese Hezbollah, which, however, is the sworn enemy of Israel and thus the US. We are in any case dealing with a generalized war between Sunnis and Sciites.

Now the fact that the Saudi's buy the bombs for this war from the US adds another element of confusion to the whole shebang. Since at the same time they are also fighting a petrol war against America by maintaing high production, which keeps crude costs low enough to debilitate the market for US oil gotten from more costly fracking. This also strikes at the arch enemies of Moscow and Teheran, who are thus uselessly in a struggle with Saudi Arabia against the Caliphate.

There is a last element that may be working behind the scenes here: the Saudi royal family struggle for the succession. The king of Saudi Arabia is Salman, who reached the throne last January and who turned 80 on 31 December. There are two heirs to the throne: Mohamed Bin Nayef, the primary heir and the king's 56 year-old nephew and Minister of Domestic Affairs. The second is the king's youngest son, the 30 year-old Mohamed Bin Salman, Secretary of Defense who is responsible for Saudi youth policy (a huge position in a nation in which one of two citizens is less than 30 years old). Bin Salman has been the catalyst in forming the anti-ISIS coalition, who thus treated with the powerful in Washington and Moscow, the latter presupposing a more cordial position toward Teheran. It could be, therefore, that the decapitation of the influential Sciite and enemy to the Sunni Saudi monarchy, Nimr al-Nimr, and the consequent worsening of relations with the ayatollahs has been Nayef's response to the pseudo-modernist positon of Bin Salman. In other words, everything suggests that an internal struggle for power is taking place at Riad. The West dreads this, because such would provide a most fertile ground for the jihadists - other than an Arab Springtime.

However you look at it, it is hard to estrange religion from the sectarian warfare: no matter what political and economic motives add fuel to its fire.

 

[python]

i dont have any sympathy for the saudi kingdom nor for their medieval ways, but burning the embassy in tehran in my opinion is crossing the diplomatic red line. a host country responsible for the security of foreign envoys should be able to prevent the mob excesses no matter the underlying events.

the alternative is too frightening to contemplate with the iranian embassies around the world being torched by the sunni mobsters. what then ? mass executions of diplomats ? i dont think the middle east extremism needs more idiocy to feed on !

iran has a point. perhaps many points to score, including over a thousand iranian pilgrims lives lost recently. the range of responses should be divorced from the street.

one may include a typical persian diplomacy skills aimed at exploiting the widening us-saudi rift which is now in the open...

 

[blutto]

Re:

The anatomy of a disaster. To begin Saudi Arabia is involved in two wars right now. The first war is against ISIS. The Saudis and the Turks lead a coalition with Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Barein (that is the other states of the Arabian peninsula) against the Caliphate. This would appear to be particularly important, given that it means Sunnis against Sunnis of the Caliphate in Iraq and Syria, were it not for the fact that wealthy Saudis close to the regime are known to be financial backers of the same terrorist organization which the Arabian Kingdoms are supposedly combating. Naturally they are sworn enemies of Assad and thus of Putin and Sciite Iran (who, though, being both against ISIS, result as their comrades!). All are allies of the Great Satan America, however (but not Putin or Iran - well, sort of).

Second war: the one against Yemen. Here last March sciite rebels, called the Houthi, toppled the Sunni regime, resettling Sana'a and dividing the country in two. The Houthi are financed by Teheran. The Saudis are bombing them with bombs bought from the Pentagon. The Houthi, though, are enemies of the Caliphate, as is the Lebonese Hezbollah, which, however, is the sworn enemy of Israel and thus the US. We are in any case dealing with a generalized war between Sunnis and Sciites.

Now the fact that the Saudi's buy the bombs for this war from the US adds another element of confusion to the whole shebang. Since at the same time they are also fighting a petrol war against America by maintaing high production, which keeps crude costs low enough to debilitate the market for US oil gotten from more costly fracking. This also strikes at the arch enemies of Moscow and Teheran, who are thus uselessly in a struggle with Saudi Arabia against the Caliphate.

