[ENGLISH.ALARABIYA.NET] Since the beginning of the boycott of Qatar ...an emirate on the east coast of the Arabian Peninsula. It sits on some really productive gas and oil deposits, which produces the highest per capita income in the world. They piss it all away on religion, financing the Moslem Brotherhood and several al-Qaeda affiliates... , we have observed significant events that would not have been witnessed had this historic and courageous decision not been taken.
The decision has put an end to Qatari policies of creating confusion and sedition, support for terrorist entities and attempts to overthrow regimes in more than one Gulf country, which constitute merely the tip of an iceberg of Qatari policies, which had sprung after the coup of Hamad bin Khalifa against his father.
Hamad bin Khalifa turned the stable state of Qatar into an international center for intelligence agencies, whose task was to support nefarious activities that firstly indulged his ego and aberrant ambitions, and then served to benefit Western institutions.
Indeed the Obama-Moslem Brüderbund project dubbed as the ’Arab Spring’, which has been supported by the Government of Hamad, is blatant proof of all the calamitous consequences that still lie before us, in the destruction of entire nations, the killing of millions of innocent people and a fallout that is still unfolding.
One of the advantages of the boycott has been the dramatic collapse of the Moslem Brüderbund. This organization had penetrated some of the vitals of the homeland, turning our peaceful and harmonized society against itself with the spread of hate speeches and extremism among people.
Environment of discord The Moslem Brüderbund thrives and flourishes only in an environment of discord and contention, as it uses religion for the purpose of polarization.
But all of its efforts have come to naught and the organization stands discredited as it faces public opprobrium. The Saudi faction of the Moslem Brüderbund stood against its own country, fiercely attacking Saudi national media and symbols.
It is worth highlighting that the fall of the Moslem Brüderbund wasn’t at the hands of the enlightened class, i.e. the intellectuals, the writers and the media, but it was the decision of the Saudi people who opposed the organization’s use of religion to denigrate them, and this in itself is a great national achievement.
It’s pretty obvious that the Saudi faction of the Moslem Brüderbund is witnessing its worst days. The Qatari crisis has exposed their position toward their country as they supported Qatar’s plans to divide the homeland. The Gulf crisis exposed their schemes and plans for the region as well as their relationship with Qatar and their support for subversive activities against Soddy Arabia ...a kingdom taking up the bulk of the Arabian peninsula. Its primary economic activity involves exporting oil and soaking Islamic rubes on the annual hajj pilgrimage. The country supports a large number of princes in whatcha might call princely splendor. When the oil runs out the rest of the world is going to kick sand in the Soddy national face....
Spreading chaos Their social media pages had turned into paid ads, fostering incitement and spreading chaos on the orders of Qatar. Some of its exponents eventually expeditiously departed at a goodly pace as they could not face the barrage of seething questions from the Saudi people who had laid bare their plans and pestered them with inquiries, for which there were no answers.
As for their ambassador, whose ambitions were dashed by the Qatar boycott, found that his pen had finally run dry and could no longer fudge or falsify the truth, manipulate people or prevaricate on various fronts.
While we had predicted the fall of the Saudi faction of the Moslem Brüderbund, we had not expected it to happen so quickly and by popular consent. So our thanks and gratitude go to this blessed boycott.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/16/2017 00:00 ||
Top|| File under: Muslim Brotherhood
the moslem bruderbund is taking multiple hits in the middle east but their affiliates in the west are doing well
a bruderrbunder is getting good press in his run for the governorship of michigan
regarding the moslemBrotherhood guy in Michigan
, Dr. el Sayed's campaign has about a million dollars but not much from the usual democratic big shots (although five years ago he graduated because of a scholarship funded by the brother of George Soros)
as for ideology, he is running as a Bernie Sanders democrat, e.g., increase the minimum wage, universal pre school, sanctuary state - stuff like that
Posted by: lord garth ||
08/16/2017 17:07 Comments ||
Him this is the first I had heard of the size of these war games. It seems somebody is a mite touchy. Btw the author makes no mention of North Korea threatening to NUKE the USA. He should be happy as fuck that only war games are going on in that locale. (Although give that little fat moron in Korea another launch and it might not be games)
[American Thinker] When Robert Mueller took the gig with the Department of Justice to lead the silent coup against the Trump administration, things looked great. One hundred percent, or close to it, of the media was reporting different levels and incidents of "Russian collusion." No your honor, we found nothing, but were were 'just interested in the facts.'
