By Dun Scotus
Recently the Deep State, which runs America under a thin veneer of fake democracy that allows “the people” to put random ‘pop icons’ into the White House from where they are duly controlled, has been having a little trouble with the latest of these pop icons, namely Donald Trump.
Whatever it is, Trump just doesn’t seem to quite get it. He keeps missing his cues, and acts as if ‘real democracy’ actually exists in America and as if Presidents should take all the rhetoric they spouted on the campaign trail seriously.
No, really, LOL!
Doesn’t the guy know the voters are just dumb sheep whose collective memory goes back as far as what happened on last week’s latest reality TV show? I mean, it’s embarrassing to see a guy this naive up front. This is why he has to be taken down or at least tamed, and the way to do this—without resorting to a messy Kennedy-style assassination—is to point out how Russia interfered in the US election.
Or at least that’s what the Deep State thought.
Somehow or other this strategy, despite the full 24-7 support of the mass media, just doesn’t seem to be working. And it’s not just stubborn Conservatives and Dissident Righters who are screwing things up. You even have Leftists, who should be playing along, coming out and saying frankly unhelpful things like this from Noam Chomsky:
“It’s a pretty remarkable fact that—first of all, it is a joke. Half the world is cracking up in laughter. The United States doesn’t just interfere in elections. It overthrows governments it doesn’t like, institutes military dictatorships. Simply in the case of Russia alone—it’s the least of it—the U.S. government, under Clinton, intervened quite blatantly and openly, then tried to conceal it, to get their man Yeltsin in, in all sorts of ways. So, this, as I say, it’s considered—it’s turning the United States, again, into a laughingstock in the world.”
I mean the naivety here is astounding. America—or more correctly the American Deep State—doesn’t “interfere” in anyone’s elections. It is really the other way round. Here, let me explain:
An interesting discussion of Abimael Guzman’s autobiography.
Some readers have suggested that I am too Eurasianist in my geopolitical outlook, but I’d argue I’m actually closer to the Senderos than the Duginists. Obviously, I don’t share their Maoist fundamentalism, but their geopolitical outlook was to reject both the Western and Eastern block as imperialist, and favor revolution in the periphery with an emphasis on the indigenous. I’d say that’s closer to my line of thinking than Eurasianism. It seems like what’s going on in places like Cheran would be more of the ideal prototype.
By Frank Beyer
Imperial and Global Forum
“Mao Zedong Thought” was a major global ideology at a time when China didn’t have much to offer the world economically. Chairman Mao influenced a wide range of groups, such as the Black Panthers in the United States and revolutionary movements in Nepal, India, and the Philippines. Mao was also a guiding light for one particular Peruvian revolutionary: Abimael Guzman. This acolyte’s revolution caused radical waves long after Mao’s death in 1976 – and ultimately ended in failure.
Well, if we didn’t know what was up in Venezuela before. Podhoretz son-in-law back in the game. As a general rule, I think Trump has been better on Russia, China, the DPRK, Afghanistan and Syria than a conventional Republican or neoconservative would have been (all things considered). But he’s been just as bad on Israel/Palestine, Saudia Arabia/Yemen, and arguably just as bad on Iran (though it’s possible a neocon/George W. Bush-like president would have initiated a war with Iran by now). Trump has also been just as bad on Africa and Latin America. Trump is, once again, very similar to Nixon in his approach to foreign policy, i.e. willing to pursue detente with other nuclear powers and knowing a failed war when he sees one, but still an arch-imperialist/neo-colonialist bankster tool committed to upholding the hegemony of the Empire.
I wonder if Alexander Reid-Ross-Podhoretz-Kristol will come to the defense of Abrams as a bulwark against Russo-fascist influence in the Western hemisphere, and dismiss criticisms of Abrams as anti-Semitism. 🙂
By Nahal Toosi
Elliott Abrams, a controversial neoconservative figure who was entangled in the Iran-Contra affair, has been named as a Trump administration special envoy overseeing policy toward Venezuela, which has been rocked by a leadership crisis.
Abrams’ appointment, announced Friday by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, is something of a surprise — President Donald Trump nixed his 2017 bid to be deputy secretary of State after learning that Abrams had criticized him.
