Log in

No account? Create an account

January 3rd, 2013

ROBERT FISK:Could Saudi Arabia be next?

Another proof Freedom of the Press does not exist. Robert Fisk puts the idea of a possible revolt in Saudi Arabia, as if it depended on the Saudi Arabian people. He writes:
Saudi Arabia
‘There are those who say that the Gulf kingdoms will remain secure for years to come. Don’t count on it. Watch Saudi Arabia.’
Why doesn't Robert Fisk write: "I think Saudi Arabia is the next country where Britain and USA will try to stage a revolt"
What puppets these politicians/diplomats are, without knowing it. Just remember when USA arranged a Game of War (with thousands dead and millions $$$ for the Arms Trade) between Iraq and Iran.

They all talk (politicians); they talk and talk, "I said this" "he said that" "secret talks", etc. all this talk because they cannot utter the truth: they are protecting and promoting the commercial interest of their own country.

The article says:

It is kind of ironic that Sheikh ul-Islam, a former deputy prime minister and a former Iranian ambassador to Syria, has emerged as:

1) a point man to deliver messages to the American side, considering....
2) how he was one of the militants who held Americans captive during the 1979-81
hostage crisis.
3) As the Foreign Ministry's director for Arab affairs in the 1980s, it was claimed
that he coordinated the Islamic Revolutionary Guards participation in Hezbollah
4) .....he blamed terrorism, drug problems and the refugee crisis on Afghans. (note
the word "problems" was used, instead of more truthful "trafficking")
5) He also accused (he was ordered to accuse) the Afghan government of allowing
US troops to remain beyond the 2014 deadline (military business has to carry on,
6) and of allowing Afghan territory to be used against his country, (the money he's
paid is more important)
7)....including sending drones into Iranian airspace. (again money comes first)

Etc, etc. Nothing "ironic"; all part of political business and comedy.
This article states an accusation from opposers to RIS: "These are the same band of misfits who purported that the East End Madrassah was teaching Muslim children “anti-Semitic” curriculum; a thorough York Regional Police investigation concluded otherwise."

To begin with, it is utterly wrong for you to call "misfits" does who accuse you, rightly or wrongly. However, the claim the East End Madrassah teaches "anti-semitism", is valid and as true as saying the Madrassah teaches "anti-hindouism" and anti-Christianity".

On the other hand, one could also state with equal certainty, Christian Schools teach "anti-Judaism" and "anti-Islamism" and Jewish schools teach "anti-Islamism" and "anti-Christianity".

All this is done without the slightest effort and without even thinking about it, not planning it in the least. It just happens. Why? because each Religion teaches "our Religion is the correct Religion", "our Religion is the TRUE Religion". Basically, saying the same: "other Religions are less good than ours".

There will be Peace in the world the day ALL Religions are taught by all schools and by all parents and children or adults who believe in God/Allah, after studying all Religions, choose the one that suits them best. Religion is a spiritual activity like listening to music, watching paintings and sculptures. A father may prefer Michael Jackson to Madonna, whilst the son prefers Madonna to Jackson. Similarly, a father could prefer Jesus whilst the son prefers Mohammed or viceversa.

Imposing a Religion upon once children, is the first infringement of Human Rights.

Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Nobody shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy...." and Religion is a very private matter, not to be interfered with.

Article 18 states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion" and continues "this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief..."

We could all live in a perfectly balanced and peaceful world if Human Rights were not abused but respected.
"how will this “new law” be enforced?" just like all Laws. And if you break it, you are punished.

The Law at present allows countries to have Armed Forces. If the new Law prohibits Armed Forces, that's it, no country can invade or attack another. If a country doesn't risk being attacked, it needs not spend money in arming herself. Weapons, bombs, Apaches, air-fighters, drones, warships, etc, will have no buyers and need to close down.

At the moment, if your Government gives you a military uniform and sends you to kill, the more you kill, the better chances of becoming famous, rich, etc. Without Government orders, if you kill someone you'll be a criminal, a murderer and go to prison.