There is a last element that may be working behind the scenes here: the Saudi royal family struggle for the succession. The king of Saudi Arabia is Salman, who reached the throne last January and who turned 80 on 31 December. There are two heirs to the throne: Mohamed Bin Nayef, the primary heir and the king's 56 year-old nephew and Minister of Domestic Affairs. The second is the king's youngest son, the 30 year-old Mohamed Bin Salman, Secretary of Defense who is responsible for Saudi youth policy (a huge position in a nation in which one of two citizens is less than 30 years old). Bin Salman has been the catalyst in forming the anti-ISIS coalition, who thus treated with the powerful in Washington and Moscow, the latter presupposing a more cordial position toward Teheran. It could be, therefore, that the decapitation of the influential Sciite and enemy to the Sunni Saudi monarchy, Nimr al-Nimr, and the consequent worsening of relations with the ayatollahs has been Nayef's response to the pseudo-modernist positon of Bin Salman. In other words, everything suggests that an internal struggle for power is taking place at Riad. The West dreads this, because such would provide a most fertile ground for the jihadists - other than an Arab Springtime.

However you look at it, it is hard to estrange religion from the sectarian warfare: no matter what political and economic motives add fuel to its fire.

....well there is this to consider...
----------------------------------------------------------
" According to Syrian sources, the Turk-Saudi arrangement for regime change in the neighboring state worked as follows. The Turks provided the logistical connections for weapons, jihadist fighters and training camps across the Syrian border, while the House of Saud was the main funding source for the nefarious enterprise going back to the origin of the conflict in March 2011. The Saudis would also provide weapons from their copious US-supplied arsenals, with tacit approval from the American Central Intelligence Agency..."

...from... http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/01/02/turkey-saudi-reap-machiavellian-whirlwind.html

....and could the following also be worth considering?
------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Saudi Execution Of Al-Nimr Was A Smart Move

The Saudi government executed 47 longtime prisoners who had be sentenced to death over terrorism and general revolting against the government.

From its viewpoint it was a smart political move.

The Saudis are in trouble over their war on Yemen. After nine month of bombing the hell out of the country there is no chance that the aim of their war, reinstalling their proxy government in Sanaa, will be reached anytime soon. Meanwhile Yemeni forces raid (vid) one Saudi town after another. The Saudi regime change projects via Salafi jihadists in Iraq and Syria are also faltering. The low oil price make it necessary for the Saudi government to introduce taxes on its people. New taxes are hardly ever popular.

To divert from these problems the Saudis decided to get rid of a bunch of prisoners and to use the event to regain some legitimacy..."

http://www.moonofalabama.org/

Cheers

 

[rhubroma]

Re:

i dont have any sympathy for the saudi kingdom nor for their medieval ways, but burning the embassy in tehran in my opinion is crossing the diplomatic red line. a host country responsible for the security of foreign envoys should be able to prevent the mob excesses no matter the underlying events.

the alternative is too frightening to contemplate with the iranian embassies around the world being torched by the sunni mobsters. what then ? mass executions of diplomats ? i dont think the middle east extremism needs more idiocy to feed on !

iran has a point. perhaps many points to score, including over a thousand iranian pilgrims lives lost recently. the range of responses should be divorced from the street.

one may include a typical persian diplomacy skills aimed at exploiting the widening us-saudi rift which is now in the open...

Here religion has its own reason, beyond the "niceties" of what Western history would advocate in the post-secular era. Inter-national civility and "normal" rules don't aply. Since we are neither dealing with civility, nor "normal" rules, but pure inculcated hatred. On the other hand, your last remark plays right into the hands of Putin in the ongoing Mideast chess game between Washington and Moscow.