Mr. Antifa Intellectual serves up the “Anarcho-MSNBC” line. This kind of stuff is why I started attacking anarcho-social democrats and totalitarian humanists so vehemently 20 years ago. Regrettably, a substantial tendency has developed among “anarchists” that opposes regional or localized illiberalism more than it opposes imperialism, opposes marginal right-wing extremists more than it opposes the power elite, opposes redneck ruckus makers like the Bundys more than it opposes the FBI and ATF, opposes social conservatives more than it opposes the state itself, and (probably) opposes the reality show president more than it opposes the actual national security state.
I suppose they’re entitled to their opinion. Unlike many anarchists, I consider freedom of opinion and freedom of association to be paramount. But, seriously, how are these kinds of folks any different from the Democratic Party?
A court in the United States has confirmed the arrest of US-born Iranian Press TV news presenter Marzieh Hashemi as a material witness in an unspecified investigation.
Ms. Hashemi, 59, was arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on unspecified charges upon arrival at St. Louis Lambert International Airport in St. Louis, Missouri, on Sunday, her family and friends said.
At the request of the US Justice Department, Judge Beryl Alaine Howell, the chief district judge for the District of Columbia, issued a federal court order, approving the partial unsealing of the Press TV journalist’s case, Reuters reported.
According to the document, since her arrest, the journalist has appeared twice before a US district judge in Washington and has been appointed a lawyer.
The Associated Press said US government officials expected her to be released immediately after her testimony before a grand jury, but Ms. Hashemi’s elder son, Hossein, was pessimistic about prospects for her immediate release, saying it was not clear yet how long his mother’s testimony would last.
“We’re hoping that it would be complete and she would be out this week. It doesn’t look like that’s going to happen,” said Hossein outside the court on Friday. “So we’re just waiting to hear more.”
However, the Friday court order did not include any details regarding the criminal case in which she has been named as a material witness.
The order said that Ms. Hashemi “has not been accused of any crime,” but she has said she was handcuffed and shackled and was treated like a criminal. The journalist has also said she had her hijab forcibly removed, and was photographed without her headscarf upon arrival at the prison.
An interesting article from Daily Kos. I know the author of this piece, who is generally friendly to ATS.
By Alex Shepard
he election of 2020 is approaching us fast, and the primary season will be here before we know it. Already, the 2020 democratic field has a few challengers. The darling of the establishment, Elizabeth Warren, has announced. From the insurgency ranks, outside of the establishment, is Hawaii congresswoman, Tulsi Gabbard.
Tulsi Gabbard, on nearly all sensible and progressive policies gets a perfect score. She supports the reinstitution of the Glass Steagall act. She supports raising the minimum wage. She also has vocally opposed and taken part in protests against the monstrosity called the Keystone Pipeline. She has continuously called for Climate change to be taken seriously and for America to embark on a pragmatic shift away from fossil fuels to efficient alternative energy. She has supported civil rights for all individual Americans, including our Latino, LGBT, African-American, disabled and Muslim citizens. So therefore, it appears she should be an ideal candidate for all left-leaning individuals, mainly those who supported Sanders in the 2016 primary. She also was one of the few Democrat Party officials to endorse Bernie Sanders during his presidential race in 2016, with considerable risk to her political career. She freely resigned from her high ranking post as vice chair of the DNC in order to follow her conscience and endorse Sanders, much to the chagrin of the DNC’s operators.
Most importantly, and speaking from the personal perspective as a PHD candidate in the field of Middle Eastern Studies, she has a spotless foreign policy. Hers is the kind needed for a successful and functional American relationship with not only the Middle East, but the rest of the world as well. She has rightly condemned the illegal war of aggression against Syria. At great risk to her person, and her own political career, she undertook a fact-finding mission in the war-torn nation of Syria. She has since taken it upon herself, much to the ire of the Democratic Party establishment, to tell Americans the truth about where their tax-dollars are going. They are being funneled at the behest of the Military Industry Complex, Saudi Arabia, and Israel to aid the wrong side of a conflict that is of no interest to the United States. Mainly, the American government is actively using American money to assist those who have killed Americans in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya. She also repeatedly called for the suspension of aid and weapon sales to the atrocious and genocidal regime in Saudi Arabia, which has been in the process of starving the Yemeni population to death. She also condemned Obama’s illegal war of aggression against Libya, which our former commander in chief admitted was a tragic mistake.
The Russian Bear is the Wizard of Oz, and Putin is the man behind the curtain. The Russophilia of the far left/far right and the Russophobia of the center left/center right is pathetic.
