Erdogan threatens Kurdish annihilation, U.S. turns blind eye

Erdogan's military has been carrying out massive attacks in several southeastern Turkish towns, furthering Erdogan's promise to "annihilate" Kurdish militants. While there has been limited coverage of these matters in the U.S. mainstream press, niche news bloggers have reported both his threats and his deadly actions against his own citizens.

I'm reminded of Qaddafi and his threats to go door-to-door, supposedly the main reason for the move to the UNSC and the R2Pers to destroy Libya. Samantha Power, Susan Rice and the rest of you lousy lot:  where are you now? Erdogan can threaten annihilation and siege whole towns and your hands are over your squinty eyes?

Oh, that's right. NATO arms the Turks and it ain't with barrel bombs.

Bahrain military plane falls out of sky in Saudi Arabia

The useless local press says the BDF plane malfunctioned before it crashed with military personnel onboard in the Saudi province close to Yemen.

Perhaps when an airplane is hit by an incoming missile it will malfunction.

Irony On Every Corner

Yesterday some research on Amb. Roebuck, now in Bahrain, made me seriously wonder why he got that post considering there is abundant evidence that his primary skill is stirring up sectarianism.

The answer came today in a complaint from the Sultan of Turkey. Erdogan warns that there is a plot to stir sectarianism in order to divide the region. Of course it is a surprise to him and the Arab states of the Persian Gulf that such a plot could be hatched and they be not only unaware, but no part of it.

He thinks the Saudi tanks in Bahrain went across to test the strength of the causeway and cannot return due to safety concerns.

Time for Regime Change ... in Bahrain

It's my belief that the U.S. may finally lead, may demonstrate zero tolerance of the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf's continued funding or contributions in kind, or blind tolerance of the flow of money, weapons, Captagon, and the bread out of the mouths of babies to the terrorists all over the Middle East and Africa and the sub-continent. The U.S. has laws against the use of banks in financing terrorism. Many banks have been fined and or banned from doing business in the U.S. or Europe because they violated such laws. Currently some big, important countries are forming their own banking systems to get around sanctions and their attendant hypocrisy.

Anybody who pays a bit of attention to international affairs knows these things. We also know that the various terrorist groups rely on other means of support. No point to waste time on these knowns.

An example needs to be made of a player in the Gulf, for the rest of them to take serious notice. I don't know how much Ajman or Um Al Qaiwain are contributing funds or banking access to their citizens to send money to their Sunni brethren fighting in the sovereign states of Iraq and Syria. Since the U.A.E. is a federation, it may be federal money, but in the case of Abu Dhabi, we know there is material support of terrorists. Ditto Dubai, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and ...

Bahrain. Banks. Remember when Bahrain was well on her way to being the banking center of the Gulf but didn't get there? Still, there are a good number of banks established in the Island, connected to the banks in the other Gulf states and the world. I betcha there is plenty of dark money flows through that entrepot to the head-choppers de jour by whatever name, through "charities" of course, and for "humanitarian" purposes.

Time to make an example. Time to shut them down. Time for a radical change in the island, a change that will ensure the rest of the Gulfies shut down their terrorist funding, tell the Saudis and Qatar to tell their clerics to fatwa the end of jihad for which they fatwa'd the beginning, and to fatwa the end of the sectarianism and hate campaigns, and to fatwa the end of blaming Iran for the shamal that blows sand in their eyes.

Time for the U.S. military in Bahrain to send the Saudis and Emiratis -- and whatever other military of the Peninsula Shield forces crossed the bridge or flew into the Shaikh Isa Air Base or arrived in ships to put down the anti-government demonstrations in Bahrain -- time to send them home. We have intelligence that some members of those foreign forces have been plotting to carry out unfriendly actions against the U.S.N. In the current tense atmosphere, we need all of them to leave. Immediately. It's a matter of force protection. Chop chop.

Also, any of the Al-Khalifas and their lackeys who believe they may be held accountable for state crimes against civilian population may want to take their cars and retinue across the bridge as well. He who fears an uninvited helicopter landing in the courtyard of the palace he may be in one night with Wife Number Two, may want to consider such advice. Perhaps he may want to consider such advice the next night when he is in the palace of Wife Number Three, or the next in the palace of Wife Number Four. (Pretty sure Wife Number One no longer receives such visits, but that's just gossip.)