 

[rhubroma]

Re: Re:

The anatomy of a disaster. To begin Saudi Arabia is involved in two wars right now. The first war is against ISIS. The Saudis and the Turks lead a coalition with Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Barein (that is the other states of the Arabian peninsula) against the Caliphate. This would appear to be particularly important, given that it means Sunnis against Sunnis of the Caliphate in Iraq and Syria, were it not for the fact that wealthy Saudis close to the regime are known to be financial backers of the same terrorist organization which the Arabian Kingdoms are supposedly combating. Naturally they are sworn enemies of Assad and thus of Putin and Sciite Iran (who, though, being both against ISIS, result as their comrades!). All are allies of the Great Satan America, however (but not Putin or Iran - well, sort of).

Second war: the one against Yemen. Here last March sciite rebels, called the Houthi, toppled the Sunni regime, resettling Sana'a and dividing the country in two. The Houthi are financed by Teheran. The Saudis are bombing them with bombs bought from the Pentagon. The Houthi, though, are enemies of the Caliphate, as is the Lebonese Hezbollah, which, however, is the sworn enemy of Israel and thus the US. We are in any case dealing with a generalized war between Sunnis and Sciites.

Now the fact that the Saudi's buy the bombs for this war from the US adds another element of confusion to the whole shebang. Since at the same time they are also fighting a petrol war against America by maintaing high production, which keeps crude costs low enough to debilitate the market for US oil gotten from more costly fracking. This also strikes at the arch enemies of Moscow and Teheran, who are thus uselessly in a struggle with Saudi Arabia against the Caliphate.

There is a last element that may be working behind the scenes here: the Saudi royal family struggle for the succession. The king of Saudi Arabia is Salman, who reached the throne last January and who turned 80 on 31 December. There are two heirs to the throne: Mohamed Bin Nayef, the primary heir and the king's 56 year-old nephew and Minister of Domestic Affairs. The second is the king's youngest son, the 30 year-old Mohamed Bin Salman, Secretary of Defense who is responsible for Saudi youth policy (a huge position in a nation in which one of two citizens is less than 30 years old). Bin Salman has been the catalyst in forming the anti-ISIS coalition, who thus treated with the powerful in Washington and Moscow, the latter presupposing a more cordial position toward Teheran. It could be, therefore, that the decapitation of the influential Sciite and enemy to the Sunni Saudi monarchy, Nimr al-Nimr, and the consequent worsening of relations with the ayatollahs has been Nayef's response to the pseudo-modernist positon of Bin Salman. In other words, everything suggests that an internal struggle for power is taking place at Riad. The West dreads this, because such would provide a most fertile ground for the jihadists - other than an Arab Springtime.

However you look at it, it is hard to estrange religion from the sectarian warfare: no matter what political and economic motives add fuel to its fire.

....well there is this to consider...
----------------------------------------------------------
" According to Syrian sources, the Turk-Saudi arrangement for regime change in the neighboring state worked as follows. The Turks provided the logistical connections for weapons, jihadist fighters and training camps across the Syrian border, while the House of Saud was the main funding source for the nefarious enterprise going back to the origin of the conflict in March 2011. The Saudis would also provide weapons from their copious US-supplied arsenals, with tacit approval from the American Central Intelligence Agency..."

...from... http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/01/02/turkey-saudi-reap-machiavellian-whirlwind.html

....and could the following also be worth considering?
------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Saudi Execution Of Al-Nimr Was A Smart Move

The Saudi government executed 47 longtime prisoners who had be sentenced to death over terrorism and general revolting against the government.

From its viewpoint it was a smart political move.

The Saudis are in trouble over their war on Yemen. After nine month of bombing the hell out of the country there is no chance that the aim of their war, reinstalling their proxy government in Sanaa, will be reached anytime soon. Meanwhile Yemeni forces raid (vid) one Saudi town after another. The Saudi regime change projects via Salafi jihadists in Iraq and Syria are also faltering. The low oil price make it necessary for the Saudi government to introduce taxes on its people. New taxes are hardly ever popular.