My own geopolitical outlook is more like that of the classical anarchists of the late 19th/early 20th century or the Sunni jihadis today, i.e. global insurgency against the global enemy even if I don’t share the politics of the jihadis.
Ultimately, I would want to see worldwide insurgencies attacking states, ruling classes, and empires on a global scale. An insurgency against the DC empire, against the EU, against the Kremlin, against Beijing, against Delhi and Islamabad at the same time.
The problem that I have with the Russophiles and Sinophiles is that ultimately they are just an Eastern version of the Republicans, only instead of a bunch of yahoos chanting “USA! USA!” at a monster truck exhibition it’s “Russia! Russia! China! China!” at a Communist or Alt-Right assembly. Just like the SJWs are really just a variation of social conservatism, only instead of being anti-abortion fanatics they are animal rights fanatics, or instead of being obsessively anti-gay they are obsessively pro-gay, or instead of protesting against adult bookstores and Satanic rock they are protesting Confederate flags and center-right campus speakers. And sometimes they overlap, e.g anti-porn feminism, anti-smoking puritans, sex trafficking hysteria, etc. It’s the same problem with the antifa who are just a variation of the skinheads (and both of these have their roots in the cultural milieu in England in the 70s and 80s). A real anarchist revolutionary insurgency would not be wasting time with any of this crap.
Another recent interview on Syria as well. Watch here.
This edition of the program is about Trumps decisions about USs military presence in Syria and Afghanistan and the challenges hes going to face in 2019. The implications of Trumps Syria pullout decision are discussed. Also, he is having a tough time coming to terms with the Democrats and also his own allies to get the necessary fund for the wall on US-Mexico border.
A very important read. Absorb every word of this.
By Nicky Reid aka Comrade Hermit
Exile in Happy Valley
This holiday season was unusually kind to the anti-imperialists among us. Trump shocked the world the week before Christmas by actually putting America first for a change and calling for the immediate withdrawal of the some 2000 troops still illegally occupying North Eastern Syria. Regardless of his motives, which I’m sure had very little to do with anything vaguely resembling the Christmas spirit, it’s hard to deny that this executive decision was a decisive win for peace.
Hard but not impossible. The doves of the progressive left have enthusiastically jumped through their own pinched assholes to stomp on McGovern’s grave with talking points straight out of Karl Rove’s playbook. Sadly, their onslaught of non-stop pro-war agit-prop, aided and abetted by the rabid war junkies of Trump’s own administration, may have worked. The perpetually spineless Trump has moved the goal post for the pull-out from 30 days to 90 days to 3 months to ‘maybe later, we’ll see…’
Regardless, the rift within the Pentagon is likely irreversible and the chaos its caused can only be interpreted as the official failure of America’s 6 year imperial project for the region. Being the peace-loving bomb-thrower that I am, the one part of this splendid fiasco that feels truly tragic to me is the increasingly likely implosion of the Rojava Revolution.
It’s interesting how even the leadership of the military caste has bought into the System’s ideology of combining imperialism and neoliberal economics with cultural leftism. Careerists will be careerists, I guess. Mattis and McChrystal: “We gotta make sure the wine and cheese crowd will buy our books and come to our overpriced speeches.”
By William S. Lind
It is interesting that General Stan McChrystal recently admitted to getting rid of a portrait he had long cherished of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. One would think that McChrystal would have some sympathy for Lee, considering both presided over failed wars. There is a world of difference between these two men and McChrystal does not benefit from the comparison.
Since his dismissal by President Obama, McChrystal has become an author in an attempt to trade on his celebrity status and high rank. He has done well, with several popular books to his name. At a recent book signing, McChrystal admitted his best advice was for the U.S. to continue to “muddle through” in Afghanistan.
Think about this for a moment. McChrystal held the top command in Afghanistan for a full year (2009–2010) during which he was unable to chart a course to success. He has had 9 years since he left command to reflect on his experience and the direction of the war. After all this time, the best he can come up with is to “muddle through”?
No response could better encapsulate the professional failure and moral bankruptcy of our senior military leaders. For the last 17 years, general after general has told a succession of U.S. presidents, “We can succeed in Afghanistan.” McChrystal was one of them. Afraid to be the one tagged with presiding over a defeat, each general believes the U.S. should stay the course, blindly hoping for a change of fortune which is unlikely to occur. Doubtless no one wishes to signal all the sacrifice in blood and treasure has ultimately proven futile. Unfortunately, that is the reality.