Time to close all the banks in Bahrain that have sent one dinar or any other currency to support the terrorists assaults on sovereign countries. It is well known which banks have been involved. They're done. Swift. Let the other states know they've got a limited time to clean up their acts.

Then time to invite the "other" foreign forces in Bahrain to go home, the mercenaries imported to act with an iron fist against protesters and change the demographic balance of the island. Bahrain can afford their return tickets and severance pay, and the houses and villas they leave behind will find people who've been waiting a long time to live in one and the jobs to support their upkeep.

Then reinstate the political parties and have a fair election for a new house of parliament to take the place of the one which Hamad appointed. Two houses, equal. An elected prime minister, no matter that the confession of the winner will not win the approval on the other side of the bridge.

Matter of fact, that is the point. Representative government is going to come to Bahrain. The U.S. and a coalition of willing friends should immediately implement steps to bring it about. It should be a rousing success. It should be without bloodshed if the dictator and his supporters know what's good for them. They have the option to leave, to cross the bridge, to keep their passports or give them up, or they can stay and face the music. It's a one-time, time-limited offer. Do they trust an independent judiciary to give them the fairness they've denied those who oppose them? Perhaps Najd might be an attractive destination to consider?

While the Al Khalifas are considering relocation, rather quickly it is suggested, it might be worthwhile to inform them of another personal financial matter. Funds derived from the natural wealth of the island and funds derived from corrupt deals made over, say, the past 40 years, which have made their way to foreign banks, will be frozen. Mansions scattered all over Europe, all over the globe, paid for with state money pilfered by the royals, will be seized because the funds to buy them traveled through the banks.

The government of Saudi Arabia does not want its favorite terrorists designated as terrorists in the upcoming Hashemite designation of who is a terrorist. Ditto Qatar. Changing the names of their terrorist groups may have fooled some, particularly those who can't read the Arabic script on those black flags, but they're terrorists and they have no sovereign state. There is a simple solution. All those "fighters" and "rebels" supported by the Saudis should have the option:  die or move to Riyadh. Ditto, Qatar. Ditto, U.A.E. Ditto, Kuwait. That should keep the paymasters busy while there are big changes in a small country, changes which Turki Faisal, Bandar Sultan and Adel Al Jubair and their addled king can huff and puff and threaten to blow down, and Bahrain, with coalition support, of course, can flip them something else to blow.

For instance, the new and elected government of the peaceful and protected islands of Bahrain could, with continued coalition support, of course, announce its intention to rectify a historical wrong, to unify the islands with the historical Bahrain on what is presently considered to be the K.S.A. mainland. It was rumoured the prior threat of such pursuit by unspecified means was sufficient for Bahrain to secure from K.S.A. proceeds from the Abu Safa oil field over the years. Historical Bahrain would include the oil-laden area with a large Shia population, the oil of which belongs to the state. Have some bravura, take Ras Tanura.

The fun could begin soon. Perhaps we need to order some more of those Freedom Donuts. Remember the anxiety they caused the first time we provided hot donuts to a few protesters? Hospitality donuts, truly. That's all it was, but Khawalid spun what many considered a laughable conspiracy theory set forth to distract the gullible, inter alia. More Krispy Kremes than last time, please. We need them for the upcoming holidays and happier times. Freedom Donuts after regime change.

Another Saudi Arabian Terrorist Attacks Us

A woman, a young Pakistani woman from Saudi Arabia, married under the contractual laws of one of the two sects of Islam to an American man her guardian must have approved even though they met online, was trained to shoot short and long guns, gussied up like a ninja terrorist, participates in a mass shooting, then dies either by police bullet or her own hand. 27 years old. Probably hopped up on Captagon. Who trained the honeypot? Who paid the bills? Who benefits?

