President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, after initially announcing his personal interest in the case (“I am chasing”) has been more circumspect. This suggests that the Turkish leader is more carefully evaluating the leverage he now has over Saudi Arabia. It may be in his power to direct the finger of blame toward Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman or to help deflect the spotlight from him.How can it be asserted flatly that "the leaks serve nobody’s constructive purpose"? It's impossible to detect an interest that could be served? I find that highly implausible. Apparently, there is "much speculation" about the motivation behind the links, so what are the speculators talking about if "the leaks serve nobody’s constructive purpose"?
But while the Turkish president is being uncharacteristically careful with his words, there seems to have been little or no effort to stanch the leaks. The leaks, and the motivation behind them, have become subject of much speculation....
But the leaks serve nobody’s constructive purpose. They undermine the credibility of the investigation, and of Turkey’s impartiality....
Or is "constructive" like the "true" in "no true Scotsman"? In other words, all that speculation is about who may be pursuing a destructive purpose.
Posts
227 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 227 of 227J. Farmer said...
Could you imagine what Farmer would say if it was a christian mob throwing shit at Muslims?
With all due respect, you're a fucking idiot.
You asked for examples that Muslims were pushing sharia here. I gave them to you.
Like every other time you are proven wrong you pretend you never said what you previously said.
Bad faith.
Right. By being consistent in my views on foreign policy for almost 20 years, I am being "disingenuous."
No. It is because you are full of shit.
You say something stupid like "Iran doesn't fund proxy wars." I prove you wrong. You pretend you aren't wrong.
The only thing you care about is that if Saudi Arabia makes peace with Israel and because the US supports that alliance it has to fail.
You dismiss the fact that there is a real chance to be peace in the middle east and you refuse to acknowledge Iran's central role in keeping the war going. You also refuse to acknowledge the benefits peace in the ME would bring the world.
By the way, Achilles, you have made references to serving in Iraq in the past. If I am recalling this incorrectly, please correct me and accept my apology. But if not, answer me this, did you think you and your comrades were three fighting and putting your lives at risk for an Iraq where "Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a fundamental source of legislation,"
I did go to Iraq. We killed a bunch of shit heads there that needing killing. And Iran was responsible for the deaths of people I knew.
You say that Iran wasn't trying to kill us. I provide proof they were. You pretend you never said they weren't trying to kill us.
You are ridiculous.
Perhaps when people caution about stupid, counterproductive wars, you should be a little more circumspect and not immediately resort to the hurling of schoolyard-level insults.
You are so smug in your cheering for our failure.
I recognize that the people that were running this country during the BushClintonBushObama years did not have our interests in mind.
We were purposely shackled and those wars were purposely lost.
And you are happy about that result just like the leftists.
Those wars were won on the ground. They were lost in DC. The only reason I think Iraq was a mistake was because the Bush's Clinton's and Obama's were working for team globalist and didn't really hold any of the goals they stated.
It just so happens you seem to be cheering for the same things team globalist cheers for.
With all due respect, you're a fucking idiot. As I have said repeatedly, over and over on this website: (1) I am a nationalist with ethno-national sympathies (2) I support a near total shut down of immigration into the country for a minimum of 10 years (3) I support a wall on the southern border (4) I have said for years, long before Trump rode down that escalator, that the simplest way to protect ourselves from Islamic terrorism was to not allow Muslims into the country (4) One of my favorite catchphrases is "America is Doomed" due to demographic trends (5) I voted for Trump, even though I have said that I believe it is a hail mary pass that is probably too late.
You know what? I am not going to let the perfect get in the way of the good.
I fully support your 5 issues here, and feel a trace of sympathy for what you see as the tensions in SA with America.
So I will happily ally with you on THESE FIVE ISSUES. The last...I think there are pragmatic realpolitik reasons to stay allied to SOME of the people in the region...and SA has the heft.
However while I doubt Iran has a nuke NOW, putting one's head in the sand doesn't mean they wont have it later...and they are the kind of asshole who shoves a shiv in your back.
So no, I won't join your isolationistic bent because I don't like the idea of flash fried Americans...even New Yorkers or Californians.
I wish New Yorkers and Californians felt the same way about me.
"I did go to Iraq. We killed a bunch of shit heads there that needing killing. And Iran was responsible for the deaths of people I knew."
How do you know they were "shit heads...that need(ed) killing?" Why did they need killing? Because they were defending their country against an illegal invading force? We were the bad guys there, if military forces invading a country that has not attacked them and poses no threat to them are bad guys. (They are.)