McChrystal was a proud graduate of U.S. military schools. He was carefully groomed for high rank and selected for great responsibility. And he failed miserably.
Press TV. Listen here.
The United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia are looking for ways to challenge Iran’s influence and Washington’s campaign of sanctions against Tehran helps them fulfill that objective, an American analyst says.
Keith Preston, director of Attackthesystem.com, said the sanctions were designed to put Iranian people under pressure and force the Islamic Republic to abandon its fundamental values.
He made the remarks in reaction to claims by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that economic bans were aimed at giving the Iranian people a chance to have better lives.
“The sanctions on Iran have this ultimate goal: creating an outcome where the Iranian people can have better lives than they have today,” Pompeo told Newsmax TV on Thursday.
On November 5, the administration of US President Donald Trump announced the re-imposition of the “toughest” sanctions ever against Iran’s banking and energy sectors with the aim of cutting off its oil sales and crucial exports. The bans had been lifted under the 2015 nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
Preston told Press TV on Friday that a lot of ordinary Americans had no idea what the conflict between the United States and Iran was all about and that Pompeo’s rhetoric amounts to “propaganda for public consumption.”
He said the sanctions were in no way intended to improve the Iranian people’s lives, and instead, “they were holding Iranian people hostage for the purpose of influencing or trying to influence the Iranian government.”
The real issues between the United States and Iran are rooted in the 1979 Islamic Revolution, which “removed a puppet government of the United States” and replaced it with a political system that resisted Washington’s policies instead, he continued.
“The reason that the United States has such a deep-seeded grudge against Iran is because of that,” the analyst further explained. “It’s because of the fact that Iran was a nation that defied the American empire.”
This, he argued, set an “example” that Washington didn’t want other nations to follow.
The second reason was the state of relations between Israel and the United States, Preston added.
“The fact that Israel regards Iran as one of its most important regional competitors in the area also intensifies the hostility of the United States towards Iran,” he said.
Preston said Saudi Arabia also had similar tendencies to weaken Iran and used its “influence” on the American foreign policy to make sure the sanctions remained in place.
Both Saudi Arabia and Israel have been helping the US form an Arab front against Iran—which is in many ways similar to the NATO military alliance.
After 17 years and a series of failed wars, the number of Sunni fundamentalist terrorists is larger than it was in 2001.
By William S. Lind
An article in the November 21 New York Times revealed two aspects of our ongoing strategic failure in Fourth Generation war. First, it quoted a new study by CSIS that found the number of Sunni 4GW fighters has grown, not shrunk, since we began the “war on terror” on 9/11:
Nearly four times as many Sunni Islamic militants are operating around the world today as on Sept. 11, 2001, despite nearly two decades of American-led campaigns to combat Al Qaeda and the Islamic state, a new independent study concludes.
That amounts to as many as 230,000 Salafi jihadist fighters in nearly 70 countries, according to the study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank. . .
. . .the Islamic State remains the predominant threat, with as many as about 40,000 members globally this year, up from 30,200 in 2014, when the group’s fighters seized the northern third of Iraq.
Second, the Times turned to another study to look at what our current strategy has cost:
Last week, Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs released its annual report, the Cost of War study, in which it calculated that the United States will have spent $5.9 trillion on activities related to the global counter terrorism campaign by October 2019.
So, the war of attrition waged largely from the air that is our chosen 4GW strategy has, in seventeen years, cost us almost $6 trillion (not billion) while multiplying our Islamic enemies fourfold. Can we see this as anything other than strategic failure on a grand scale?
Press TV. Listen here.
The UAE’s reopening of its embassy in Syria and the US announcement that it will withdraw its forces from the country reflect the failure of plots targeting the government of Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad, says an American analyst.
“What has happened is that over the past seven years…, the United Arab Emirates as well as other [Persian] Gulf states have attempted to weaken and destroy the government of President [Bashar] al-Assad in Syria,” Keith Preston told Press TV from Virginia on Thursday.
The Syrian Information Ministry announced on Thursday that the United Arab Emirates had officially reopened its embassy for the first time since 2011.
The UAE closed down its embassy after Syria was hit by a foreign-backed militancy in 2011. The UAE have Saudi Arabia have for long been accused of funding militants fighting to topple the Syrian administration.
