[ENGLISH.ALARABIYA.NET] Amid the angry countries’ recent 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... , the latter is acting like a trapped cat who is searching for a way out to evade the situation. Instead of realistically dealing with the crisis and admitting that it represents a dangerous and serious problem on everyone in the region, it’s jumping in the air while resorting to its old tricks.
We say this to the Qatari cat: Quit attempting to jump from windows as there is only one door to exit the crisis. You must reach an understanding with your neighbors. Iran’s supreme guide will not save you, neither will The Sick Man of Europe Turkey
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
06/29/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Qatar (MB)
#1
Invasion not far off. Will Iran+Turkey respond?
#4
Saudi already overextended in Yemen. USA, under Donald, is not going to fight their war for them. Iran might intervene. Turkey, well - IMO - Erdogan is nuts.
#5
Qatar a small bit of flat desert with hardly any armed forces.
Iran doesn't have an airforce worth mentioning and Turkey is too far away for any meaningful intervention.
The spike in oil prices as Iran and Iraq exports stop as the Gulf becomes a war zone will pay for a Qatar invasion and the Yemen war probably several times over.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
06/29/2017 10:08 Comments ||
Top||
#7
The Sheikh in charge develops "health issues" and a nephew that the Saudis like "invites" them in to maintain public order? Now don't call it a Coup or a Regime Change!
In that context, Saudi Arabia and its friends have given Qatar a list of demands they cannot conceivably meet and imposed a ten-day deadline to concede or face unspecified further action. Qatar was essentially doomed from the start of this rift, and it’s only just beginning. As Newsweek lamented, “the demands are designed to be impossible to comply with.”
[Market Watch] It turns out that all Americans, regardless of income, spend a large percentage of their income on luxuries.
People who make the most money spend the biggest chunk of their incomes on luxury goods, but even the poorest households spend a significant amount for luxuries, according to an analysis released this week by Deutsche Bank Research.
The wealthiest families (the top fifth of earners) spend around 65% of their incomes on luxury goods and 35% on necessities, according to the study, which looked at spending habits between 1984 and 2014. Middle-income households weren’t far behind: They spend 50% on luxuries and 50% on necessities.
Even the lowest income families (the bottom fifth of earners) spend 40% on luxuries and 60% on necessities, according to the study’s author, Torsten Slok, chief international economist for Deutsche Bank Securities.
#1
Pretty stupid definition of "Luxuries", which are essentially whatever you spend the greater proportion of your income on. Them defining as axiomatic the conclusion they wanted to obtain, and (lo and behold!) its true!!!
#2
So the fact that are culture has cheap basic survival necessities means that we are wasting money on luxuries... Man in Black: Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.
Vizzini: Wait til I get going! Now, where was I?
Man in Black: Australia Luxuries.
#3
1. We have redefined "poverty" in this country. Poor people have cable TV, cars, microwave ovens, AC, laptops, etc. They aren't starving, but have weight problems.
2. Spending on "luxuries" is actually very common among the poor, and is often part of why they are poor. It is the rich who are accustomed to sacrifice and delayed gratification.
#4
I remember when I was young and poor - but not on public assistance - I was checking out with my generic corn flakes and ground beef behind a man with ribeye and artichoke who paid with food stamps, though he did have to use his cash for the wine.
[American Thinker] What will the future of the European Union be? Bruce Thornton projects a solution to their future that lies in the EU showing greater respect for the diversity of cultures of its member states. He states,
"The challenge facing Europe today is not just reforming its economies or crafting saner immigration policies. It is whether the EU leadership can allow a greater recognition of and respect for the member nations’ distinct identities and sovereignty...."
In short, there needs to be a better balance between the EU continental/globalist aspirations and the national identities and aspirations of the member states.
To some degree we can see the EU as using the USA as a model of federalism. Just as our states came together to form a "more perfect union," the European member states, beginning with the Treaty of Rome in 1954, have worked step-by-step to build a common economy and other areas of integrated policy and action. The parts of Europe coordinated to form the whole known as the European Union, just as the thirteen original colonies coalesced in a spirit of unity to form our national entity.