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a close Trump confidant, had recused himself. The deputy AG, Rod Rosenstein, quickly buckled under media pressure to name a Special Counsel where no crime had been found and only an FBI counterintelligence investigation was taking place. No criminal investigation of the president, said the FBI director. Mueller had the chance to overturn an epic election mistake by uninformed American deplorables and be the darling of the swamp for a generation. How could he say no?
Everyone is guilty of something, even if it is only that their memories of an event differ from someone elses (see Scooter Libby.) Given enough time and resources your crime will be discovered. Or created.
Strzok must see the writing on the wall and wants to keep his rep?
Posted by: Frank G on the Road ||
08/16/2017 15:10 Comments ||
If the bottom-line objective of a Federal investigation is to generate a Perjury Indictment then the only rational response is to develop amnesia, lawyer up and plead the 5th Amendment.
Sabotages the whole concept of Justice, doesn't it?
Over the weekend, during remarks at the National Defense College of the Philippines, Philippine Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana dwelled a little on the increased capability requirements that the Philippine military is looking for, particularly in the intelligence realm, as it confronts Islamic State-linked militants in Marawi. Lorenzana’s comments are yet another indication of the challenges that the nation continues to face as it deals with a rising terror threat.
The Philippine military has struggled during the Marawi crisis, and that has not been surprising to those familiar with both the general challenges it faces as well as the specifics of the current situation. The AFP remains one of the region’s weakest militaries despite some improvements, and Marawi has been an uphill battle for it because of various factors including the fact that it is a densely populated city with dense, forested terrain outside of it, and the reality that the allegiances between various insurgent groups and foreign fighters can be much looser than the headlines often suggest.
Posted by: ryuge ||
08/16/2017 00:00 ||
Top|| File under: Islamic State
[Breitbart] Stated Emerson - "Nearly the entire liberal/left wing media spectrum have been continuously condemning President Trump for not condemning by name the ultra-white nationalist groups who came out for battle on Saturday in Charlottesville instead of condemning the generalized categories of "hate and bigotry." In fact, we also criticized that hesitation to name the neo-Nazi coalition, but at least the President condemned them by name on Monday."
"But by the scurrilous standards of McMaster and the 8 years of the Obama Administration, a generalized statement against "violent extremism" should have been enough for the events on Saturday. But of course, that meaningless euphemism invoked by Obama, to the murderous applause of a compliant media, meant absolutely nothing. And in fact, only emboldened the quest for power by radical Islamic front groups over truly moderate Islamic reform groups and leaders. That McMaster is pursuing the same refusal to condemn radical Islamic terrorism by name is a threat to our national security."
[Acculturated] I read Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis for the first time last December. A lifelong Christian and Narnia superfan, I’m late to the party, I know. But as the dust settled from an election that shined a glaring spotlight on our cultural divisions—political, social, economic, theological—I was feeling out of sorts. Christian leaders I respected as well as people close to me who had helped shape my own faith were on the other side of the divide, and I needed a touchstone, something to help reorient me in the foundations of the faith, so I could move forward. I reached out to one of the great Christian thinkers of the twentieth century and found the solace I needed in his book.
This is the power of books. They let us escape, try on new points of view, and explore what it means to be human. The great works give readers a shared experience and a shorthand for big ideas. Describing something as Orwellian is a big hit lately, if you haven’t noticed. We return to old favorites again and again when we need the familiarity of a trusted friend. Books can heal the spirit and soothe the soul like nothing else can.
In her lovely bestselling book, The Little Paris Bookshop, Nina George explores the healing power of books. She tells the story of Jean Perdu, a bookseller who has a knack for uncovering just the right book to heal whatever is ailing his customers. He is so good at dispensing bookish remedies a local therapist sends patients to his bookshop, the Literary Apothecary, with a “prescription” for their literary needs. One person might be described as “Kafkaesque with a touch of Pynchon” and another as “a splendid example of Potter-under-the-stairs syndrome.” Perdu can always find just the right book to soothe anxiety or help mend a broken heart.