How do you know Iran is responsible for the deaths of people you know?
"I did go to Iraq. We killed a bunch of shit heads there that needing killing. And Iran was responsible for the deaths of people I knew."
How do you know they were "shit heads...that need(ed) killing?" Why did they need killing? Because they were defending their country against an illegal invading force? We were the bad guys there, if military forces invading a country that has not attacked them and poses no threat to them are bad guys. (They are.)
How do you know Iran is responsible for the deaths of people you know?
"Saudi Arabia is trying to modernize and bring the entire middle east to modern times."
That's why the murdered and dismembered a critic of their regime.
@Achilles:
You asked for examples that Muslims were pushing sharia here. I gave them to you.
Like every other time you are proven wrong you pretend you never said what you previously said.
Bad faith.
Neither example you gave is of "creeping sharia." One was a video of a confrontation between a small group of people, and the other was about female genital mutilation, which is illegal in the United States.
The only thing you care about is that if Saudi Arabia makes peace with Israel and because the US supports that alliance it has to fail.
You dismiss the fact that there is a real chance to be peace in the middle east and you refuse to acknowledge Iran's central role in keeping the war going. You also refuse to acknowledge the benefits peace in the ME would bring the world.
Saudi Arabia supports the establishment of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, and they support the right of return, which would be demographic suicide. And even if by some miracle, the Israeli-Palestinian issue was solved, it would not end the regional rivalry between Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. What does Saudi support for the Al Nusra front in Syria and Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula IN Yemen have to do with "peace with Israel?
Those wars were won on the ground. They were lost in DC. The only reason I think Iraq was a mistake was because the Bush's Clinton's and Obama's were working for team globalist and didn't really hold any of the goals they stated.
That doesn't even make sense. The war was successful. The Hussein regime was toppled. The problem that you don't seem to grasp is that as soon as you turn Iraq into a democratic country, you were going to get an Islamist government, which is exactly what we got. That has nothing to do with "DC" or "globalists."
It just so happens you seem to be cheering for the same things team globalist cheers for.
Right, because obviously the policy preferences I outlined are exactly what "team globalist cheers for."
@FIDO:
However while I doubt Iran has a nuke NOW, putting one's head in the sand doesn't mean they wont have it later...and they are the kind of asshole who shoves a shiv in your back.
So no, I won't join your isolationistic bent because I don't like the idea of flash fried Americans...even New Yorkers or Californians.
I have not advocated "putting one's head in the sand." The JCPOA effectively blocked Iran's path to a nuclear weapon. No country that has adopted the Additional Protocols has developed a nuclear weapon. Trump's decision to pull out of the JCPOA was counterproductive, and his so called maximum pressure campaign is unlikely to bring Iran back to the negotiating table to accept a list of demands they will never accept.
Sorry, you needed to go to Page 2 of Google to find this;
"(Reuters) - A federal appeals court said police violated the free speech rights of Christian evangelists by telling them to leave a June 2012 Arab-American festival in Dearborn, Michigan after an angry crowd began pelting them with bottles, eggs and other objects."
When sheriff's deputies tell Christians that they must leave the area because the Muslims are rioting against them, you are not in the USA, you are in Dearbornistan, MI. Where creeping sharia has done crept.
And the Iranian Navy doesn't need to have a blue-water navy to set off an EMP bomb that would put the US back to pre-industrial standards of living in seconds. They could use a shrimp boat, if they just had a reliable sea-launched missile. And they are working on that. As for your claim that they don't have a bomb, right. Neither did South Africa. Neither did India. Neither did Pakistan. Neither do the Norks. Neither do the Israelis. The Iranians have underground facilities that they do not acknowledge, which no external inspector has ever sen the inside of.
At one point the Bush administration was seriously considering a conventional attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. A major reason they held back was the likelihood that such an attack would release large amounts of airborne radioactive material, and causing tens of thousands of deaths in Iran and other countries. If the prevailing winds continued to prevail, most of those deaths would have been in Saudi, which was deemed problematic.
This scenario places a conventional attack on Iran in the last-ditch category. An EMP attack on the US would leave most of the nation without electricity. It might take years to recover, during which years half or more of all Americans would die. The options, therefore, are
1 - Nuke Iran.
2 - Regime change in Iran.
3 - Die (J. Farmer's preferred option).
@Jupiter:
When sheriff's deputies tell Christians that they must leave the area because the Muslims are rioting against them, you are not in the USA, you are in Dearbornistan, MI. Where creeping sharia has done crept.