Why The U.S. Navy Moved Aircraft Carrier Out of The Persian Gulf

The Lyft driver who brought me home from the city one night last week had served in the Persian Gulf three times while in the U.S. Navy. We had plenty to talk about for 25 minutes. He told me that the reason we moved the USS Theodore Roosevelt out of the Gulf recently was because of the Russians firing cruise missiles from the Caspian Sea into Syria. He said the U.S. had been caught off guard by the range of those missiles, so the aircraft carriers had to be moved out of their range.

Rubbish, I said. Putin would not send a cruise missile to attack an American aircraft carrier. There are missiles in every country in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea and so forth, and none would fire away at an aircraft carrier of the strongest navy on the planet.

He asked me to recall the reports that a few of the Russian cruise missiles supposedly failed, fell into Iran. Yes, I heard and read about it, and also read the denials. I saw a couple photos of holes in the ground that looked like they'd been dug by a couple kids playing with shovels. I didn't see remnants of crashed missiles, not one shard. I don't know the truth, but I'm sceptical of Pentagon leaks and claims about it, and anything that comes out of the mouth of Andrea Mitchell or anybody she gives the okay for an appearance on MSNBC to talk about anything relating to the Middle East.

Lyft driver then suggested that the U.S.N., in an abundance of caution, moved the carrier out of the Gulf in case a wayward Russian cruise missile accidentally falls out of the sky right onto the flight deck and kaboom.

I guess he forgot that the U.S. military would shoot that errant bugger down before it got close, but my ride was over at that point and so was out chat.

Then today I read in The New Khalij that a former Lebanese minister and head of a political party -- a man who must have been sleeping for the past few years -- said that Doha would be bombarded with rockets if it joined with the Saudis and Turks, intervening in Syria militarily in support of the terrorists of Ahrar Ash-Sham and other head choppers.

Now there is a reason to move a U.S. aircraft carrier out of the waters of the Persian Gulf. We must watch out for errant Lebanese missiles on their way to Doha.

Al Sauds Don't Drain the Swamp, They Drain The People's Money

It's been reported widely this week that the IMF warned Saudi Arabia may run extremely low in financial assets in five years unless they sharply reduce their spending. It's also widely suggested that the funds being depleted so fast are due to low oil prices (nevermind the Saudis wanted them low and have kept them low for multiple reasons) and to costs related to regional wars.

Why isn't the reporting more accurate? Why can't the Independent or the Guardian or the lousy New York Times or the Washington Post reporters include just a couple more salient facts and less euphemism? "Regional wars?" Why not say the Saudis are spending massive funds in support of terrorists and terrorism in Syria and Iraq? Why not say that the Saudis spent billions to overthrow the democratically elected president of Egypt and keep that sissie in power? Why not say the Saudis are spending massive funds bombing the poorest nation in the Middle East to smithereens, hiring soldiers from other countries to do what they cannot do themselves on the ground, committing war crimes, patrolling the sea to stop enough food, water and medicine for the millions of people affected by the Young Hothead General's need to prove his manhood?

Why not say that the Al Saud family are the biggest thieves on earth, that their greed and corruption appears to know no bounds? Daily there are reports of the massive theft of public money and plots on how to get more of it at the highest levels of the Saudi dynasty. The 12 to 16 billion dollar Lockheed Martin deal announced this week? How many of those billions is baksheesh? How much is the share of Mohammad bin Salman in that baksheesh?

Even some reporters whose work I respect get a fail, and the royal lovers at SUSRIS get the cake.

What A Difference A Day Makes

I had to laugh tonight hearing Rachel Maddow state that reporters should check on the claims made by their sources. Pretty hard to check on the Pentagon when you're amongst their stenographers.

Matthews, Maddow Spread Rubbish About Russians in Syria Today

MSNBC big league star Rachel Maddow has become a major disappointment in her coverage of news relating to the Middle East, doling out propaganda as if it's reporting. 

Today I heard Chris Matthews say about the first Russian bombing raids in Syria, "They're bombing the good guys." I listened to his program for a couple years in the afternoons when there wasn't anything interesting to me on C-Span, until I couldn't bear to hear his ignorance on "my" issues. Now he declares the Nusra Front, an Al-Qaida offshoot, allegiance sworn, and Ahrar-as-Shams are "good guys." How is that not support for terrorism?

