.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
dexterm
-
Posts
4,128 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by dexterm
-
-
10 minutes ago, Morch said:
Iran is seen as a destabilizing force by many of countries, both in and out of the ME. That you choose to make it solely about Israel doesn't point out to much other than your usual stance. Notably, this topic is not about Israel, even if the usual suspects try to spin it so.
And as with the post above, not much trust in your crystal ball predictions. Been there done that.
There are a several very powerful countries (mentioned above) trying to destabilize the situation in the Middle East to their advantage, which you fail to admit.
Time will tell who will win this proxy battle in Qatar.
Shame on Trump for involving the west in this. But that's par for the course for US administrations. And one wonders why the Middles East comes to visit us when our leaders attempt to interefere in their politcs.
-
7 minutes ago, Morch said:
No, I did nothing of the sort. That's your spin.
What I did was point out that there are various elements at play here, and at least with regard to the Qatar-Hamas connection, one of the main beneficiaries Abbas. Also, I do not think that specific angle is a main ingredient in the current mess.
Doubt that Saudi Arabia will "capture" Qatar. In all probability, that's just another one of your scaremongering "sinister" scenarios, which will remain in the confines of your imagination. Just like the other times when your predicted such things.
And sorry, not much inclined to treat all of Fisk's musings as gospel.
>>Doubt that Saudi Arabia will "capture" Qatar. In all probability, that's just another one of your scaremongering "sinister" scenarios, which will remain in the confines of your imagination. Just like the other times when your predicted such things.
..they would probably install a pro Saudi regime instead. US approval of outright capture would revive memories of Bush Snr pervious forays leaping to the defense of embattled undemocratic nearby monarchies.
Let's hope I don't have to quote you on this being a figment of the imagination.
Yes, much easier to shoot the highly knowledgeable Fisk messenger, than address his critique.
-
21 hours ago, Morch said:
Mr. Sinister strikes again. One- track mind at work.
The US is aiming to form a coalition countering Iran. They'll make a whole lot of compromises and hold their noses. Such is the nature of international relations.
Elections (whether they are fair and free is another matter) do not necessarily say a whole lot about the nature of the regime in power. Doubt any poster, including yourself, would willingly live under those regimes praised. That's without pointing out that Qatar itself isn't actually on the list.
As for Al Jazeera being "honest", you'd have to be you to make such as assertion. Al Jazeera comes in two main versions, English and Arabic. Content is not always similar. Editorial intervention is an issue. Don't recall much criticism about Qatar. Maybe has to do with being owned and funded by.
Even if you insist making it about your pet obsession, no cigar. Or at least, only half a cigar. The party intent on tightening the screws on Hamas is the Fatah. May want to read about recent developments in the ongoing spat before spewing the usual nonsense.
So you are trying to blame this on Abbas and Fatah alone. What a joke. there are far more sinister and powerful foces at work, just as previously. This anti terrorism nonsense is just fodder for the sheeple.
Think of the scenario: Saudi Arabia and the other dictatorships who stand to gain capture Qatar, steal all their oil and gas, guarantee supply to USA, allow USA to maintain a base there, silence Al Jazeera, isolate Hamas, support Fatah to another 20 odd years of fake peace negotiations while Israel swamps the whole of the West Bank with settlements.
All of which would please Israel very much.
And with a bit of luck, Iran may be drawn into the conflict too on some pretext such as US personnel getting killed in Qatar.
And we in the west would become involved in yet another war on Israel's behalf, probably as before without them risking a single medic to help out.
This is the real story behind the economic crisis unfolding in Qatar
"No Qataris flew the 9/11 planes into New York and Washington. All but four of the 19 killers were Saudi. Bin Laden was not a Qatari. He was a Saudi."
This is the aim of Donald Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia – and it isn't good for Shia communities
"The Sunni Saudis and the Gulf kings possess immense wealth, the only religion that Trump really respects, and they want to destroy Shia Iran, Syria, the Hezbollah and the Houthis – which is a simple ‘anti-terrorist’ story for the Americans"...both articles well worth a read.