Yet, the net result to this point was not to create a European government per se, although that may well be on the horizon, but to create a bureaucratic network of rules and regulations, a common currency (the Euro), and joint rapid reaction forces (separate from NATO). These rapid reaction forces are subordinate to the European Union Military Staff, and complement other EU military forces. The existence of a military program managed by the EU often comes as a surprise to those who think of the EU as a purely economic arrangement.
#7
Why is the EU failing? The great majority of citizens do not want to reproduce, live for today, and do not value their culture and history. They are being out bred by muslims from the ME and south Med, who want the bennies, but do not contribute to the European culture. So it is an invasion by people who do not give a rat's behind about European values, other than what they can grab in material goods.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
06/29/2017 15:54 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Why the European Union Is Failing
Don't know - I still haven't figured why they wanted European Union, as distinct from European Common market, in the first place.
[TownHall] The progressive strategy of investigating President Donald Trump nonstop for Russian collusion or obstruction of justice or witness tampering so far has produced no substantial evidence of wrongdoing.
The alternate strategy of derailing the new administration before it really gets started hasn't succeeded either, despite serial efforts to sue over election results, alter the Electoral College vote, boycott the inauguration, delay the confirmation of appointments, demand recusals, promise Trump's impeachment or removal through the 25th Amendment, and file suit under the Emoluments Clause.
A third strategy of portraying Trump as a veritable monster likewise so far has failed in four special elections for House seats.
Apparently progressives have accepted the idea that Barack Obama's formula of twice winning the Electoral College is not yet transferrable to other progressive candidates such as Hillary Clinton. And they probably have concluded that Obama's progressive political agenda proved unpopular with voters by 2010 and had to be implemented by ad hoc executive orders -- presidential prerogatives now utilized by Donald Trump to overturn the ones Obama issued.
A fourth potential pathway to power would be a return to Bill Clinton's pragmatic agendas of the 1990s. But apparently progressives find that centrist remedy worse than the malady of losing elections -- given that during the Obama tenure, more than 1,000 state and local offices were lost to Republicans, in addition to majorities in the House and Senate, and a majority of governorships and legislatures.
#4
Rather, the lesson is that progressives should have offered alternative political visions that might have won back the American people rather than attempting to terminate the Trump presidency on charges to which the progressive side was far more vulnerable.
Alternative vision? You mean like open borders, unrestricted immigration from the Middle East, constant meddling in the Middle East, rust belt unemployment, trillion dollar stimuli, single payer, Planned Parenthood subsidies? That kind of vision? I don't think that's gonna work anymore either.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
06/29/2017 10:33 Comments ||
Top||
[Daily Caller] CNN "New Day" host Chris Cuomo said Wednesday President Donald Trump is at war with the media and out to make reporters "an enemy of the state."
"At the end of the day we have been here before my brothers," said Cuomo.
"This is a de facto declaration of making the media an enemy of the state, that is what this effort winds up amounting to," he said. "It’s not just Cillizza, it’s not just Cuomo, it’s not just one story. It’s all of them all the time, they’re all fake. Don’t trust them, [reporters] only trust us [The White House]."
CNN politics reporter Chris Cillizza said Trump is fixated on the media because it’s what helped him rise to power.
"Almost every morning particularly yesterday and this morning it’s about the media," said Cillizza."It’s about the fake news media. That’s what he cares about that. That’s what animates him. That’s is at the fundamental core of why the guy ran for president."
He added reporters have to adapt and change their style of covering the White House, but fellow panelist and executive editor of The Sentinel Newspapers, Brian Karem, disagreed.
“If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're mis-informed.” ― Mark Twain
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/29/2017 8:10 Comments ||
Top||
#5
From the people when a certain community of citizens riot, always ask us to examine the cause as in 'blame America'. That's why self examination fails for you, you always fall back on 'blame America'. What advice could be offered, but 'adapt or perish'.
#8
CNN "New Day" host Chris Cuomo said Wednesday President Donald Trump is at war with the media and out to make reporters "an enemy of the state."