"One Bible Believer carried a severed pig's head on a stick, which Chavez explained protected the Bible Believers by repelling observers who feared it. Appellants soon began preaching using a megaphone, and a small crowd formed around them almost immediately. Chavez castigated the crowd for following a “pedophile” prophet and warned of God's impending judgment. As this evangelizing continued, the crowd yelled back. At this point, a ribbon-cutting at the opposite end of the Festival occupied a majority of the WSCO officers, but one officer watched from the outskirts of the crowd."
-BIBLE BELIEVERS v. WAYNE COUNTY
So a small group of evangelists show up to a festival with a severed pigs head and a megaphone to castigate attendees, and a few minors reacted with violence. That does not make violence permissible, but it's a little different than "Christians that they must leave the area because the Muslims are rioting against them."
And if this single episode of a handful of people behaving badly six years ago is your one and only example of "creeping sharia," then consider me unimpressed.
@Jupiter:
And the Iranian Navy doesn't need to have a blue-water navy to set off an EMP bomb that would put the US back to pre-industrial standards of living in seconds.
So does that mean you are now retracting your claim that Iran "recently begun operating naval vessels in the Atlantic Ocean?"
As for your claim that they don't have a bomb, right.
What I said was: "There is zero evidence that the Iranians "may already have" any nuclear weapons, small medium or large." If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide it. I certainly hope it is not the same source as your fatuous claim about Iran operating naval vessels in the Atlantic.
The options, therefore, are
1 - Nuke Iran.
2 - Regime change in Iran.
3 - Die (J. Farmer's preferred option).
No, my preferred options are to not listen to uninformed morons like yourself. There is no evidence that the Iranians are suicidal or irrational. Iran launching a nuclear first-strike on the US would get them nothing but utter destruction in return. And as for regime change, right, because such operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya have worked out so well in our favor. Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Smiley was recently wounded in a Taliban attack Kandahar 17 years after we started the war that has resulted in a failed state in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. So seeing how successful our regime change operation was in a country of 250,000 square miles and 35 million, of course we should try duplicating that policy in a country of 635,000 square miles and 80 million people. What could possibly go wrong?
"The commonest error in politics is sticking to the carcass of dead policies."
-Lord Salisbury
Robert Cook said...
"I did go to Iraq. We killed a bunch of shit heads there that needing killing. And Iran was responsible for the deaths of people I knew."
How do you know they were "shit heads...that need(ed) killing?" Why did they need killing? Because they were defending their country against an illegal invading force? We were the bad guys there, if military forces invading a country that has not attacked them and poses no threat to them are bad guys. (They are.)
Because they came from foreign countries to overthrow the Iraqi government.
How do you know Iran is responsible for the deaths of people you know?
Because we had their conversations in Iraq and the explosively formed projectile bombs being used were made in Iran.
The evidence was so incontrovertible even Farmer would have to accept it. In his heart he likes the US.
He just has taken a position that all foreign intervention everywhere is wrong every time all the time so he must shape the world around his world view. Thus his nickname smug and his obvious problems with contradictory information.
We know you would never accept anything our country said.
Because you are an enemy of the founding principles of the United States.
J. Farmer said...
No, my preferred options are to not listen to uninformed morons like yourself. There is no evidence that the Iranians are suicidal or irrational. Iran launching a nuclear first-strike on the US would get them nothing but utter destruction in return.
But there is clear evidence that Iran would use their power to destabilize the middle east and drive more war.
They are already funding proxy wars. They started the war in Yemen. You bitch and complain about Saudi Arabia incessantly in Yemen, but you refuse to accept Iran caused that war.
Even Earnest and Kerry had to admit Iran started the Yemen war.
J. Farmer said...
@Achilles:
You asked for examples that Muslims were pushing sharia here. I gave them to you.
Like every other time you are proven wrong you pretend you never said what you previously said.
Bad faith.
Neither example you gave is of "creeping sharia." One was a video of a confrontation between a small group of people, and the other was about female genital mutilation, which is illegal in the United States.
This is a perfect example of your problem.
You cannot deal with contradictory information. You just dismiss it out of hand. Smug.
The police of a leftist run locality in Dearborn teamed up with Muslims to shut their critics down.
Police in a leftist run locality teamed up with Muslims in Rotherdam too.
It is clear the police are covering up numerous crimes committed by Muslims in Dearborne. They were caught on video doing it in public. One can only imagine what goes on in without cameras around and a compliant police force.
