Tag Archives: Hezbollah

Israel is to the right

Yup, we can see Israel from where some are standing, that is if you are standing in Egypt. You see, we look at the middle east and we seemingly forget that Egypt is a player here (even as it is in Africa), so when I see Israel Hayom giving us ‘Egypt-Jordan-Iraq: Another Middle East axis in the making?’ I am not overly surprised. I am a little surprised on the use of the word ‘axis’, but that is not the greatest breach of settings. For the most, we tend to look at that word negative, but the clean meaning is “an agreement or alliance between two or more countries that forms a centre for an eventual larger grouping of nations”, it does make sense in a few ways, especially Jordan, for them the issue is not Israel, it is the setting of any escalation coming from Syria. Even as we are given “all three countries are poor and dependent in for economic largesse on more wealthy partners, so their regional aspirations and strategies will necessarily be limited”, we see a setting that is correct, but not essentially right. Let me explain, there is a mess from both Palestine and Syria flowing over, these three nations will get the first brunt, for a player like Saudi Arabia or the UAE aligning with their needs in some form of support would go a long way and whatever countering is required could happen that way. In all Jordan is due to location the weakest, but they all need to set the security of their nation and as such there others might consider chipping in towards that security, let’s not forget that Saudi Arabia is linked to the north to both Jordan and Iraq. In this whatever comes for Saudi Arabia (Hezbollah and Iran) would most likely be spilled through Jordan and Iraq. 

There are several reasons for the choices the the three nations seem to advocate, but for the most it he’s towards the ‘needs’ of Hezbollah, who ignored options for the longest time, as such I am not in favour of them, in this Hezbollah made its own best and for them becoming the tool of Iran sends a much larger problem equation than any solution thrown the way. Yet, in all Jordan requires support and protection, yes we can go towards another pipeline, but the setting here is not merely what can be, but the future of what is and for that the (by official count) a solution needs to be found for the 750,000 refugees there, I reckon that the actual size is well over twice that. So to find support on those settings to deviate pressures in Jordan is essential and that is before you realise that 750,000 people tend to get thirsty and water is not something that Jordan has an abundance of, so the pressures are only increasing. Even as sources give us “Jordan is struggling to deliver enough fresh water to its population and farmers. Water access is particularly erratic during drought events, which have been increasing in frequency and severity. Groundwater levels drop by roughly a meter annually, the result of prolonged drought and of the proliferation of thousands of illegal wells that are pumping the country’s aquifers to extinction”, we see a text that does not mention those refugees, they too will dig out of thirst and there we get a much larger issue on all of it. As the situation in Jordan is not improved, this so called axis will depend on Iraq and Egypt, a small change that ISIL, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood would like very much, because the pressures over there work to their advantage. You forgot about those players, didn’t you?

Even as some sources give us ‘Islamic State steps up attacks in Syria and Iraq: UN experts’, here the text “The experts monitoring sanctions against the Islamic State and al-Qaeda said it is unclear whether the Islamic States’ new leader, Abu Ibrahim al-Hashemi Al-Qurayshi, can effectively lead the extremist group’s diverse and far-flung supporters and affiliates” would relax the wrong people for too much, especially when we consider “Parts of Iraq, especially areas in Anbar province near the Syrian border, “also represent a permissive security environment for the movement of ISIL fighters,” I believe (a personal speculation) that the setting is actually worse, thee is every setting where people seem to shoot allegiances in Egypt and Iraq, it is not merely there, there is a much larger ‘permissive security environment’ in both Egypt and Jordan, in some cases not intentionally, but the refugee setting seems to fuel adherence to extremism and it is there the Jordan has a much larger problem, for the simple reason the it creates a funnel between Iraq and Egypt via the Sinai and when we consider ‘Egypt says 18 suspected armed fighters killed in Sinai firefight’, Egypt needs to consider that the setting might be much worse, I have actually been there, if you see 18, there is every chance you missed 60 more and where would they go to? The Sinai is a strategic point that allows for incursions in Egypt, Israel AND Jordan, so who would get hit and more important, who would get hit next? I do not know but the field is open from the point onwards, especially when ISIS, ISIL and the Muslim Brotherhood thrive on chaos.

So whilst you wonder whether I am exaggerating (always an option), consider my setting the next flame up in that region and the stage that is behind it.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Military, Politics