To divert from these problems the Saudis decided to get rid of a bunch of prisoners and to use the event to regain some legitimacy..."

http://www.moonofalabama.org/

Cheers

This struck a cord in the first article:

"This has implications for social unrest in the authoritarian kingdom. Despite decades of royal largesse, Saudi Arabia suffers from high levels of chronic unemployment and poverty, particularly among its youth. This reflects the rentier nature of the Saudi economy, typical of the oil-rich Gulf states."

It struck a cord because the inherent context of democracy goes against the very "rentier nature" by which America and the West has been able to exact the necessary pressure to bear in keeping the authoritarian regimes in power. Mossadeq was the great casuality in this conflict of interests. In short it is authoritarianism, not democracy, that is convenient for the West's economic interests.

Until we get off oil, this will remain so.

 

[python]

as i have anticipated in a post above, the saudis broke the diplomatic relations with iran...more over, their high official made a public statement i initially thought was a misreporting - something like ' we dont care what the us thinks'.

what next ? to find out this morning in stead of my usual france 24 and euronews i am listening to the iranian presstv and al jazeera international. while al jazeera attempts to strike a (fake imo) neutral tone, the presstv is concentrating on 'world community' supporting its position. yep, hillary was shown to appeal to the saudis 'hurting themselves', the un condemnation of the 47 executions, the shiite protests in turkey being brutally suppressed etc etc...

having witness the saudis increasingly radicalized actions, i assume that the 80 year old new king and his circle will step up their opposition to iran everywhere they can - in syria and iraq primarily. it is interesting how europe, the us and russia will influence the evnts.

 

[blutto]

Re:

as i have anticipated in a post above, the saudis broke the diplomatic relations with iran...more over, their high official made a public statement i initially thought was a misreporting - something like ' we dont care what the us thinks'.

what next ? to find out this morning in stead of my usual france 24 and euronews i am listening to the iranian presstv and al jazeera international. while al jazeera attempts to strike a (fake imo) neutral tone, the presstv is concentrating on 'world community' supporting its position. yep, hillary was shown to appeal to the saudis 'hurting themselves', the un condemnation of the 47 executions, the shiite protests in turkey being brutally suppressed etc etc...

having witness the saudis increasingly radicalized actions, i assume that the 80 year old new king and his circle will step up their opposition to iran everywhere they can - in syria and iraq primarily. it is interesting how europe, the us and russia will influence the evnts.

....Canada condemned the executions today....which may not mean much on the world stage but for natives of Soviet Canuckistan another sign we are indeed leaving Harperland and the neocon world it was part of....that being said we are still selling too much in the way of weapons to the Saudis but that condemnation was an encouraging sign....

Cheers

 

[blutto]

....and speaking of the glorious revolution seems things are unfolding as per the usual Merikan spreading of democracy and apple pie model....though the leaders of the latest experiment in spreading democracy are working overtime to be good friends of the interests of freedom and stuff ..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Corruption in Ukraine is so bad, a Nigerian prince would be embarrassed

United States Vice President Joe Biden has never been one to hold his tongue. He certainly didn’t in his recent trip to Kiev. In a speech before Ukraine’s Parliament, Biden told legislators that corruption was eating Ukraine “like a cancer,” and warned Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko that Ukraine had “one more chance” to confront corruption before the United States cuts off aid.

Biden’s language was undiplomatic, but he’s right: Ukraine needs radical reforms to root out graft. After 18 months in power, Poroshenko still refuses to decisively confront corruption. It’s time for Poroshenko to either step up his fight against corruption — or step down if he won’t...."

....and...

"When it comes to Ukrainian corruption, the numbers speak for themselves. Over $12 billion per year disappears from the Ukrainian budget, according to an adviser to Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau. And in its most recent review of global graft, anti-corruption watchdog Transparency International ranked Ukraine 142 out of 174 countries on its Corruption Perceptions Index — below countries such as Uganda, Nicaragua and Nigeria..."

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/12/30/corruption-in-ukraine-is-so-bad-a-nigerian-prince-would-be-embarrassed-2/

Cheers

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Reading Python's, blutto's, and some of Rubroma's ---I tend to agree with respect to Saudi. There are more than a few good points made.
I think it is Python who says that it will be interesting to see how Europe, USA, and Russia will influence these events between Saudi and Iran.