I didn't expect the same from Ph.D. Rachel, but she's hopped on the bullshit bandwagon without a fare-thee-well in regards to Syria and Iran, for some time now. She sometimes issues corrections, but never about the obvious mistakes and preconceived narratives for Middle East matters. 

The Pentagon whispers in her ear and she puts it on the air. Often, as today, a diligent amount of research would have turned up some large holes in her so-called reporting.

Examples from tonight's program: the faux contempt that the U.S. military has been bombing terrorists in Syria for a year and the Russians are late to the party. Perhaps she was unaware that we and the others were not invited in but the Russians were. Minimally, she or her staff could have looked at the headlines in Google News. Perhaps if they'd clicked on a few articles, that simple fact would have become clear.

Perhaps it didn't occur to her that the U.S. doesn't get to choose targets for the Russians. 

Perhaps it didn't occur to her that the U.S. drones can see the convoys of terrorists moving towards Damascus, and saw them moving towards the ancient Palmyra, but somehow forget to send target data to our bombs.

 Does she really believe our lack of success is because the lousy Syrian dictator won't give up power? 

I watch her show, have done since the beginning and whilst she subbed for Keith Olbermann. I will continue to watch her show because she covers D.C. politics from a progressive POV and I'm interested in that, but I'm not just going to growl at the tube all the time when I hear rubbish. 

A Game Called Diplomacy

When I was in London at S.O.A.S. studying with Noel Coulson and others in the Law School, way back when, some of us would gather on the occasional weekend for a board game. My favorite was the game of Diplomacy. (It could more accurately have been called Diplomacy and War, but that would have discouraged the more peace-minded from playing.)

The fun, to me, was in the diplomacy conducted in half-hour segments wherein deception had a major role as the players moved amongst themselves, making and breaking alliances in order to advance specific goals to gain control of the board.

Once the timer clanged to inform us that the diplomacy segment had ended, all moves on the board were made simultaneously. Many feathers were ruffled, of course, and some egos did not easily bear the double and triple-dealing, but the great food and company kept most of our group together.

Over time, I found myself looking at seasonal goings-on in the Middle East as if it was a board game: winter and summer diplomacy, spring and fall moves. Now? War, war, war. Where's the jar, jar, jar? 

Why The Gulf Nations Don't Take Syrian Refugees

so ...

The lousy NYT ran a story a couple days ago about the fact that wealthy Persian Gulf nations -- whose state and private funds help support the Sunni terrorist groups in Syria and elsewhere -- are not taking in refugees fleeing from the war in Syria. It's highly likely that they're also not taking in victims of the Saudi's dastardly aggression in Yemen, either.

Nope, the Gulfies are good at importing Sunni mercenaries from all over the Arab world, to do the tough jobs which their own citizens cannot be trusted to do. For example, in Bahrain they fill out the ranks of the military, police and secret services. They're brought in to alter the demographic balance on the island as well as assure loyalty through financial and other benefits such as free housing and medical care, cheap loans, subsidized meat, bread, electricity and fuel. How else could those men and their families afford to live in the Gulf? They even pay the ultimate price for those jobs, dying in lands not their own and for a country not their own.

Well, if they're unskilled or day laborers, they can live in accommodation with multiple other such workers or in the lousy worker camps built for those who are doing the manual labor that has built the gleaming towers throughout the Gulf. There were eleven such men living in a one bedroom apartment in the block of flats where I lived in Adliya the last time I was there. I doubt that situation has changed since then.

If they're rich refugees, no problem. Welcome. 

Cowards. Rotten cowards, the whole lot of them. I read Marc Owen Jones's piece putting forth some cogent reason why their regimes don't take in refugees from the conflicts they support. He left out the obvious. They're a bunch of cowards.

Senator Maria Cantwell, Tool

When a long-serving, self-serving Democratic Party senator from the State of Washington withholds support from the intensely-negotiated Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with the "I'm still considering it" line of rubbish, one has to ask:  of whom or what are you a tool, Senator Cantwell?