-
Tillerson and Trump playing the good cop bad cop routine.
We are being softened up for regime change and Al Jazeera closure in Qatar on the pretext of the war on terror. Just as we were softened up for regime change in Iraq with fake claims.
And it is the same neo cons in Washington pulling the strings (and for the same reasons), making suckers of us all.
-
17 minutes ago, stevenl said:
Disagree, he simply has no clue of the consequences of his words and tweets.
You may well be right. Maybe he is just being played. Time will tell. But if this particular assault on Qatar does escalate into a war against Iran, it will certainly be very convenient for Trump's allies.
When he got off the plane from Saudi his comments were all anti Iran...even though they had just held reasonably democratic elections.
“I wanted you to know how much we appreciate the American change in policy on Iran,” Netanyahu said as the two leaders delivered joint statements at the prime minister's residence here, but took no questions from reporters.
"We can hold back Iran's march in this region and thwart Iran's unbridled ambition," Netanyahu added.
re Trump's visit to Saudi...
“Iran is the grand prize here,” said one member of the Saudi royal family, who declined to be named. “Everything else is bells and whistles.”https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/19/saudi-arabia-trump-visit-us-relations
-
Sinister forces at work here. I strongly suspect Trump deliberately started this crisis or it received his tacit approval. The media and diplomatic attack on Qatar began almost immediately after Trump left.
Qatar has not been towing the line and has been punching above its weight in the region for a while through Al Jazeera supporting the Arab Spring, which of course upset the authoritarian Egypt, Saudis, Jordan and the UAE...nothing to do with any anti-terrorism pretexts.
I also think we are being softened up for a direct or proxy war with Iran. Bringing together all the parties in the region who stand to lose power and influence with Iran on the ascendancy. Wars are good for deflecting attention from real issues.
"As the recently leaked emails of the Emirati ambassador to Washington confirmed, the UAE spent considerable resources lobbying US officials to endorse the 2013 military coup that brought a violent end to Egypt's revolutionary moment and the tenuous transition to democracy dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood's political party.
The Emirati ambassador was revealed to have coordinated closely with the most hawkish pro-Israel think-tanks in Washington to promote a view of the Middle East that posits the conservative monarchies, military dictatorships, and Israel as the bulwark against Iranian expansionism and Sunni Islamists.
For its perceived role in promoting the Muslim Brotherhood, hosting members of Hamas' political bureau, and taking a softer line on Iran, Qatar became a central target of the Saudi-Emirati-Israeli joint lobbying efforts."
...very interesting read about what may actually be going on behind the facade in the region.
-
I presume Trump will tweet that he is united with Iran against terrorism...oops forgot...it is not terrorism if it is sponsored by his Saudi and UAE buddies and directed against Iran.
-
1 hour ago, Morch said:
Use "people like you" and try to pin false labels to your little heart's content.
As for your imaginary musings on my motivations while posting "Islamic" or "Islamist", let me set you straight - I don't actually think about it all that much, hence the terms would be found interchangeably in my posts. Similarly, there was no indignation expressed, and again, no "hidden agenda", even you repeat it ad nauseam.
>>As for your imaginary musings on my motivations while posting "Islamic" or "Islamist", let me set you straight - I don't actually think about it all that much, hence the terms would be found interchangeably in my posts.
So if you dont think about it all that much, why did you bring up the issue in the first place responding to a post of mine pages back in the thread?
Methinks thou doth protest too much.
QED.
I hope you will focus on more accurate terminology and less hateful stereotyping in your future posts.
-
28 minutes ago, Morch said:
I do not have a "particular" (or general) Islamophobic agenda, hidden or otherwise. Figment of your imagination. Or rather, same old mud-slinging when nothing better to offer.
With regard to such examples as you raise - I would point out that it doesn't represent the whole of the religion, of course. That would not bar discussion of perpetrators religious motivation, though. Most people can grasp that there are more that one flavor within a religion.
