bo pian is right... so lan lan have to give face.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
'CIA created ISIS', says Julian Assange as Wikileaks releases 500k US cables
- Thread starter covertbriar
- Start date
Anyway,,,its better for the yanks to deal with the Saudi royal family,,every one knows that the Royal family are just hypocrites,,,,they drink alcohol and enjoy life,,,nothing islamic about them,,,so easier to control,,and its better for the world,,,if the fundamentalist take over Saudi,,the whole world is fucked even more,,,,the royal family is the lesser of 2 evils
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ort-saudi-arabia-dictatorships-fundamentalism
To really combat terror, end support for Saudi Arabia
Owen Jones
Ramped up rhetoric on security makes no sense so long as the west cosies up to dictatorships that support fundamentalism
Mon 1 Sep 2014 04.30 AESTLast modified on Sun 15 Apr 2018 04.06 AEST
Shares
25,605
Comments
1,024
Prime Minister David Cameron at a news conference in Downing Street. 'As the British government ramps up the terror alert to 'severe' and yet more anti-terror legislation is proposed, some reflection after 13 years of disaster are surely needed.' Photograph: Paul Hackett/PA
The so-called war on terror is nearly 13 years old, but which rational human being will be cheering its success? We’ve had crackdowns on civil liberties across the world, tabloid-fanned generalisations about Muslims and, of course, military interventions whose consequences have ranged from the disastrous to the catastrophic. And where have we ended up? Wars that Britons believe have made them less safe; jihadists too extreme even for al-Qaida’s tastes running amok in Iraq and Syria; and nations like Libya succumbing to Islamist militias. There are failures, and then there are calamities.
But as the British government ramps up the terror alert to “severe” and yet more anti-terror legislation is proposed, some reflection after 13 years of disaster is surely needed. One element has been missing, and that is the west’s relationship with Middle Eastern dictatorships that have played a pernicious role in the rise of Islamist fundamentalist terrorism. And no wonder: the west is militarily, economically and diplomatically allied with these often brutal regimes, and our media all too often reflects the foreign policy objectives of our governments.
Advertisement
Take Qatar. There is evidence that, as the US magazine The Atlantic puts it, “Qatar’s military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra”, an al-Qaida group operating in Syria. Less than two weeks ago, Germany’s development minister, Gerd Mueller, was slapped down after pointing the finger at Qatar for funding Islamic State (Isis).
While there is no evidence to suggest Qatar’s regime is directly funding Isis, powerful private individuals within the state certainly are, and arms intended for other jihadi groups are likely to have fallen into their hands. According to a secret memo signed by Hillary Clinton, released by Wikileaks, Qatar has the worst record of counter-terrorism cooperation with the US.
Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more
And yet, where are the western demands for Qatar to stop funding international terrorism or being complicit in the rise of jihadi groups? Instead, Britain arms Qatar’s dictatorship, selling it millions of pounds worth of weaponry including “crowd-control ammunition” and missile parts. There are other reasons for Britain to keep stumm, too. Qatar owns lucrative chunks of Britain such as the Shard, a big portion of Sainsbury’s and a slice of the London Stock Exchange.
Then there’s Kuwait, slammed by Amnesty International for curtailing freedom of expression, beating and torturing demonstrators and discriminating against women. Hundreds of millions have been channelledby wealthy Kuwaitis to Syria, again ending up with groups like Jabhat al-Nusra.
Kuwait has refused to ban the Revival of Islamic Heritage Society, a supposed charity designated by the US Treasury as an al-Qaida bankroller. David Cohen, the US Treasury’s undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, has even described Kuwait as the “epicentre of fundraising for terrorist groups in Syria”. As Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, an associate fellow at Chatham House, told me: “High profile Kuwaiti clerics were quite openly supporting groups like al-Nusra, using TV programmes in Kuwait to grandstand on it.” All of this is helped by lax laws on financing and money laundering, he says.
But don’t expect any concerted action from the British government. Kuwait is “an important British ally in the region”, as the British government officially puts it. Tony Blair has become the must-have accessory of every self-respecting dictator, ranging from Kazakhstan to Egypt; Kuwait was Tony Blair Associates’ first client in a deal worth £27m. Britain has approved hundreds of arms licences to Kuwait since 2003, recently including military software and anti-riot shields.
And then, of course, there is the dictatorship in Saudi Arabia. Much of the world was rightly repulsed when Isis beheaded the courageous journalist James Foley. Note, then, that Saudi Arabia has beheaded 22 people since 4 August. Among the “crimes” that are punished with beheading are sorcery and drug trafficking.