Literature can be a healing agent. Unfortunately, Americans are reading less today than they have in the past. Philip Yancey lamented our shift away from reading and toward digital distractions in a recent Washington Post op-ed, “The Death of Reading Is Threatening the Soul.” Technology and social media have combined to retrain our brains to graze along the surface of information rather than hone our concentration to delve deeply into meatier content. Neuroscientists tell us finding new and interesting information gives our brains a little dopamine hit, and, like lab rats, we keep clicking those web links to keep that happiness hormone flowing. The average American spends ten hours per day getting their media fix.
I am as guilty as anyone else is. A “quick” look at Twitter turns into thirty minutes or more of following links through articles across the web. I can’t remember the last time I got truly lost in a book where hours passed without me noticing. Where I once devoured books, I now “take a break” after each chapter or two to see what’s happening on Twitter. Five minutes turns into ten, and then, well, it’s time to put the book down and make dinner.
Our time online is not making us happier either. The more we use social media sites like Facebook the less happy we are. Looking at our friends’ carefully curated online lives leaves us with a sense that maybe our lives aren’t so great in comparison, plus the time we spend on our devices takes away from the face-to-face interactions we need to build a strong social network. We know our time online is making us unhappy, but we still struggle to kick the habit.
We need to find our way back to the deep, focused reading so many of us enjoyed in the past. “Commitment to reading is an ongoing battle,” Yancey declares. “We have to build a fortress with walls strong enough to withstand the temptations of that powerful dopamine rush while also providing shelter for an environment that allows deep reading to flourish.” In an age of information overload, we could use the soothing balm of a good piece of literature; we need to tune out digital distractions and pick up a book. I’m making a commitment to myself to carve out more time for distraction-free, focused reading. I hope you will too.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
08/16/2017 10:37 Comments ||
I read about 3 books a week. Better than TV past 7 PM.
Posted by: Whiskey Mike ||
08/16/2017 10:50 Comments ||
on vacation and I'm starting my fourth book
Posted by: Frank G on the Road ||
08/16/2017 11:31 Comments ||
Some people like to read, some people like to do outdoorsy stuff, and some people like to work with their hands. IMO, Having a cultural rich enough to indulge these separate interests is a sign of prosperity not moral decay.
Sarah Hoyt's take on Charlottesville
No one, not even Drudge is touching the Charlottesville insanity. Or it wasn’t last night. That is because "nobody knows nothing."
Depending on what actually happened and why, this could very well be the fuse that heats the cold civil war. And if you’re rubbing your hands, don’t be. Go read about the type of civil war where the populations are thoroughly emulsified. It’s not pretty, it doesn’t end sometimes for centuries, and it takes civilization down three levels, at least.
And yeah, to quote from the Ankhmorpork anthem "we own all your shoes, we own all your guns, we own all your troops, touch us and you’re done" is tempting, but not really. Sure, we own all of those, or at least they’re mostly on our side. The problem is that the other side has a near-psychotic disregard for everyone’s else lives and can build bombs. They’re not GOOD at it, mind you. The days of rage proved that. They blow themselves as much as everyone else, but practice makes perfect, and if this starts we’ll have plenty of time for them to practice.
...And yet, the way things have been going, with not only an entire cohort that was indoctrinated in Russian propaganda (originally) and then just in America-hatred in our best schools, it might be inevitable. How long can a nation subsist with the enemy within? Particularly when the enemy’s power is threatened by new technology. Particularly when that enemy is financed by Soros who might very well BE the beast of the apocalypse?
In America, if it were healthy, the crazy that happened in the weekend would never have happened. Both Nazis and communists have the right to say whatever the hell they want to. As long as they don’t have power, let them scream. But that’s not possible in the land of safe rooms and microaggressions.
...Also in a healthy society, if the fracas had happened because of the usual provocateurs, the rest of society would shake their head and go "So much crazy." not pile on (particularly on the left side) claiming this just proves all their theories.
And no, to whom it may concern, a region not wanting their past or their regional heroes erased to appease a vocal minority does NOT make them white supremacists. This idiotic changing of names, removing of statues and erasing people from history is NOT the work of a free society. It is wholly Stalinist and is letting the rest of the world know you by your fruits as it were. I have nothing invested in the ACW, except for having studied it enough to know it was more complex than most people think, and I’m only "southern" by fiat of my friends, but even I get outraged at the erasing of the past of the region. And you know damn well they’re coming for Jefferson and Washington next.