For someone often whining about "pedantry" and "nitpicking", hanging the whole argument over a couple of letters is absurd. For someone often selectively employing or rejecting such broad brush generalizations, making it an issue, is disingenuous.
>> Most people can grasp that there are more that one flavor within a religion.
... that's just the point...most racists can't grasp anything other than blind unthinking hatred, and people like you only pander to that by bandying about slogans.
But the very fact that you are intelligent enough to know the difference between Islamic terrorism and Islamist terrorism, yet disingenuously insist with faux indignation on using the former pretending there is no difference, betrays your hidden agenda.
I prefer the late Muhammad Ali's take on the subject..."I am a Muslim and there is nothing Islamic about killing innocent people in Paris, San Bernardino, or anywhere else in the world. True Muslims know that the ruthless violence of so called Islamic jihadists goes against the very tenets of our religion.
We as Muslims have to stand up to those who use Islam to advance their own personal agenda."
-
Just now, Morch said:
Only it doesn't. Only if one is terribly insecure.
The reluctance to reference religious affiliation of perpetrators and their organizations is not evenly applied. Doubt most on the West would be angered by referencing a perpetrator's Christian (for example) affiliation and motivations, if these were relevant or salient. It wouldn't necessarily be taken as a comment on the "entire religion".
Only it does if people like you insist on using it because you have a particular Islamophobic not so hidden agenda.
Would you call Israeli settler violence Jewish terrorism as though done in the name of all world Jewry.
Would you call abortion clinic murderers Christian terrorists as though done in the name of all world Christians?
What is so difficult for you to call it Islamist terrorism, rightly implying that these acts are perpetrated by fanatics with a particularly warped evil interpretation of a religion.
The answer of course is that it serves your purpose to muddy the waters, so that you can conflate these atrocities in London and Manchester with your own Islamophobic agenda.
-
It's interesting that the groups Egypt and Saudi Arabia want Qatar to sever ties with..Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, all won free and fair elections, something those countries havent tried themselves recently. Same possibly could be said about Trump's...still under scrutiny.
The fact that Qatar's Al Jazeera is the only honest news outlet on the Gulf , and that Qatar has had a recent moderatng influence on Hamas probably irks them too
Strange too that on his visit to the Middle East Trump only had criticism for Iran, which had reasonably fair democratic elections that same week.
I wonder which country in the Middle East might benefit most from all this interference?
More sinister forces at work here.
-
Love JK Rowling's response to Trump's petulant attack on Sadiq Khan.
"It's called 'leadership', Donald. The terrorists were dead 8 minutes after police got the call. If we need an alarmist blowhard, we'll call."
-
Rather than support and understanding from one of the UK's closest allies, Trump indulges in his personal vendetta to score a few self righteous political points.
Can you imagine the reaction if after 9/11 a British Prime Minister had pompously criticized Mayor Giuliani.
-
22 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:
In the UK they're busy working in the NHS, police force, schools and universities. The owner of the restaurant Roast, where some of the dreadful stabbings took place, is one of them.As was Dr Malik Ramadhan, who treated victims of the terrorist attack. Or is he a co conspirator in the great Islamic Terrorist plot. too?
"Dr Ramadhan, who had been cycling home when he saw a large convoy of emergency vehicles heading into central London, said he immediately sensed something was wrong and rushed back to work to help - arriving to find a major incident had been declared.
In the wake of the attack at London Bridge and Borough Market his hospital received 12 casualties, eight of which were critical and six of which required surgery."
-
2 hours ago, champers said:
So, we are in the last week of an election campaign and the press are smearing prominent Labour figures. Surprise, surprise.
Of course, all Tories are paragons of virtue. You may need to look outside the mainstream press to read about their misdemeanours.
It goes deeper than simply the press. Investigate in which foreign power's interest it is to besmirch Corbyn, because of the consequences were he to become PM.
-
How about some honesty and integrity rather than platitudes from May.
There's an excellent article in the Independent on the OP subject...well worth a read.
