Two oil tankers struck in suspected attacks in Gulf of Oman

Yes - I wasn't going to wander down the rabbit hole on this one as it was an attempt at distraction from the central point - that Saud arms and funds extremist Islamist groups - and has been promoting this sick and twisted ideology all over the world. This is the case regardless of whether or not El Saud actually knew about the 911 plot. It is not some big secret that El Saud was funding -and/or knew about funding going to Al Qaeda.

It is not some big secret that El Saud armed Al Qaeda - and others of the same ilk - in Syria with tens of thousands of tons of sophisticated military technology - much of it having "end use" certification - meaning the US is to be made aware of where that technology ends up and what it is being used for.

The fact the the matter is that we were working with the Sauds (and other nation states) to get arms into the hands of the Islamist Extremists ( either Al Qaeda or affiliated with Al Qaeda or operating under Al Qaeda) in Syria.

That the poster is not aware of this reality is a function of not having any understanding of what is going on with respect to these issues.

 

Unfortunately, that is the case. Many Americans just have no idea what their government is really up to. I don't blame them as their news media, owned by 5 or 6 major corporations just does not provide balanced news coverage or investigative journalism and does not cover important stories and issues - instead focuses on the spectacle or tawdry scandal to get ratings.

And even smart people can be fooled by state propaganda as Bernays pointed out in "Propaganda."

Didn't mean to bring up this rabbit hole. Way off topic. I do wish right-wingers on this forum were more informed about their government's relationship with the Saud kingdom or even that with Israel.

Especially with the arms deals the Trump Admin is putting forward to these "allies"

 

Absolutely but to say Obama armed AQ is nonsense, he gave arms to anti-Assad groups in Syria and they eventually fell into their arms, as I've stated before that's always a risk.

 

1. So if they didn't know what is your point?
2. The lawsuits went nowhere because they were ridiculous
3. I'm drawing the analogy that a nation state cannot be blamed for the actions of its' individual citizens acting without its' knowledge.
4. Obama did do the right thing but sometimes you get blowback you can't anticipate.

 

They are informed, they just accept realpolitik and you do what you have to at the time whilst lacking a crystal ball.

 

You know that Saddam started the war, not the Mullahs?
And which 2003 liberation please ... you mean the year when the US stated to make out of Iraq the current shithole?

In a TV documentation it was shown by documents ... but I don't find this in www in moment ...

 

No he wasn't ... because this is a CIA lie only and no truth!

When I see that it is wasted time, then I let it ...

This is your own rating of your own deeds ... but not the common one in the world!

Nice ... and when had Bismarck been Chancellor again?
Should I go back further and quote your Benjamin Franklin regarding security and restriction of rights with supervision by NSA, etc.?

ROFL ... my wife is from Poland and is still Polish citizen ... and she and all the many Poles I know (and I speak Polish too btw.) say that Duda is simply an ass crawler and his appearance with Trump was just a total embarrassment! This is a Polish point of view ... not my eutsche view meadow, but the same is here!

And that's one of the reasons why it stinks hard for a "False Flag" issue!

 

Arrogance? Hypocrisy? Probably correct, the USA has its faults as do all people of all nations...Russian included. However without the US the world, at the end of the day, would be worse off.
In that case we should be grateful.

 

But then I would also recommend to take off the hypocrisy and indict others for evil iussues, which make the US just as evil.

Let's take the example of influencing the Elections, where even Trump claims that Russia had influenced here 2016!
Sorry ... that, conversely, the US has demonstrably done the same thing 32 times in other sovereign states as now Russaland ... and one of the 32 cases warn elections in Russia under Yelcin ... it is kept silent or even described as justified and OK.

 

I have read some of Bernays stuff. I did a paper on mind control in a Psychology class. Most people think "cult" when they think of mind control. The reality is that most are under the influence in one form or another - and none of these people realize it.

What is interesting is the amount of effort being put towards the goal of control and how sophisticated these techniques have become.