But yeah. Smug.
@Achilles:
He just has taken a position that all foreign intervention everywhere is wrong every time all the time so he must shape the world around his world view.
I have never taken that position. That's just some caricature you dreamed up in that tiny brain of yours.
They started the war in Yemen. You bitch and complain about Saudi Arabia incessantly in Yemen, but you refuse to accept Iran caused that war.
No they didn't. That's just talking point you regurgitate without knowing what the hell you are talking about.
You cannot deal with contradictory information. You just dismiss it out of hand. Smug.
I can deal with contradictory information. You just didn't provide any.
The police of a leftist run locality in Dearborn teamed up with Muslims to shut their critics down.
Those aren't the facts of the case. See the link above. As usual you have strongly held opinion without even being minimally informed of the actual facts.
But yeah. Smug.
Better to be smug than an uniformed idiot.
They supported the Houthi that toppled Saleh who was an ally of the kingdom,
Today was a bad day for Erdogan his bluff was called the lira went splat, his ruling partner deserted the alliance and Salman raised 50 billion.
Luckily the Kingdom can always count on credulous western commenters to lap up their PR dog and pony shows like the sycophantic throw sniffers they are.
How about erdogans today he tried to pull a felix the cat.
As soon as anyone can explain what significant American national interest is served by getting in the middle of a pissing match between two middle east autocrats, I'll try to summon the energy to care.
many of these events are happening in salafi communities, hamlet towers, st. denis, molenbeek which is increasingly led by mosques funded from Qatar, in fact there is a whole hash, # Qatar leaks, that shows the corruption of the current thanim regime, internally and externally, the short hand is hamadein, the sauds have retreated from some of this, admittedly not soon enough
I have not advocated "putting one's head in the sand." The JCPOA effectively blocked Iran's path to a nuclear weapon. No country that has adopted the Additional Protocols has developed a nuclear weapon. Trump's decision to pull out of the JCPOA was counterproductive, and his so called maximum pressure campaign is unlikely to bring Iran back to the negotiating table to accept a list of demands they will never accept.
Ah yes. A big piece of paper. I am sure the Mullahs are shivering in their boots at the prospect of violating it. They will treat it like a modern day Koran.
You put your faith in John Kerry, the toothless UN and the Mullahs.
Which of those should inspire any confidence from me again?
They do not. So functionally, you are trusting in a sense of 'global comity' to the nuclear problem from nationalistic religious extremists.
I do not share your incredible optimism.
I'm looking forward to Framer's visit to the Iran that "a thousand Americans" visited.
They love gays there. Even give them flying lessons.
@FIDO:
Ah yes. A big piece of paper.
Oy. Yet another person who has strong opinions about the JCPOA but has not bothered to understand a single thing about. The plan includes numerous verification and transparency measures, such as the use of electronic seals, 24/7 video surveillance, foreign weapons inspectors present at Iranian facilities, etc. So, for example...
"8...On 25 August 2018, the Agency verified that the plant was in operation and that Iran’s stock of heavy water was 122.9 metric tonnes. Throughout the reporting period, Iran had no more than 130 metric tonnes of heavy water (para. 14).
13. As of 18 August 2018, the quantity of Iran’s uranium enriched up to 3.67% U-235 was 139.4 kg, based on the JCPOA and decisions of the Joint Commission.
14. At the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant (FFEP), no more than 1044 IR-1 centrifuges have been maintained in one wing (Unit 2) of the facility (para. 46). On 14 August 2018, the Agency verified that 1020 IR-1 centrifuges were installed in six cascades. On the same date, the Agency also verified that five IR-1 centrifuges were installed in a layout of 16 IR-1 centrifuge positions and one IR-1 centrifuge was installed in a single position,21 for the purpose of conducting “initial research and R&D activities related to stable isotope production”. Throughout the reporting period, Iran has not conducted any uranium enrichment or related research and development (R&D) activities, and there has not been any nuclear material at the plant (para. 45).
15. All centrifuges and associated infrastructure in storage have remained under continuous Agency monitoring (paras 29, 47, 48 and 70).24 The Agency has continued to have regular access to relevant buildings at Natanz, including all of FEP and the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant (PFEP), and performed daily access upon Agency request (para. 71). The Agency has also continued to have regular access to FFEP, including daily access upon Agency request (para. 51).
17. On 19 August 2018, the Agency verified that all irradiated TRR fuel elements in Iran have a measured dose rate of no less than 1 rem/hour (at one metre in air).