Around 2,000 people have been killed since 1985, their decapitated corpses often left in public squares as a warning. According to Amnesty International, the death penalty “is so far removed from any kind of legal parameters that it is almost hard to believe”, with the use of torture to extract confessions commonplace. Shia Muslims are discriminated against and women are deprived of basic rights, having to seek permission from a man before they can even travel or take up paid work.
Even talking about atheism has been made a terrorist offence and in 2012, 25-year-old Hamza Kashgari was jailed for 20 months for tweeting about the prophet Muhammad. Here are the fruits of the pact between an opulent monarchy and a fanatical clergy.
This human rights abusing regime is deeply complicit in the rise of Islamist extremism too. Following the Soviet invasion, the export of the fundamentalist Saudi interpretation of Islam – Wahhabism – fused with Afghan Pashtun tribal code and helped to form the Taliban. The Saudi monarchy would end up suffering from blowback as al-Qaida eventually turned against the kingdom.
Chatham House professor Paul Stevens says: “For a long time, there was an unwritten agreement … whereby al-Qaida’s presence was tolerated in Saudi Arabia, but don’t piss inside the tent, piss outside.” Coates Ulrichsen warns that Saudi policy on Syria could be “Afghanistan on steroids”, as elements of the regime have turned a blind eye to where funding for anti-Assad rebels ends up.
Although Saudi Arabia has given $100m (£60m) to the UN anti-terror programme and the country’s grand mufti has denounced Isis as “enemy number one”, radical Salafists across the Middle East receive ideological and material backing from within the kingdom. According to Clinton’s leaked memo, Saudi donors constituted “the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide”.
But again, don’t expect Britain to act. Our alliance with the regime dates back to 1915, and Saudi Arabia is the British arms industry’s biggest market, receiving £1.6bn of military exports. There are now more than 200 joint ventures between UK and Saudi companies worth $17.5bn.
So much rhetoric about terrorism; so many calls to act. Yet Britain’s foreign policy demonstrates how empty such words are. Our allies are up to their necks in complicity with terrorism, but as long as there is money to be made and weapons to sell, our rulers’ lips will remain stubbornly sealed.
To really combat terror, end support for Saudi Arabia
Owen Jones
Ramped up rhetoric on security makes no sense so long as the west cosies up to dictatorships that support fundamentalism
Mon 1 Sep 2014 04.30 AESTLast modified on Sun 15 Apr 2018 04.06 AEST
Shares
25,605
Comments
1,024
Prime Minister David Cameron at a news conference in Downing Street. 'As the British government ramps up the terror alert to 'severe' and yet more anti-terror legislation is proposed, some reflection after 13 years of disaster are surely needed.' Photograph: Paul Hackett/PA
The so-called war on terror is nearly 13 years old, but which rational human being will be cheering its success? We’ve had crackdowns on civil liberties across the world, tabloid-fanned generalisations about Muslims and, of course, military interventions whose consequences have ranged from the disastrous to the catastrophic. And where have we ended up? Wars that Britons believe have made them less safe; jihadists too extreme even for al-Qaida’s tastes running amok in Iraq and Syria; and nations like Libya succumbing to Islamist militias. There are failures, and then there are calamities.
But as the British government ramps up the terror alert to “severe” and yet more anti-terror legislation is proposed, some reflection after 13 years of disaster is surely needed. One element has been missing, and that is the west’s relationship with Middle Eastern dictatorships that have played a pernicious role in the rise of Islamist fundamentalist terrorism. And no wonder: the west is militarily, economically and diplomatically allied with these often brutal regimes, and our media all too often reflects the foreign policy objectives of our governments.
Advertisement
Take Qatar. There is evidence that, as the US magazine The Atlantic puts it, “Qatar’s military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra”, an al-Qaida group operating in Syria. Less than two weeks ago, Germany’s development minister, Gerd Mueller, was slapped down after pointing the finger at Qatar for funding Islamic State (Isis).
While there is no evidence to suggest Qatar’s regime is directly funding Isis, powerful private individuals within the state certainly are, and arms intended for other jihadi groups are likely to have fallen into their hands. According to a secret memo signed by Hillary Clinton, released by Wikileaks, Qatar has the worst record of counter-terrorism cooperation with the US.
Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more
And yet, where are the western demands for Qatar to stop funding international terrorism or being complicit in the rise of jihadi groups? Instead, Britain arms Qatar’s dictatorship, selling it millions of pounds worth of weaponry including “crowd-control ammunition” and missile parts. There are other reasons for Britain to keep stumm, too. Qatar owns lucrative chunks of Britain such as the Shard, a big portion of Sainsbury’s and a slice of the London Stock Exchange.
Then there’s Kuwait, slammed by Amnesty International for curtailing freedom of expression, beating and torturing demonstrators and discriminating against women. Hundreds of millions have been channelledby wealthy Kuwaitis to Syria, again ending up with groups like Jabhat al-Nusra.
Kuwait has refused to ban the Revival of Islamic Heritage Society, a supposed charity designated by the US Treasury as an al-Qaida bankroller. David Cohen, the US Treasury’s undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, has even described Kuwait as the “epicentre of fundraising for terrorist groups in Syria”. As Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, an associate fellow at Chatham House, told me: “High profile Kuwaiti clerics were quite openly supporting groups like al-Nusra, using TV programmes in Kuwait to grandstand on it.” All of this is helped by lax laws on financing and money laundering, he says.
But don’t expect any concerted action from the British government. Kuwait is “an important British ally in the region”, as the British government officially puts it. Tony Blair has become the must-have accessory of every self-respecting dictator, ranging from Kazakhstan to Egypt; Kuwait was Tony Blair Associates’ first client in a deal worth £27m. Britain has approved hundreds of arms licences to Kuwait since 2003, recently including military software and anti-riot shields.
And then, of course, there is the dictatorship in Saudi Arabia. Much of the world was rightly repulsed when Isis beheaded the courageous journalist James Foley. Note, then, that Saudi Arabia has beheaded 22 people since 4 August. Among the “crimes” that are punished with beheading are sorcery and drug trafficking.
Around 2,000 people have been killed since 1985, their decapitated corpses often left in public squares as a warning. According to Amnesty International, the death penalty “is so far removed from any kind of legal parameters that it is almost hard to believe”, with the use of torture to extract confessions commonplace. Shia Muslims are discriminated against and women are deprived of basic rights, having to seek permission from a man before they can even travel or take up paid work.
Even talking about atheism has been made a terrorist offence and in 2012, 25-year-old Hamza Kashgari was jailed for 20 months for tweeting about the prophet Muhammad. Here are the fruits of the pact between an opulent monarchy and a fanatical clergy.
This human rights abusing regime is deeply complicit in the rise of Islamist extremism too. Following the Soviet invasion, the export of the fundamentalist Saudi interpretation of Islam – Wahhabism – fused with Afghan Pashtun tribal code and helped to form the Taliban. The Saudi monarchy would end up suffering from blowback as al-Qaida eventually turned against the kingdom.
Chatham House professor Paul Stevens says: “For a long time, there was an unwritten agreement … whereby al-Qaida’s presence was tolerated in Saudi Arabia, but don’t piss inside the tent, piss outside.” Coates Ulrichsen warns that Saudi policy on Syria could be “Afghanistan on steroids”, as elements of the regime have turned a blind eye to where funding for anti-Assad rebels ends up.
Although Saudi Arabia has given $100m (£60m) to the UN anti-terror programme and the country’s grand mufti has denounced Isis as “enemy number one”, radical Salafists across the Middle East receive ideological and material backing from within the kingdom. According to Clinton’s leaked memo, Saudi donors constituted “the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide”.
But again, don’t expect Britain to act. Our alliance with the regime dates back to 1915, and Saudi Arabia is the British arms industry’s biggest market, receiving £1.6bn of military exports. There are now more than 200 joint ventures between UK and Saudi companies worth $17.5bn.
So much rhetoric about terrorism; so many calls to act. Yet Britain’s foreign policy demonstrates how empty such words are. Our allies are up to their necks in complicity with terrorism, but as long as there is money to be made and weapons to sell, our rulers’ lips will remain stubbornly sealed.
tat true. a lot of terrorists directly or indirectly funded through money from Saudi Arabia. Also, too many extremist zealots there trying to spread their extremist madness.
How come the resident mudslime whore that KPKB about the Yanks supporting ISIS etc,,but never say anything about the Saudis???? guess mudslime really support mudslime
that is a good question. perhaps he should enlighten us with his opinion? I am also curious to hear his opinion.