12 years of school and we manage not to teach the basics of Philosophy - logic, logical fallacy, what constitutes a valid argument, critical thinking and so on. We also manage not to teach the founding principles - legitimacy of authority, individual liberty, consent of the Governed and what being a Republic means with respect to law.

It is tough to wade through the cacophony of fallacy and bad argument raining down on people on a daily basis from politicians and the Mainstream Media without these basic tools.

Folks are constantly making claims about issues that are highly debatable - as if they are defacto true and the same is true with respect to belief in "necessary illusions" (this is the title of a book written by Chomsky - thought control in a democratic society). Speaking of which - even mention this fellows name and some folks will fly off the handle - despite knowing almost nothing about his writing.

As soon as these folks come across ideas or information that conflicts with necessary illusions one of their first reactions is to demonize the messenger rather than trying to refute the idea- a classic denial avoidance response - very similar to the response when one's religious belief is challenged.

 

1. Absolutely, no one is arguing about that but we couldn't let him lose.
2. Yes, the liberation, Iraq today is more peaceful, freer and prosperous than it was under Saddam. Or do you think Iraq was some sort of paradise under an odious tyranny.
3. Let me know when you find the docs.

 

1. No, no one denies this, he followed the pattern of so many 'liberators' who hopped into bed with the reds
2. You mean you're running away?
3. Some truisms never change
4. Perhaps if your country bordered Putin's Russia and had been dissected by 2 of the most evil regimes of all time within living memory you might have a different attitude?

The Iranians have done this before and the evidence against them this time is overwhelming, why do you seek to excuse this odious regime?

 

The two tankers were attacked on June 13th. Since the US video of the Iranian boat removing the limpet mine from the side of one of the tankers was released, there have been no more
attacks. Perhaps Iran realizes its been caught and doesn't want to risk making another attack. If it was the US or Israel trying to start a war, as some have claimed, they would have followed up with
another "false flag" attack to increase the tension.

 

1) The article claims that arms were given directly to Al Qaeda and how this was done in quite some detail. Either you did not read the article or believe that the information in the article is complete falsehood. Which is it ?

2) It matters not if arms were given to Al Qaeda affiliates - as this is Al Qaeda
3) It matters not if arms were given to those of the same ilk as Al Qaeda - they are all fighting for the same cause and are on the same side of the war.

4) You have not researched this topic and are regurgitating State propaganda that is known to be false. Obama's "Moderate Rebel Lie". There were no "moderate rebels" of any significance in Syria. Almost all were either Al Qaeda - ISIS - or affiliated groups.

5) we are not talking a small amount of arms here - some of which managed to get into the hands of AQ/ISIS. We are talking tens of thousands of tons of sophisticated military technology. You don't smuggle a Howitzer or a Tank in some backpack. This was a sustained effort requiring logistics, planning, transport over many years. It was accomplished via many nation states - including Israel.

6) Who were these anti Assad Rebels you are referring to ? Rebels you know nothing about ? Was it these guys ?

Pentagon Trains “Moderate” Syrian Rebel Army. $500 Million to Train 60 Rebels. Where Did the Money Go?

This was in late 2015 - 4 years after the war had been raging. 60 rebels ? This was an exercise in creating a story to tell to try and cover up reality. I hope you don't think that our Military leaders are actually stupid enough to think that training 60 rebels is going to make a difference ?

Obviously these 60 did not receive tens of thousands of tons of sophisticated military technology.

Who did this stuff go to ? This is back in 2012 when Obama was claiming to only be providing "non lethal" aid.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/penta...rain-60-rebels-where-did-the-money-go/5469615

Who were these guys ? Forgive me for calling the State Department out on their preposterous falsehoods but - 160 flights and 3,500 tons of military equipment is not going to a rag tag band of 60 rebels - or something of that nature.

Where was this "moderate" front line of the war ? Certainly we had no reporting from such a front line - because it did not exist. This exists as a figment of your imagination that you ingested from drinking too much state propaganda. Name one city that was taken by these "moderate" rebel forces ?