22. Iran has continued to permit the Agency to use on-line enrichment monitors and electronic seals which communicate their status within nuclear sites to Agency inspectors, and to facilitate the automated collection of Agency measurement recordings registered by installed measurement devices (para. 67.1). Iran has issued long-term visas to Agency inspectors designated for Iran as requested by the Agency, provided proper working space for the Agency at nuclear sites and facilitated the use of working space at locations near nuclear sites in Iran (para. 67.2).
23. Iran has continued to permit the Agency to monitor – through measures agreed with Iran,
including containment and surveillance measures – that all uranium ore concentrate (UOC) produced in Iran or obtained from any other source is transferred to the Uranium Conversion Facility (UCF) at Esfahan (para. 68). Iran also provided the Agency with all information necessary to enable the Agency to verify the production of UOC and the inventory of UOC produced in Iran or obtained from any other source (para. 69)"
-Verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of United Nations Security Council resolution 2231 (2015), 30 August 20
And from the Arms Control Association:
"The JCPOA guards against both the breakout and sneakout options. Intrusive monitoring and verification will give inspectors daily access to nuclear facilities including enrichment sites and provide for continuous monitoring of Iran’s supply chain. Given these restrictions, it is extremely improbable that Iran would attempt to cheat using declared facilities. Any attempt would be quickly detected or predicated on Iran choosing to leave the NPT and pursue the bomb."
-Understanding the JCPOA
@Michael K:
GeoEx CEO Jean-Paul Tennant recently returned happy to report that his expectations were exceeded. Not only did he feel safe 100 percent of the time, but people were also kind and open to him. Revealing he was American, “they would say, ‘USA? We love Americans! I have a cousin in Los Angeles! Come to my house—I will feed you dinner!’ A few people just came up to us and said ‘I love you’ out of the blue.”
Destination specialist Linda de la Torre returned from a scouting trip in Iran with stories of hospitality and surprises. She also commented: “As Americans traveling in Iran, safety is on our minds from the minute we begin planning the trip. I was pleased to see the openness of the culture and was able to enjoy absolutely everything without worrying.” She advises interested travelers not to believe everything you read about Iran, that things have changed dramatically since the turbulent years of the 1970s, and to go soon because things are changing.
Scott Montgomery remembers: “When I think of my Iran travel experience, I think first of the people. In the more than 120 countries I have visited, I don’t think I have ever felt as warmly welcomed as I did in Iran. Without exception, everyone I met was kind and helpful. Esfahan is certainly one of the most incredible cities anywhere. The UNESCO World Heritage Site designation is well-deserved—there's incredibly beautiful architecture everywhere you look. The magnificent Naqsh-e Jahan Square took my breath away. Iran's history is so rich and the sights so varied, I wish I had more time there to take everything in.”
-GeoEx Staff Reports from Iran
Although initially a little anxious about safety, we quickly relaxed into total comfort as we walked the streets of Shiraz, Isfahan, Kashan, Tehran and, later, Yazd. Frankly, we felt as safe in Iran as in any other country we have visited. Even when Trump announced his decision to back out of the nuclear agreement half way through our tour, we saw no ill effects in the attitude of the Iranian people. Bottom line, our Iran trip with Wild Frontiers was one of the most gratifying cultural experiences of our lives. We loved Iran, we loved the people. The history, antiquities, ruins, mosques and culture are endlessly fascinating. We highly recommend the trip to our American friends.
-Visiting Iran as an American
Traveling to Iran as an American citizen may sound complicated and dangerous. It’s not. We’re here to dispel the myths and answer the questions piling up in our inbox about visas, safety, and other concerns based on our visit to Iran.
Although the United States has imposed sanctions against Iran, there are currently no restrictions on American citizens visiting Iran as tourists. Currently, about 1,000-1,500 Americans visit Iran each year.
-Traveling to Iran as Americans: All You Need to Know
If you’ve happened to stumble upon this page, you are probably at least a tiny bit curious about experiencing the beauty, history, and culture of Iran first-hand. However, you may have heard lots of negative things about Iran: things like, “it’s dangerous,” “they have a contentious relationship with the United States,” and “they hate Americans.” During my travels in this beautiful country, I learned that these one-sided messages couldn’t be farther from the truth.
-The Ultimate Guide to Traveling in Iran As An American Citizen
Now I wonder who these people are going to believe. Michael K or their own lying experiences.
Post a Comment