The USA has made a dangerous pact over the years with Saudi and basically Saudi is nothing more than a sanctioned ISIS pre ISIS in my opinion. Now we have a dilemma because it becomes much like our "interesting" UN relationship with Israel. We (merikan govment) will have to support these Saudi's because we made that nest. What a mess. One would wish we had a real leader in the USA but for now and I'm afraid in the future we are left wanting in that category.

I found this interesting piece of opinion and news that I thought was a good read.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/01/07/commentary/world-commentary/riyadh-makes-the-world-a-more-dangerous-place/#.Vo6sy01FCUk

 

[rhubroma]

Re:

Reading Python's, blutto's, and some of Rubroma's ---I tend to agree with respect to Saudi. There are more than a few good points made.
I think it is Python who says that it will be interesting to see how Europe, USA, and Russia will influence these events between Saudi and Iran.

The USA has made a dangerous pact over the years with Saudi and basically Saudi is nothing more than a sanctioned ISIS pre ISIS in my opinion. Now we have a dilemma because it becomes much like our "interesting" UN relationship with Israel. We (merikan govment) will have to support these Saudi's because we made that nest. What a mess. One would wish we had a real leader in the USA but for now and I'm afraid in the future we are left wanting in that category.

I found this interesting piece of opinion and news that I thought was a good read.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/01/07/commentary/world-commentary/riyadh-makes-the-world-a-more-dangerous-place/#.Vo6sy01FCUk

You see the contradictions at work. This all boils down to the acritical approach the US has taken with respect to the Sunnite Arabian regimes, while vilifying Shiite Iran and imposing debilitating sanctions for decades. Even after 9-11, in which many of the terrorists were Saudi's, the acritical approach didn't change. But now the US needs Iran against ISIS (which is financed by Saudi oil moguls), while its big ally Saudi Arabia does everything in its power to ruin the US-Iran axis. That's because Saudi Arabia doesn't want its mortal enemy Iran to threaten its Mideast position of regional supremacy. Iran, for it's part, has the support of Moscow and is poised to realize the much vaunted Shiite crescent moon to gain a position of regional superiority: a unified Shiite block arching through the Mideast all the way to Lebonese Hezbollah. Obama's determination to not reinstate sanctions against Iran, reflects the new and more accomodating relationship. This is probably why the Saudi regime beheaded a noteworthy Shiite imam recently.

The US hasn't been buying Arabian oil for years, yet its fleet is still maintained as the protectorate of the Persian Gulf. Why? Because only by policing the oil routes, and particularly the one to China, which still relies almost exclusively on Mideast oil for its industry, does the US maintain its position of global empire. With the yuan now being recognized as a global currancy, along with the dollar and euro, and the increased tendency to move away from the dollar as the petrol standard of exchange, the mono-polar world we have lived in for the past 3 decades risks a major reformation of terms.

We are thus witnessing the stuggle for a new global order. Perhaps this is why the supreme leader of North Korea, Kim Jong-un, has ruffled the state's (which is protected by China) feathers to show the US its developed neuclear capacity. Just a hunch.

So the great, irresolvable rebus is that American can't afford to change it's acritical relationship with Saudia Arabia, which would undermine its position in the Persian Gulf and turn the World over to China even more expeditiously. At the same time, it can't renig on its new cordiality with Iran if it wants to defeat ISIS. Thus what ever the US does will in some form be a detrimental failure. Are we headed toward a fourth gulf war?

 

[blutto]

....here is an interesting factoid thingee about the latest Mid-East contretemps....