“Clearly, that objective has failed,” Preston said, adding their hopes that Washington could realize the plot have also been dashed.
“They were hoping that the Americans would eliminate the government of Syria, but that has failed,” he said.
US President Donald Trump has announced that has ordered a full and rapid withdrawal of troops from Syria.
“So, they’re trying a different strategy at this point…they’re backtracking,” Preston said. adding, “And the reason for this is essentially an admission of defeat by the UAE. They realized that the Assad government is going to remain in power and that they’re going to have to deal with this particular government.”
Preston also said the Syrian government’s victory is likely to push it closer to the nations and groups that have helped it win the war, including Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah.
“And I think that the UAE is also concerned that the American withdrawal is going to strengthen the position of Syria and strengthen the position of Syria’s allies in the region, and now, they’re thinking that they’re going to have to try extend the olive branch or the carrot rather than the stick,” the pundit noted.
Preston finally said he suspected that other Persian Gulf monarchies will be following in Abu Dhabi’s footsteps in reestablishing diplomatic ties with Damascus.
By Keith Preston
Recently, a reader of Attack the System offered the following questions and comments:
Why do you and other radical, ostensibly libertarian anti-war types, leap to the defense of the authoritarian BRICS countries, anti-propertarian movements in Latin America, Duginist shills, and other slave-minded untermensch? Reading the work of Marxist-Leninists as primers on strategy is one thing. Their revolutions succeeded, and it is essential to learn from them. But for godsakes let the neocons eradicate our Marxist blood enemies, while we gather our strength.
You frequently repeat your desire to create a non-aligned movement, one which I believe we share, but if your model is the so-called “non-aligned movement” that amounted to little more than Soviet controlled opposition, I find it reasonable to say you are more interested in an anti-American movement than a powerful, effective non-aligned one. If that’s what you want, national anarchists risk falling into a similar trap that snuffed out the Strasserites and classical anarchists, though perhaps it won’t be as lethal.
I am not interested in defending the Atlanticist foreign policy establishment. They are very frequently wrong, and disastrously so. But perhaps a handful is sincere in their desire for an open society, and I desire to give credit where it’s due. I’ll give them credit for supporting “nazis” in Ukraine, and Kurdish separatists in Iraq. However disastrous the war in Afghanistan has been, it has kept Winnie the Pooh at bay, and restraining the Chinese is essential. If there is an immediate, voluntarist solution to that problem, let me know.
I also count the suppression of Latin American Marxism, among the establishment’s few good deeds. As someone interested in decentralization and subsidiarity, I hope to see Bolsonaro’s Brasil take over the leading role in fighting communism south of the Panama Canal, from the USA. However I’m realistic, and know the chances of the USA handing off a torch to anyone are almost zero.
Press TV. Listen here.
he United States is planning to add Ukraine into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as part of its plan to encircle Russia, an American political analyst says.
Keith Preston, director of the Attackthesystem.com, made the remarks while discussing Washington’s decision to provide an additional $10 million in military aid to Ukraine.
Announcing the decision on Friday, the US State Department said the money would be used to boost its naval capability, after Russia seized three Ukrainian navy ships off the coast of Crimea in the Sea of Azov last month.
The Sea of Azov is a strategic ocean route linked to the Black Sea by the narrow Strait of Kerch where Russia has built a bridge to link the Crimean Peninsula with the mainland.
Tensions escalated earlier this year after Ukraine detained two Russian ships for port calls on Crimea, which rejoined Russia in a 2014 referendum.
The move prompted Russia to increase patrols off its Azov coast to guarantee free navigation by Russian ships.
“What’s being done here it seems is that the Americans are using the situation with Russia’s seizure of three Ukrainian ships as a pretext for expanding America’s own involvement in the Ukraine through providing million in military aide,” Preston told Press TV on Sunday.
“The objective of the United States appears to be to eventually incorporate Ukraine into NATO,” he added.
Noting that the US was trying to encircle Russia by strategically placing weapons and equipment in NATO countries, Preston said Ukraine plays a key role in those plans.
“I think that the ultimate objective is to bring all of the former Soviet republics… into NATO,” he argued. “Because the United States has, since the end of the Cold War, consistently been trying to expand NATO right up to Russia’s border.”