"May needs to talk to us about the “difficult conversations” she must have with the Saudis and their Gulf allies, not to Muslim British citizens. But she is too gutless, too cowardly, to deal with the Gulf Arab autocrats to whom she sells weapons (albeit not on the scale of Donald Trump, whose principal Arabian dictator, the head-chopper-in-chief, is so worthy of our mourning that May’s predecessor lowered the British flag to half-mast on his death).
Yes, to confront this Salafist-Wahhabi state and Gulf citizens’ financial contributions to Isis would be a "difficult conversation" indeed for Theresa May."
-
2 hours ago, transam said:
But nobody knows what that 1.6 billion actual private thoughts are...
Precisely. That is why it is wrong to prejudge an entire religion by using the stereotypical phrase Islamic Terrorism.
-
1 hour ago, SheungWan said:
The reason why some on the Left (including Corbyn) cannot let the words Islamic Terrorism cross their lips (and it is an absolute red line for these guys) is that it would cross over to their support for Shiite Islamic Terrorism namely Hizbollah and Hamas, so when they condemn individual acts not only are they crocodile tears, the words slide out from only one side of the mouth. It is the simplest of litmus tests.
Still can't bring yourself to say Saudi Arabia I note , the extreme wahhabi Sunni Muslims, the source of ISIS, Al Qaeda and all the terrorist attacks in Europe and USA, including the OP. More pertinent is the reason you won't name them.
Instead you are hijacking this tragedy to tar all Muslims with same brush, with the faux term Islamic terrorism which implies all the world's 1.6 billion Muslims. That's why you wont hear it from me. Just as you wont hear me label last week's Portland attack as Christian terrorism, because it was not done in the name of all the world's Christians.
You are attempting to muddy the waters deflecting to focus attention on Iran..the arch enemy of you know who (the ultimate purpose for your post)
No Shiite attacks in Europe. But of course your reasons for attempting to conflate and smear Iran and Hizbollah, Hamas and Corbyn, is your obvious hidden agenda...to defend your friends ....that other infamous terrorist state in the Middle East.
-
"And, yes, we do need to have some difficult conversations starting with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states that have funded and fuelled extremist ideology."
Corbyn is spot on. But the petro$$ of these corrupt regimes seems to make Trump and May strangely mute.
-
12 hours ago, SheungWan said:
Do not for one moment accept the crocodile tears of anybody, anybody who will not under any circumstances use the words 'Islamic Terrorism' to name that which is and at the same time try a little sideways kick into the long grass with their first priority here which is to associate that terrorism with an equivalence on the Western states. The truth is that some hard left-wing organisations have rubbed shoulders with these guys in their efforts to fight 'imperialism' and here is a key concept take sides. Taking sides is a key element of hard-left groups and no amount of tear-jerking should throw us off the scent. The whole phrase of the hard left-wing taking sides phraseology is 'unconditional, but not uncritical support for (name the organisation). The critical bit is the criticism of individual acts but the unconditional bit here is the refusal to condemn Islamic Terrorism. This is what happens when the hard left descends into its own madness of cult logic and there we have it right above here in a sample of all its glory.
How dare you accuse me of crocodile tears. Where's your expression of sympathy? Too busy trying to score political points?
>>The critical bit is the criticism of individual acts but the unconditional bit here is the refusal to condemn Islamic Terrorism.
..learn to read. I wrote"scumbug cowardly terrorists who murdered these innocents.
the warped evil cults such as ISIS and Al Qaeda
the fanatical sect of wahhabism practised by Saudi Arabia which inspired and possibly financed ISIS and Al Qaeda"No doubt you would prefer me to tar all Muslims with your Islamophobic brush, which is of course your hidden agenda demonstrated in other posts on this forum.
...seems to me: you are the one refusing to condemn the West's financial support for the backers of Islamic terrorism...including your own government's.
You are the one who refuses to utter the words "Saudi Arabia" as the ultimate source of these terrorist attacks. But their petro$$ seem to have made you and the UK/US governments strangely mute.