"What the map shows is that, due to a peculiar correlation of religious history and anaerobic decomposition of plankton, almost all the Persian Gulf’s fossil fuels are located underneath Shiites. This is true even in Sunni Saudi Arabia, where the major oil fields are in the Eastern Province, which has a majority Shiite population."

https://theintercept.com/2016/01/06/one-map-that-explains-the-dangerous-saudi-iranian-conflict/

Cheers

 

[Echoes]

Got to love those fanatical Western suprematists who just discovered about the Quincy Agreement of 1945! And then they reduce it as just a "dangerous pact". They can't figure out that they negotiated in a DELIBERATE way with the most dangerous dynasty of the Arab world because they are ideologically very close.

The USA are a dangerous secularist country who had sparked wars all over the world for over a century and Arabia under the Saud's have adopted the American ways (not the reverse thing!).

The Saud are not Muslim. Their acts are there to prove it. They are usurers, pedophiles, some Princes are homosexual murderers, they've reformed the codes of the pilgrimage to Mecca, have built luxury hotels on the Holy Places, etc. They are modern secularists.

It should be remembered that the only true Islam recognized the Sharif of Mecca, Hussein ibn Ali, as the Custodian of the Holy Places. During World War I the Sherif allied with the Brits against the Turks and then the Perfidious Albion turned its back on him and instead placed the Saud in power in Arabia (Picot-Sykes Agreement). Since the bloody Attaturk put an end to the Ottoman Caliphate, Hussein declared himself Caliph. But by 1924/25 the Saud ousted him out of Mecca and massacred the population of Hedjaz. So the Saud are stricto sensu, anti-Islamic historically speaking and pro-West. It's easy to prove if you read history correctly but of course, if you think that Islam fundamentally represents Evil, you'll always be way off the mark.

So stop with "medieval ways" etc. The Saud are a 20th century dynasty, okay? Their ways are 20th century ways. The two World Wars, Hiroshima bombs, Vietnam War, Napalm, Guantanamo, Depleted Uranium. This is not medieval, it's 20th century-ish, okay? The Middle-Ages was an era of true grandeur whether in Christendom or in the Orient, period.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Got to love those fanatical Western suprematists who just discovered about the Quincy Agreement of 1945! And then they reduce it as just a "dangerous pact". They can't figure out that they negotiated in a DELIBERATE way with the most dangerous dynasty of the Arab world because they are ideologically very close.

The USA are a dangerous secularist country who had sparked wars all over the world for over a century and Arabia under the Saud's have adopted the American ways (not the reverse thing!).

The Saud are not Muslim. Their acts are there to prove it. They are usurers, pedophiles, some Princes are homosexual murderers, they've reformed the codes of the pilgrimage to Mecca, have built luxury hotels on the Holy Places, etc. They are modern secularists.

It should be remembered that the only true Islam recognized the Sharif of Mecca, Hussein ibn Ali, as the Custodian of the Holy Places. During World War I the Sherif allied with the Brits against the Turks and then the Perfidious Albion turned its back on him and instead placed the Saud in power in Arabia (Picot-Sykes Agreement). Since the bloody Attaturk put an end to the Ottoman Caliphate, Hussein declared himself Caliph. But by 1924/25 the Saud ousted him out of Mecca and massacred the population of Hedjaz. So the Saud are stricto sensu, anti-Islamic historically speaking and pro-West. It's easy to prove if you read history correctly but of course, if you think that Islam fundamentally represents Evil, you'll always be way off the mark.

So stop with "medieval ways" etc. The Saud are a 20th century dynasty, okay? Their ways are 20th century ways. The two World Wars, Hiroshima bombs, Vietnam War, Napalm, Guantanamo, Depleted Uranium. This is not medieval, it's 20th century-ish, okay? The Middle-Ages was an era of true grandeur whether in Christendom or in the Orient, period.

These Medieval Saud's are out of control. The Medieval mischief they are up to really is blowing my mindz. The Medieval tact towards the people of Saud are just about kicking our tail. Medieval people really are bringing the rest of us here in the west down. We are out of those Medieval ways but somehow they have become more Medieval during modern times. One has to wonder if this Medieval regimes in saud will keep going in this more Medieval direction or become more mainstream Medievals.