Obama's "moderate rebel lie" is so laughable that even his VP Biden contradicted in one of his famous gaffes. You can read about this gaffe in the Washington post - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...as-middle-east-allies/?utm_term=.29f847dde719

Biden is answering questions after a speech at Harvard. Behind Biden’s gaffe lie real concerns about allies’ role in rise of the Islamic State

Biden of course doesn't mention that the CIA was facilitating these transfers - and forgets that the Saudi's are required to prove the end use of the weapons we give them.

This however, is not what is the most interesting about what Biden has to say. The WP article conveniently omits the part of Biden's comments that contradict Obama's "Moderate Rebel Lie" despite the high minded sounding title of the article. This was the case with all of the US mainstream - even Fox who one would think would be salivating over such such a thing - a case of convenient forgetfulness.

Now forgetting the fact that we know that the US was acting in Syria - Biden sidesteps this fact not saying "but we were acting earlier". This is another false narrative but this is again digressing from the Obama's "moderate rebel lie". The main point to get from Biden's comment is that there were no moderates of any significance among the opposition rebels. This is a well known fact that was reported on by nearly every news outlet reporting on the war in the early years.

The moderate rebel lie did not come about until later. ISIS did not exist as we know it in the early part of the war. The modern incarnation of ISIS - as reported by WP by accident - was when a bunch of Islamist extremist groups coalesced to form an Islamic state IS-ISIL -ISIS after the rebels had taken over most of Syria in late 2013. After this point the two main groups were ISIS and AQ.

Just to be clear - they did not take over most of Syria with AK 47's - rag tag bands of rebels are no match for a nation State.

ISIS then went into Iraq in 2014. This created a problem as we were fighting on the same side as ISIS in Syria but fighting against them in Iraq. This is what necessitated the "moderate rebel lie". The NY Times and others then quickly forgot its previous reporting.

Congressman Rand Paul described this situation on CNN's Sunday morning program "State of the Union"

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2...-my-son-into-that-mess-on-the-crisis-in-iraq/

Obviously this shows what absurd nonsense the story about training 60 moderates in Syria in late 2015 was - and the lengths that these clowns will go to propagate a lie - and the complicity of the Media in promoting this lie. Note that Rand is speaking in 2014. Sorry for all the digressions but this is so convoluted and absurd ( as is the narrative you have been ingesting).

So then - what is this now ? We have prominent US congressman stating on National television that Obama was arming Al Qaeda - the 911 terrorist group.

One would think that this would be "News" - that every print and network would have as the front page story "US congressman Paul claims Obama is arming Al Qaeda - 911 terrorist group" .. is this not news ?

Apparently not as the response from the media was Silence - Crickets - the "Sin of Omission"

So Yes - we armed Al Qaeda and other Islamist Jihadist groups of the same ilk. We knew that these groups had a common objective - to turn Syria into a Strict Sharia Theocracy - and that this was the whole "call to Jihad" - back in 2012 according to declassified Defence Intelligence Agency reports. We knew these groups were killing, raping and persecuting Christians and other marginalized groups.

This action - arming these nutters - led to the death of over 500,000, the refugee crisis which has spread the plague of Islamist ideology further over the world - and the rise of the modern incarnation of ISIS. This is not some conspiracy to try and blame Obama for something he did not do- these are the facts. The conspiracy is the cover up.

How is this "For the Greater Good" ?

 

You might not have been paying attention at the time, but some were, including myself.

Saddam invaded Kuwait because the US ambassador Glaspie informed him, in response to his question to her, that the US would consider his proposed invasion of Kuwait to be "a matter of inter-arab affairs". She was instructed to give him that answer by her superiors in the Bush 41 administration.

Were you informed and paying attention in those days, you would also know that the so-called WMD he possessed were those chemical and biological weapons delivered to him by one Donald Rumsfeld of the US government.