They even mention the BDI index (Baltic Dry Index). Obama had things in order to pursue martial law. I suppose if Duterte can do it we can. With the media in control of news and no effort to offer the public a balanced approach. We must consider all options.
This is well-reasoned document concerning the reasons the Civil War occurred.
Many people think the Civil War of 1860-1865 was fought over one issue alone, slavery. Nothing could actually be further from the truth. The War Between the States began because the South demanded States' rights and were not getting them.
The Congress at that time heavily favored the industrialized northern states to the point of demanding that the South sell is cotton and other raw materials only to the factories in the north, rather than to other countries. The Congress also taxed the finished materials that the northern industries produced heavily, making finished products that the South wanted, unaffordable. The Civil War should not have occurred. If the Northern States and their representatives in Congress had only listened to the problems of the South, and stopped these practices that were almost like the taxation without representation of Great Britain, then the Southern states would not have seceded and the war would not have occurred.
I know for many years, we have been taught that the Civil War was all about the abolition of slavery, but this truly did not become a major issue, with the exception of John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry, until after the Battle of Antietam in September 1862, when Abraham Lincoln decided to free the slaves in the Confederate States in order to punish those states for continuing the war effort. The war had been in progress for two years by that time.
Most southerners did not even own slaves nor did they own plantations. Most of them were small farmers who worked their farms with their families. They were fighting for their rights. They were fighting to maintain their lifestyle and their independence the way they wanted to without the United States Government dictating to them how they should behave.
Why are we frequently taught then, that the Civil War, War of Northern Aggression, War Between the States, or whatever you want to call it, was solely about slavery? That is because the history books are usually written by the winners of a war and this war was won by the Union. However, after following my family around since I was just a year old to Civil War Living History scenarios in Gettysburg and elsewhere, I have listened to both sides of the story, from those portraying historical figures, both Union and Confederate. Through listening to these people and also reading many different books, including some of the volumes of The Official Records of the Civil War, Death in September, The Insanity of It All, Every Day Life During the Civil War, and many others, I have come to the conclusion that the Civil War was about much more than abolishing the institution of slavery.
It was more about preserving the United States and protecting the rights of the individual, the very tenets upon which this country was founded. I personally think that the people who profess that the Civil War was only fought about slavery have not read their history books. I really am glad that slavery was abolished, but I don't think it should be glorified as being the sole reason the Civil War was fought. There are so many more issues that people were intensely passionate about at the time. Slavery was one of them, but it was not the primary cause of the war. The primary causes of the war were economics and states' rights.
Slavery was a part of those greater issues, but it was not the reason the Southern States seceded from the Union, nor fought the Civil War. It certainly was a Southern institution that was part of the economic system of the plantations, and because of that, it was part and parcel of the economic reasons that the South formed the Confederacy. The economic issue was one of taxation and being able to sell cotton and other raw materials where the producers wanted to, rather than where they were forced to, and at under inflated prices. Funny, it sounds very much like the reason we broke from Great Britain to begin with. The South was within their rights, but there should have been another way to solve the problem. If they had been willing to listen to Abraham Lincoln, perhaps the war could have been avoided. Lincoln had a plan to gradually free the slaves without it further hurting the plantation owners. He also had a plan to allow them to sell their products anywhere they wanted to and at a fair price. They did not choose to listen to the President, however, so they formed the Confederacy and the Civil War began.
Former CSA Col. John S. Mosby was quoted in Wikipedia， as having written in 1894: "I've always understood that we went to war on account of the thing we quarreled with the North about. I've never heard of any other cause than slavery."
I've always felt the states rights argument for the civil war was a bit of historical revisionism.
Yes the war was about states rights, but it was specifically the right to have slaves that brought things to war. Yes Lincoln didn't mention slavery until two years in, but that was because everyone in America knew what the war was about but talking about slavery turned public opinion in England against slave picked cotton or any other involvement in the American war.
Why are we frequently taught then, that the Civil War, War of Northern Aggression, War Between the States, or whatever you want to call it, was solely about slavery?
There's that damn 13th Amendment thingy. Followed shortly by the 14th (equal protection) and 15th (right to vote). One didn't amend the Constitution lightly (till the Judiciary got around that by 'interpreting' upon whim not text).
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.