 

[frenchfry]

http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2016/01/07/01003-20160107ARTFIG00421-agressions-sexuelles-en-allemagne-plus-de-120-plaintes-deposees.php

Of 31 suspects linked to the sexual assaults in Cologne on New Year's eve, 18 are refugees and apparently the remainder are of Maghrebian origin.

Unfortunately some cultures have little or no respect for women, and are keen to maintain this cultural difference and indeed transmit it to their host country.

Of course it is politically incorrect to identify this cultural difference or to react in any official or unofficial way. It is necessary to respect cultural differences, and not resist their imposition upon us.

Decades of fighting for equality of the sexes in the occidental world is for nought, women will be reduced to objects subject to man's every whim and desire. This is already established in the immigrant districts where niqabs and hijabs are becoming the standard garment for women.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2016/01/07/01003-20160107ARTFIG00421-agressions-sexuelles-en-allemagne-plus-de-120-plaintes-deposees.php

Of 31 suspects linked to the sexual assaults in Cologne on New Year's eve, 18 are refugees and apparently the remainder are of Maghrebian origin.

Unfortunately some cultures have little or no respect for women, and are keen to maintain this cultural difference and indeed transmit it to their host country.

Of course it is politically incorrect to identify this cultural difference or to react in any official or unofficial way. It is necessary to respect cultural differences, and not resist their imposition upon us.

Decades of fighting for equality of the sexes in the occidental world is for nought, women will be reduced to objects subject to man's every whim and desire. This is already established in the immigrant districts where niqabs and hijabs are becoming the standard garment for women.

This stuff you are pointing out is some seriously Medieval acts.

 

[ray j willings]

 

[ray j willings]

US bases around Iran , who threatening who?

 

[ray j willings]

 

[Semper Fidelis]

USA USA USA USA
We even have a song about it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBGPw_LBiRA

 

[ray j willings]

Re:

USA USA USA USA
We even have a song about it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBGPw_LBiRA

The people of Syria are not singing also the millions of other people who's way of life has been destroyed by the US crazys in charge who's only real concern is resources [ oil etc] and power and control. Lets Bomb the world and keep these wars going and keep selling those arms ....People mean nothing.
SEE LIST OF US WARS ON PREVIOUS PAGE.

..

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re: Re:

USA USA USA USA
We even have a song about it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBGPw_LBiRA

The people of Syria are not singing also the millions of other people who's way of life has been destroyed by the US crazys in charge who's only real concern is resources [ oil etc] and power and control. Lets Bomb the world and keep these wars going and keep selling those arms ....People mean nothing.
SEE LIST OF US WARS ON PREVIOUS PAGE.

..

The song was about Iran not Syria.

 

[blutto]

....the following from a rather polarizing writer....as in he engenders sharp responses from everyone....a real $h!t-disturber ....I read him often for all that means...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Have no doubt: the big bad West, NATO and Pentagon together would never be able to ruin the Muslim world without the Saudi connivance.

They appointed themselves defenders of Sunni Islam, but they helped the US to destroy the mightiest Sunni state of all, Iraq of Saddam Hussein and rejoiced at Saddam’s fall.

They caused the collapse of the democratically elected Muslim government of President Morsi of Egypt and installed the military dictator in his stead (he turned out less obedient than they expected). I do not exaggerate: Morsi’s fall was a result of a conspiracy arranged and paid for by the Saudis. They used the methods previously applied against the last Soviet government of Russia, namely they created artificial shortages of food and petrol, they sent hired thugs to cause insecurity. Once Morsi was removed, as by the wave of a magic wand the shortages and thugs were gone. The Saudi-sponsored Salafists supported the military coup and gained at the Muslim Brotherhood’s banishment.

They did not help the most oppressed Sunni Muslims, the Palestinians of Gaza, when they suffered the brunt of an Israeli blockade and shelling. Oh yes, they promised (“committed”) billions for Gaza reconstruction, but none of these promised billions were delivered. The Saudis are very generous with their promises, but stingy with actual payments. (I learned it first hand: a Saudi newspaper reprinted my essays from Palestine during the Intifada; they promised to pay, but they never did.) They spend their money on the import of luxury and weapons, and on the export of their extremist ideology (in religious guise) to other Muslim countries and communities.