He said the US was not concerned about the Ukrainian ships and just used it as an excuse to get involved.
The consensus of opinion among the Important People is that Trump’s withdrawal from Syria and Afghanistan is a blunder, which means that Trump’s move is obviously correct. The Guardian is refreshingly sensible.
By Trevor Timm
Donald Trump unexpectedly announced that the US would be pulling its troops out of Syria on Wednesday, and the entire national security establishment exploded in anger that one of our many wars may be ending.
Members of Congress, like Republican senators Bob Corker and Lindsey Graham – who have never met a war they didn’t like – are furious that Congress wasn’t consulted in the decision. Members of the media have proclaimed that the “winners” here are Assad and Putin, despite the fact that the stated mission in Syria was never to fight them in the first place. And pundit after pundit derided that this decision is a win for terrorists, with no thought to whether we are creating just as many terrorists by being there at all.
Lost in the discussion was any semblance of questioning whether it’s in America’s interests to have thousands of troops fighting and dying in yet another Middle Eastern country. Does anyone know what the long-term military strategy in Syria would be, or how we would ever exit?
Scott Horton is interviewed by Tom Woods. Predictably, this is the best overview and discussion of Trump’s withdrawal from Syria so far, including a discussion of Rojava and Chomsky’s endorsement of US intervention on behalf of the Kurds. Listen here.
Scott Horton joins me to discuss the reality of the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria, and the hysterical establishment response, from center-left to center-right. We also discuss fears about the fate of the Kurds, whose safety has been used to justify a continued U.S. presence.
About the Guest
Scott Horton, managing director of the Libertarian Institute, is the host of Antiwar Radio on KPFK 90.7 FM in Los Angeles, and Opinion Editor of Antiwar.com. The Scott Horton Show features daily interviews on foreign policy from a libertarian perspective.
Read the original article at TomWoods.com. http://tomwoods.com/ep-1309-the-syria-withdrawal-three-cheers/
By Nicky Reid aka Comrade Hermit
William Blum, a role model, a hero, and the author of my favorite book, Killing Hope, died this past week at 85 in Arlington, VA, from complications related to kidney failure. Blum pulled zero punches when it came to his acidic criticism of America’s imperialist foreign policy or its shameless defenders in the mainstream media, like the loathsome New York Times, those fine folks who brought you the Iraq War, who penned a pissy little obituary about a real journalist titled, “William Blum, US Policy Critic Cited by Bin Laden, Dies at 85“. I sincerely hope that I’m not alone when I wish those creeps blackouts, toothaches. and indigestion for Christmas. Morons like Mr. Sam Roberts aren’t fit to dig Blum’s grave, much less piss on it.
By Nicky Reid aka Comrade Hermit
It seems like just last week we finally fucking buried John McCain’s stinking corpse and it’s already time for another 24/7, month long, imperial funeral marathon. Since the very second former president and well known war criminal George HW Bush finally dropped dead (What was he, like 900?), every channel from CNN to Nickelodeon has been surgically attached to his decomposing dick. “Oh, what a great man!” “What an American hero!” “His breath smelled like roses and his jizz tasted like mayonnaise!” Judging by the coverage, you would have thought the man cured fucking cancer rather than twiddling his thumbs while a whole generation of queer people died of a plague he refused to even address so he could keep cutting checks from those Millennarian fag-bashers in the Christian Right, OH WHAT A HERO!…
We’re all told how humble our 41st president was, yet his obnoxiously opulent funeral put some of the African dictators he bankrolled to shame with all the subtlety of a goddamn Master P video. Pre-pubescent quires and blazing guns and fluttering doves and balling bitches. I’m surprised they didn’t drag his gilded casket away behind a solid gold tank. I’ve seen North Korean missile parades with more modesty. The bastard even had some saccharine Josh Groban knock-off warbling philosophic about his Greek godlike achievements- “He swung his golden sword, and spilt blood for our lord, and when he unsheathed his dong, his interns swore it twas a gourd…” I would have burst out laughing if I didn’t have to swallow a mouthful of vomit.
Press TV. Listen here.
Saudi Arabia has is a regional “puppet” of the United States, an American analyst says, arguing that Washington needs Riyadh as part of its grand plan for global domination.
Keith Preston, director of Attackthesystem.com, made the remarks while discussing Washington’s continued support for the ongoing Saudi war against Yemen despite international outrage.