 

Perhaps you need some talking head on TV to tell you how and what to think?

 

A bit garbled there, but this is known as "collateral damage", the natural byproduct of any military action. International conventions, the traditional (western) "laws of war" and Western militaries (particularly the US') spend billions and spare no effort to improve the precision of their weapons trying to reduce this "collateral damage", nonetheless it still happens. A sensible person would realize that war is an inherently dangerous activity that cannot be made safe for innocent bystanders.

 

The US caused the war to be extended by an extra two years when it was seen that Iraq was on the verge of winning at which time the US covertly changed sides giving Iran intelligence info on Iraqi forces

 

Don't know if you have read Chomsky's, Manufacturing Consent" but it is a great study of how we are socialized into seeing the world as we do and come to believe completely fallacious ideas about our own history. Teaches us how to be good citizens in a materialist consumer society.

The basic idea is that all the information that comes down to us comes in filters that together build a narrative which we are encouraged to embrace as natural truth.

Filters start with our parents and peers, school education where we learn patriotic illusions that exhualt ourselves and in many cases dehumanize the other or outsiders.

Moves on to advertising and media which has it's own series of filters and on and on.

Pretty soon you realize that almost everything we think we know is constructed from socially contrived narratives that worship obedience and patriotism in place of truth.

I don't know if Americans are fundamentally more taken in by all this than anyone else but I do know that the propaganda of empire and the illusion of wealth, celebrity and spectacle are propagated and glorified in the US to an extent seen nowhere else on the planet.

Seeing the same glorification national myths mixed with the absence of reality based historical truths and the demonization of anyone who dares question the narrative exhibited by many not just on this forum but many like it is quite disturbing.

The complete absence of truth in someone like Trump is the unfortunate natural progression of the manufactured illusion we are all surrounded by.

 

Read that one first actually more than 30 years ago now. I must say though that while it was bad back then - things have gotten a fair bit worse. Its freaky these days.

 

When I studied International Relations, I took a class called "Revolutionary Ideologies in World Politics". It was at a postgraduate level and each of us had to discuss a text from a selection of authors. I examined Chomsky's first political opus, American Power and the New Mandarins. I reviled Chomsky before I set off, and my research showed he was an excellent linguist, in fact he contributed significantly to something called "morphological analysis" (of which I knew a bit about too). One form of morphological analysis Chomsky developed involves analyzing words based on their role in a sentence. I figured I'd apply morphological analysis to Chomsky's thesis statement in The New Mandarins.

The New Mandarins features a thesis statement of over 350 words and it is all predicate, the subject (the US) is referred to only elliptically -by implication. In my analysis (of Chomsky rather than of the morphology of his New Mandarins thesis statement) I concluded Chomsky was a Marxist idealist afraid to name the US in the thesis statement of his seminal work. Chomsky is a much better linguist than ideologue.

 

Never read that one - did read "Manufacturing Consent" and "Necessary Illusions" and both were excellent. One needs to be able to distinguish between Chomsky's facts and his opinion - and he distinguishes when he is doing one or the other. I am sure Einstein had said some dumb things and had some strange political ideas. - that does not detract from the Theory of Relativity.

When you use terms like "Marxist Idealist" and do not state what you mean by that - It causes me to doubt your understanding of the term and what Chomsky's political leanings are. Ask 5 people and they will give you 5 different definitions of Marxism - then there is what the dude wrote and what it became in practice - these are very different beasts.

Regardless it matters not to me what his political leanings are - I judge a book by its content - not by the author.

 

Oh and the world think Britain is just fine, exporting the values of Magna Carta and the Glorious Revolution to the world. Hence why everyone is still our friend in the Commonwealth.

 

Because it was to get rid of Assad and end this horrific civil war? It would have been nice if all the rebel groups opposing him were ardent democrats but they weren't, you can't choose your allies, hell in WW2 we armed the French communists.

 

REALLY? Got a source on that? Although Kissinger did comment it was a shame they both couldn't lose.