The Saudis acted nasty for many years. An outsider, I was astonished to learn that they are hated even more than Israelis by the average Arab, be it Palestinian, Egyptian or Lebanese. But they grew in nastiness with every year. They (and their terrible dwarf twin Qatar) conspired with NATO against Libya, and ruined this country. Afterwards, they shipped Qaddafi’s vast arsenal of weaponry to Syria via good services of their friends in Turkey. They were the engine behind the war in Syria and they prevailed upon Erdogan to enter this war. However, until recently they preferred to act on the sly.

They have got an Israeli complex, a complex of a pampered child who is allowed and encouraged by his adoring parent (the US) to tear off the wings and legs of living creatures. Nothing would force the US to condemn the Saudis – or Israel. Existence of the KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) is the sterling proof that the Jewish Lobby is not the only reason for the US Mideast policy and is not the single source of general nastiness in the region.

The Israeli complex is a feeling that one can do anything and everything. Such kids end in jail, and this is mentality of the KSA rulers. Their mad plans go astray because the plans are too big while their abilities are too limited. Being mentally unable to recognise their limitations, they blame their failures on Iran. Iran has its own problems, but Iran is not infatuated with the Saudis as the Saudis are obsessed with Iran."

....and....

"The Russians are not a timid exception. Nobody wants to upset the Saudis. They got away with their citizens’ involvement in 9/11. They can commit any barbarity, and nobody would object. From this angle, they are perhaps second to Israel, or even second to none. In 1981, Israel fought tooth and claw against President Reagan’s decision to sell AWACS aircraft to the Saudis, and lost. (This was the only case of Israeli losing until the recent Iran nuclear agreement.)"


.... http://www.unz.com/ishamir/greedy-eyes-of-saudi-sheikhs/

Cheers

 

[rhubroma]

Got to love those fanatical Western suprematists who just discovered about the Quincy Agreement of 1945! And then they reduce it as just a "dangerous pact". They can't figure out that they negotiated in a DELIBERATE way with the most dangerous dynasty of the Arab world because they are ideologically very close.

The USA are a dangerous secularist country who had sparked wars all over the world for over a century and Arabia under the Saud's have adopted the American ways (not the reverse thing!).

The Saud are not Muslim. Their acts are there to prove it. They are usurers, pedophiles, some Princes are homosexual murderers, they've reformed the codes of the pilgrimage to Mecca, have built luxury hotels on the Holy Places, etc. They are modern secularists.

It should be remembered that the only true Islam recognized the Sharif of Mecca, Hussein ibn Ali, as the Custodian of the Holy Places. During World War I the Sherif allied with the Brits against the Turks and then the Perfidious Albion turned its back on him and instead placed the Saud in power in Arabia (Picot-Sykes Agreement). Since the bloody Attaturk put an end to the Ottoman Caliphate, Hussein declared himself Caliph. But by 1924/25 the Saud ousted him out of Mecca and massacred the population of Hedjaz. So the Saud are stricto sensu, anti-Islamic historically speaking and pro-West. It's easy to prove if you read history correctly but of course, if you think that Islam fundamentally represents Evil, you'll always be way off the mark.

So stop with "medieval ways" etc. The Saud are a 20th century dynasty, okay? Their ways are 20th century ways. The two World Wars, Hiroshima bombs, Vietnam War, Napalm, Guantanamo, Depleted Uranium. This is not medieval, it's 20th century-ish, okay? The Middle-Ages was an era of true grandeur whether in Christendom or in the Orient, period.

The Saudi's dangerously secularist? Well the Sunni 12 Caliphs resolution to the problem of the Prophet's succession may seem so, not being a priesthood, though it's pretty far fetched to take their literal interpretation of the Koran as secularist.