There are many things wrong with this statement:
1. CNN discredited itself with fake news to besmirch a POTUS who they can't accept; HRC, in their view, was supposed to be the inevitable coronated queen.
2. The CNN have an over-inflated view of who they are and what they do. They are hacks who shill for the Democratic Party and anything left. Some call it propaganda. Propaganda often has a germ of truth to it albeit distorted and inflated. What they do is just scurrilous faked news. See "fake dossier" for an example.
3. CNN does not deserve to have the protections of the 1st Amendment as they don't practice anything that resembles a "free press" unless by "free" it means free to publish anything that is misleading, scatological and libelous.
#10
So the press is supposed to be at odds with the administration. That's how it is supposed to work. Its not supposed to be hate filled lies from the press, its not supposed to be propaganda machines spinning people into a frenzy, it is supposed to be honest reporting calling out the issues for explanation. The press has lost its way due to 8 years of coddling and hero worshiping of the last POTUS.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
06/29/2017 10:06 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Thought you guys just admitted your output regarding the State is manufactured BS?
[Breitbart] Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich said on Tuesday that CNN should consider bringing in an independent counsel to investigate the company as a whole amid a fake news scandal in which they retracted a hit piece pertaining to President Donald Trump.
"They should appoint an outside analyst, somebody of impeccable authority like Michael Mukasey, who used to be Attorney General of the United States, to view everything of CNN and basically reset it," he told Fox and Friends in an interview. Gingrich continued:
You cannot get to a believable network while Zucker is there. He clearly made a gamble last year to be the leading anti-Trump network, he’s clearly done things that are absurdly wrong. I like lots of the people at CNN, I worked with them for a while. There are some very very good people at CNN, they have a very long tradition of being good journalists. But the culture of the overall system right now is very toxic.
Gingrich’s comments come after the network retracted a story alleging links between former Trump transition team member Anthony Scaramucci and the Russian Direct Investment Fund -- an incident that has since led to the resignation of three CNN employees.
Furthermore, footage obtained by investigative journalist James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas showed a senior CNN producer admitting that the network’s relentless coverage of President Donald Trump over alleged links to Russia was "mostly bullsh*t."
On Tuesday, Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders described the network as "a disgrace to journalism."
[American Thinker] The mainstream media and many others have been grilling President Trump since he signed the Executive Order temporally halting the population of seven predominantly Muslim states from entering the USA. As a result, he has been called everything from "racist" to "Islamophobic."
As a Jordanian Muslim who also holds a British citizenship, I am not offended by the President’s actions, nor am I convinced that the Executive Orders in question were specifically written to target Muslims, for the following reasons:
First, the Executive Order singled out seven specific countries out of 56 Muslim states.
Second, the President did not pick these countries randomly, because six of the seven states have one thing in common: they are failed states, and they do not have a unified and recognized state system for processing of nationalities, passports, and state documents. In other words, the country’s citizens can receive any number of passports they like, complete with fake or multiple names. That means a terrorist can simply make up a name, obtain a passport and visa, and head to the U.S.
Third, there are numerous examples of terrorists using nefarious means to reach America’s shores ‐ from the ISIS Passport Printing Press to clearly identified individuals. Take terrorist Anawr al-Awlaki, a dual national of both the U.S. and Yemen. It’s documented that in the early 90s, he was issued a passport using a different name, thus helping him establish a whole new, secret identity. He then used that identity to enter the U.S. on a Fulbright scholarship for foreign students. After obtaining a college degree at taxpayers’ money as a "foreign student", he went back to Yemen and actively supported, promoted, and financed terrorist acts against America.
Fourth, the President knows these facts, and this is a sign that he is listening to his advisors and is absorbing intelligence information accurately and quickly.
Next, its quite clear that the President did what his patriotic duty and position require him to do: protect Americans from harm
With that said, if the President did want to ban a specific group of people, what would it look like, especially in a Middle Eastern country?