Of course we need economists who will devise a strategy to cope with the global financial hole that the lack of Death Industry will produce.

It can be done. Even Churchill said it at the end of World War II: "of course we could have avoided this war completely, but we didn't want to,,,,,". He added "the war was not about defeating Fascism or Nazism; it was about conquering new markets
How can Mark, the 'Truth's' Editor in Chief Sajjad Ahmad be so naive?
a) doesn't he know that politicians NEVER reveal their real intentions, but especially at election time.
2) doesn't Mr Ahmad know that it is because drone manufacturers and banks "knew" they would be in for good business, that they voted Obama into a second term?
3) Bush would have never done a second term, had he revealed his intentions of invading Iraq?
Who's the writer of this erudite article ?

Pity the writer, is so knowledgeable but at the same time so dangerously patriotic.

His patriotism doesn't allow him to see how the same he says about Pakistan, could be said about many other countries in the world.

His question - towards the end - "Have American long term strategic interests been met? means the writer does not know the "long term" strategic interests of the Washington Administration, otherwise he'd know they are far from reaching their target.

He continues with "Have America strategic interests gone from controlling the energy corridor to defending Indian and Israeli interests? This shows lack of political acumen. American politicians defend "American interests" only, otherwise they would be considered traitors. Proof of what I'm saying is that Israel has to endure war after war and the untimely death of many of her children. American interests also mean that Israel must commit odious actions that destroy the possibilities of Palestinians of having a nation. Washington interests mean that Israel must endure the hatred of millions all around the world.

The last question Remember Pakistan was the most pro-American nation in this part of the world, what has gone wrong? means that, after all, he is pro USA, which is pro CIA, pro Blackwater, etc, etc. otherwise he wouldn't be asking: what has gone wrong?
The sheer stupidity and nastiness of whoever wrote this article is beyond belief !!!!

"Who" wants to help Christians in Pakistan, I mean whether their are Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, of no religion, etc, doesn't matter. What matters, the ONLY thing that matters, is that Christians need to be helped. Of course achieving good results would not be such a difficult task if the Pakistani Press was not so bigoted about Islam.

For this one would need an Islam that is not the Dictatorship it is now. You would need an Islam that accepts and teaches that ALL religions are equally valid.

This would make Christians' life in Pakistan acceptable and not the hell that it is today.
Quite amusing. The Pakistani Army "creates" the internal threats and they now have to wash their hands!!!! (so that they can prepare for action)

"The ongoing guerrilla war in the tribal area near borders with Afghanistan and armed attacks from different groups ........"

The truth is - just as in so many other countries - the Pakistani Army is forced (because of international business agreements) to buy new stocks of arms for their fighters. However, the old stocks are not destroyed. They are sold to tribal groups, to criminal gangs, etc.

All this is aided by secret agents who incite the various bands to kill each other. All quite simple really. Wars do not happen in nature, like rain, fog, snow, winter, summer, etc. They are all man-made, man-concocted, man-planned, etc.

What else can man do, if he is forced - often without knowing it - to keep the Arms Trade alive?

Pakistan-Afghanistan will keep bleeding

Our retired Brigadier may know about weapons and killing, but doesn't understand much the intricacies of politics. He says:

"Despite Obamas desperation to declare victory in Afghanistan, triumph is not in sight." If the Brigadier was the President of the US, he would be saying the same thing.

"The US is now striving to end the war in Afghanistan" totally wrong!!!! one thing is what they say they are doing, another what they "really" are doing.

"......in a manner that its honor doesn't get bruised." This is the last worry for the Washington Administration, Pentagon included. Our Brigadier doesn't seem to understand that the LAST thing USA want is to pull out of Afghanistan. This is the reason why Washington put the Taliban there in the first place and this is why secret services continue to arm Taliban forces and incite them to create havoc.

If you have two football teams, one wanting to play a game and other "not" wanting, there is no game. To have a war, you also need willing parties.

And yes, as our Brigadier says "Pakistan-Afghanistan will keep bleeding". However, many other corners of our planet will keep bleeding. This is what we need, in order to reduce arms stocks and make room for new arms.