-
17 minutes ago, Khun Han said:
Nope. The jihadists' ambitions to crash the west and take it under a caliphate umbrella long pre-date modern war crimes by the west.
Here's a tip. If a couple of mad mullahs appear at your front door canvassing for ISIS ..just say no and vote accordingly!
Islamic (not so sure about Christian) fanatics havent a hope in hell of taking over western democracies. That's just hysterical bs.
And certainly murdering innocent people as in the OP will not help their cause.
-
14 minutes ago, RickBradford said:
This is the kind of thinking that truly amazes me. We know why they do it - they go out of their way to tell us. They post their reasons online, they explain them in videos. They even print them in English-language magazines, for heaven's sake.
For example, here is a snippet from an article in the ISIS magazine Dabiq, entitled "Why We Hate You and Why We Fight You"
It couldn't be much clearer, could it?
Who's "they"?
Glad you clarified it... ISIS .. about .01% (and falling...good!) of the 1.6 billion world's Muslim population.
Stereotype away.
-
The usual redneck nonsensical counterproductive, impractical/impossible responses when the scumbag perps are usually native born citizens anyway.
Yeah ... lets get 'em, paint a quarter of the world's population with the same bigoted brush, stereotype 'em, ban 'em, deport the lot, intern 'em, demolish their places of worship. The latter four of course (lets get real) have a snowball's chance in hell of happening.
You'd have all made good Nazis.
But I know it feels good to rant on to vent your fury. But for crying out loud, think of realistic steps to stop these atrocities happening again.
Seek out any cells the terrorists belong to. Prosecute, imprison, deport those you find. Criticize what the UK is doing in terms of its morally corrupt interfering/populist vote winning/money grabbing foreign policy. But don't do what the terrorists want you to do..attack the entire faith of Islam, thus inevitably creating more converts for revenge, whose mosques tomorrow get graffitied, whose sisters get their hijabs torn off, whose mothers get abused on public transport ..all fired by the same blind hatred that inspired the OP maniacs. All that will do more harm than good.
-
8 hours ago, SheungWan said:
There's always an initial gentle white-wash from the same quarters who are active elsewhere on the forum. You know where... More of the same expected from Jeremy Corbyn who will mouth similar inanities in the next few days. One thing readers should note is that although above contributors will make a gesture towards condemning individual terrorist acts, they will never ever stand against any of the organisations behind them. Why is that? Because the above contributors hold to a formula of unconditional support to all those organisations seen to oppose imperialism (whatever that means and see nonsense above). And that is why we have seen hard left marching with Islamists against 'imperialism'. Also, whether any of the above contributors hails from a Stalinist or Trotskyist background we'll probably have difficulty finding out as they are careful in not letting it peep out.
I utterly and completely condemn the scumbug cowardly terrorists who murdered these innocents.
My sympathies are entirely with the loved ones of the victims and the police who had to risk their lives confronting the perps.
My anger is directed at the individual terrorist slime who committed these atrocities, the warped evil cults such as ISIS and Al Qaeda who may be [in]directly implicated, and the fanatical sect of wahhabism practised by Saudi Arabia which inspired and possibly financed ISIS and Al Qaeda, which country Trump last week did $350 billions of business with having previously accused it of being behind 911 and which is conveniently omitted from his Muslim exclusion ban! Likewise the UK governtment's extensive arms contracts with these dictators.
The hypocrisy is astounding as is your attempted whitewash of western governments' hand in creating these terrorist extremists.
Trump takes sides in Arab rift, suggests support for isolation of Qatar
in World News
Posted · Edited by dexterm
>>It is a fact that Iran is considered [weasel word!] a destabilizing element by many countries in and out of the ME
...Just depends who is doing the "considering", what evidence they have, and what vested interests they already have for their so called considerations.
>>What is "this", that Trump supposedly got "the West" involved in?
..perhaps you should reread the OP "Trump takes sides in Arab rift"