The two best examples I can give you are found in the Middle East. The first example is how Arab countries treat their Palestinian and Jordanian brethren, simply denying them documentation, freedom of movement, and banning their entry into their countries for the most frivolous of reasons. This is similar in nature to the second, how most Arab countries ban Israeli Jews from entering their countries, while allowing Israeli Arabs to come and go. A prime example of this is found in Jordan.
To me, that is real racism and religious discrimination, and in all honesty, comparing the President’s Executive Orders to what those Arab countries do is hard for me to swallow because of how easily they violate human rights, point fingers at others and clearly support true apartheid.
With those reasons in mind, President Trump did right thing, protecting the American way of life while being the first politician in generations to take the initial steps to keep his campaign promises. This is what I -- as a Muslim, Palestinian and Jordanian -- call a great President who’s is making America great again.
(Washington, DC): The unlikely alliance between Islam and the left isn’t on the media’s radar screen, yet the chaos on our streets and campuses is obvious and disturbing. The ever-more frequent jihad attacks, both at home and abroad, even more so. But the swirl of images flitting across our screens can be difficult to understand: protesters are carrying all kinds of signs, hurling abuse at our new president, and at those who would speak in defense of America and its free institutions… Black Lives Matter activists spew hatred for law enforcement, but are funded by wealthy establishment leftists. Muslim terrorists screaming ‘Allahu Akbar’ are murdering innocent, men, women and children—in the name of the ‘religion of peace.’ Too much of it doesn’t seem to make sense. How can the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood, Black Lives Matter movement, and social Marxist anarchist leftists all be part of the same street scene?
To help explain this unlikely but very real alliance, Matthew Vadum, Senior Vice President at the Washington, D.C. think tank, Capital Research Center and an award-winning journalist, has authored an important new book for the Center for Security Policy’s Civilization Jihad Readers Series entitled “Team Jihad: How Sharia-Supremacists Collaborate with Leftists to Destroy the United States.” Vadum, already widely published on issues related to leftist infiltration and subversion within American society, here marshals a wealth of historical detail to document how and when the forces of Islam and the left first began to make common cause and how far they’ve come in the years since.
With a new president in the White House, the United States seems headed for changes on many fronts. None is more important to understand than the deeply anti-American working relationship among seemingly disparate forces like these that are united in their dedication to the overthrow of the U.S. Constitution and our system of law and order. Neglect, benign and otherwise, has allowed this unholy alliance of jihadists, street thugs, and cultural Marxists to advance unchecked throughout our society for far too long.
With this monograph, Matt Vadum offers the average citizen a clear and very readable explanation for what we all see happening around us.
#1
The unlikely alliance between Islam and the left isn’t on the media’s radar screen, yet the chaos on our streets and campuses is obvious and disturbing.
The alliance between Islam and the left isn't published by the MSM because the fourth estate lame-stream media are a part of a fifth column effort. FIFY
Historian E. H. Carr emphasized the Comintern's "uncompromising" promotion of the notion of revolution combined with its willingness to compromise with Muslim traditions:
"Muslim beliefs and institutions were treated with veiled respect, and the cause of world revolution narrowed down to specific and more manageable dimenstions. The Muslim tradition of jihad, or holy war against the infidel, was harnessed to a modern crusade of oppressed peoples against the imperialist oppressors, with Britain as the main target."
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.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
(Washington, DC): The unlikely alliance between Islam and the left isn’t on the media’s radar screen, yet the chaos on our streets and campuses is obvious and disturbing. The ever-more frequent jihad attacks, both at home and abroad, even more so. But the swirl of images flitting across our screens can be difficult to understand: protesters are carrying all kinds of signs, hurling abuse at our new president, and at those who would speak in defense of America and its free institutions… Black Lives Matter activists spew hatred for law enforcement, but are funded by wealthy establishment leftists. Muslim terrorists screaming ‘Allahu Akbar’ are murdering innocent, men, women and children—in the name of the ‘religion of peace.’ Too much of it doesn’t seem to make sense. How can the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood, Black Lives Matter movement, and social Marxist anarchist leftists all be part of the same street scene?