Didnt i tell u guys The Hypocrite is suffering fm dementia. I dont wish to kip repeating my ans to him again n again. Like feeding a retard. Maybe u didnt notice my previous post. I will answer u. We all knew MBS had a part in Khashoggi death. Turkey already produced sm evidences. But dotard still covered up for him. We also know teres billion of dollars worth of weapon US selling to Saud. U may not know but we muslims know US holding Saud at ransom. Saud beholden to US. US dictate on the prices of oil. Not Saud or opec. So u tell me can i support Saud? My previous post i already stated Saud rulers cant be trusted. Cos of power Saud willing to support US/zionist Israel n attack Iran? Rem Saddam? When u support warmonger US ultimately u will be at US disposal. I will never trust a murderer...like saddam n MBS. If u care to read the Islamic scripture muslims were being warned n told to be cautious of muslim hypocrites. And yes...sm of those..people of the Book...are trustworthy n righteous than sm "muslims" as mentioned un oue scripture too. So whoami no double standard ya.
Last edited:
Of course not! If u know abt the story on Israj n Miraj...our Prophet ascension to Heaven...then surely u would know which group of Muslims were in Hell. So y shld i support such "muslims"?
U believe the resident mudslime whore? On one hand he says There is no compulsion in religion (ie Islam) but when evidence of what has been happening in Mudland was produced,,,he said its up to the individual country,,so if Mudland forces all m&ds to be mudslimes,,it is ok,,,,But the state uses religion as an excuse, is that not compulsion? so should not the state be condemn for misusing Islam and hence the state is Infidel? but nothing on that point,,,the whore just says,,not happy leave,,,so the mudslime whore has no leg to stand on...he and his kakis can jolly well take a long walk off a short pier
Last edited:
Look at The Hypocrite. Now chg topic..talk abt Msia again. Same old topic again. Haiz...u can talk to him till cow cum home. I dont wish to miss my break fast.
slowly bro! one by one ok...
- I for one am very unhappy with what goes on in Mudland. It's fucking garbage.
- I don't know his opinion on Mudland, perhaps we can discuss it?
- He is not mudlander nor do I think he'sinvolved with mudland gahmen. I doubt that he has any control over anything there.
- Not happy leave I don't think is whoami, but the other guy...
- Well until they ask me to leave, I am happy to discuss. Maybe we just don't understand each other.
Look at The Hypocrite. Now chg topic..talk abt Msia again. Same old topic again. Haiz...u can talk to him till cow cum home. I dont wish to miss my break fast.
well come back and join us after you have finished.
Look at The Hypocrite. Now chg topic..talk abt Msia again. Same old topic again. Haiz...u can talk to him till cow cum home. I dont wish to miss my break fast.
Look at the resident mudslime whore,,,same old excuses,,,like old topic,,,these 'old topic' is not fact? Mudland gahmen not misusing Islam? but when the actions favour mudslimes,,its all good,,,typical mudslime whore reply. More fork tongue than an ah neh. And the point I have bought up is the mudslime whore is not to be trusted,,,and this reply has proven me right
Look at The Hypocrite. Now chg topic..talk abt Msia again. Same old topic again. Haiz...u can talk to him till cow cum home. I dont wish to miss my break fast.
maybe he is angry about what is happening there. Is that not done by Muslims against non-Muslims? I know that it doesn't please me as well. So how about we clear the air?
slowly bro! one by one ok...
so let's talk and get to the bottom of it shall we?
- I for one am very unhappy with what goes on in Mudland. It's fucking garbage.
- I don't know his opinion on Mudland, perhaps we can discuss it?
- He is not mudlander nor do I think he'sinvolved with mudland gahmen. I doubt that he has any control over anything there.
- Not happy leave I don't think is whoami, but the other guy...
- Well until they ask me to leave, I am happy to discuss. Maybe we just don't understand each other.
Just look at my posts and responses to the mudslime whore. And my point is the mudslime whore is not to be trusted in his comments about 'moderate islam',,,
hmmm.... he is not right in dismissing your concerns. that is not respectful discussion. So how about we all agree to let bygones be bygones and start afresh? 1 topic at a time? You are upset about Mudland? How about we start there?
I use mudland as an example against the arguments of the mudslime whore,,,
name calling him isn't going to get him to give you a clearer answer. Like I said, a lot of things you mentioned upset me too, but he may not be personally responsible and while I feel his discussion style and beliefs may be called to question, I think it's worth bearing with it for a bit for a conclusion if you're interested. No need to stay angry, it's not healthy for you.
well let's just pick one topic and stick to it. otherwise we'll all be chasing each others' tails. Maybe start a new thread that's easy to answer? Like religious discrimination in Mudland maybe?
Similar threads