One sided coin

When is a one-sided coin like a watchdog? That is the underlying question, and the answer is seen in this article ‘When they are shallow’. We all have needs, we all have centred targets, but what happens when that setting makes you miss the larger picture? Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against watchdogs, I have nothing against the media, or politicians, but when they give a one sided brief just to please themselves, how shallow will they be? It is not the first time, but in this case it starts with ‘US watchdog report cites civilian casualties in Saudi arms deal’, now this might be correct, might being the operative word and not towards optionally pointing fingers and not towards the setting. We see “The Saudi-UAE air raids hit farms, schools, water supplies, and energy sources, triggering what the United Nations has described as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis” now, I am not making a statement that they did not do that, but in all that, was it truly some civilian hit target or were there Houthi and/or Hezbollah fighters there? So whilst some focus on ‘precision-guided-munition components’, no one is looking what they were clearly firing on, because that too is an unknown. So whilst some focus on one side of “Tens of thousands of Yemenis, many of them civilians, have been killed by the Saudi-UAE air strikes – often with American-made weapons, targeting information and aerial refuelling support”, in a stage where should consider on ‘how many were civilians (and how many were not)’ in the sentence “Tens of thousands of Yemenis, many of them civilians”, yes we can hide behind ‘many of them’, but precision is essential, even if the weapons are not. In addition Representative Eliot Engel, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee gives us ““This obvious pre-spin of the findings reeks of an attempt to distract and mislead,” Engel said, adding that he feared the classified annex to the report would be “used to bury important or possibly incriminating information””, and I am not debating that, yet in all this, the stage where Eliot Engel is optionally helping our the Iranians, that is still up for debate, is it not? So when we check NPR and we see the question “Congress had concerns about $8 billion in arms sales to Saudi Arabia, and those concerns included how the arms might be used in the war in Yemen” and the only thing that Eliot Engel gives us is “Yeah”? By the way the interview (at https://www.npr.org/2020/08/11/901431799/engel-discusses-ig-report-on-u-s-selling-8-billion-worth-of-arms-in-middle-east) gives us nothing on ‘Iran’, ‘Houthi’ and ‘Hezbollah’, three tags that are essential in the Yemeni war, as well as the current Saudi Arabian state of affairs, so why are they missing? So whilst Engel gives us “Meaning that all the excuses that they give us, all the reasons they give us for doing what they have to do are phony and are made up. It’s just that they don’t – they want to have freedom to operate, not have the public know anything, certainly not have Congress know anything. And this is the way they’ve operated from day one. And it’s not really, you know – on the Foreign Affairs Committee, this is our jurisdiction. We’re supposed to be investigating these things, and they look at us as somehow intruding on their private purview”, a view that is his and might be valid, but the Yemeni war is larger and the three elements (Houthi, Hezbollah and Iran) are left out of it giving us an unbalanced and one sided story. Now, there is a side that accept, the US can decide on how it does business and who it does business with, and consider the hilarity we see when that $8,000,000,000 dollars goes to the Chinese or Russian treasury coffers? The US has been alienating its middle eastern partners to such an extent (all whilst ignoring to a larger degree the activities by Iran), we need to see the way that ball rolls down the hill and away from the congressional weapons sales teams. So whilst some might applaud the activity of watchdogs, the absence of the whole picture is actually rather disturbing. Not merely to the stage, but the fallout is other large. This does not reflect on Eliot Engel, but his congressional party is seemingly ignoring a much larger stage and this stage includes both Hezbollah and Iran, so why is Eliot Engel and his band of naughty congressionals ignoring that? Consider that the people for a week have been aware of ‘Saudi Arabia’s project clears 177,637 Houthi mines in Yemen’, now, we accept that some would have originated in Yemen, but not all and when we see these elements in the equation (and that is merely the beginning of that mess), we need to wonder why the US watchdog is so one sided. An investigation into the forces active in Yemen, as well as the weapons used and one side is left off the table completely. So how does your humanitarian side react to that? Oh and for desert I offer ’84.000 children in Yemen are dead, who is holding the Houthi and their methods to account?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

This is boom, that is not

Yet, Beirut, the place where buildings get free air-conditioning through the application of 7.62mm ammunition, the place where something went boom and it enraged a whole lot of people, yet on August 5th I wrote in ‘Boom goes the dynamite’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/08/05/boom-goes-the-dynamite/), we see “It is speculation, but consider the blast, according to some the blast was noticed well over 100Km away. I do have a point of reference, the Fireworks blast in the Netherlands (Enschede) had a similar effect, but nowhere near the size, the video’s I saw told a different story, one car on the highway with a distance of around 2000 meters away got its windows blown out and the rear view mirrors got blown off the car, and that is one of a few video’s that show me that this was no ordinary blast” and it was merely the toppling of issues. We get to see a better picture when we consider “Ammonium nitrate does not burn on its own” (Source: American Scientific), it is merely the foundation. When we consider “For combustion to occur, oxygen must be present. Ammonium nitrate prills provide a much more concentrated supply of oxygen than the air around us. This is why it is effective in mining explosives, where it’s mixed with oil and other fuels. At high enough temperatures, however, ammonium nitrate can violently decompose on its own. This process creates gases including nitrogen oxides and water vapour. It is this rapid release of gases that causes an explosion” we need to look any the explosion again (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdSHRbSZkwc), it is one of many explosions, and as you see there was a fire in the vicinity, but the explosion is violent and complete. The stage is in two fold, in the first, Ammonium nitrate doesn’t burn well and to explode oil is used. The images we see could not be done if it was merely the ammonium nitrate. It is my view and I am not the expert (I did study chemistry), yet experts tell me ‘Ammonium nitrate does not burn on its own’, all the footage I have seen give implication that this was not merely ammonium nitrate, yet Scientific American also give us “It’s stable under normal conditions, but you can do things to it that will cause it to misbehave. The main trigger is an external heat source. Depending on how you want to count it, there have been probably somewhere between 20 and 30 major catastrophic explosions with ammonium nitrate since it came on the scene as a commercial product in the 1920s. And fire is a frequent trigger. It’s the heat of the fire that warms up the ammonium nitrate that can become a problem”, it seems that everyone is willing to give Hezbollah a pass on this event. I am not willing to do so, even if they merely blew up their own city, there is a stage where we need to consider what else was there and was it meant for pro-Houthi or anti-Israel actions? In an age where we see a whole range of analytics and geometric based analyses, in this the Guardian gives us ‘The explosion that devastated the city was no accident and anger is boiling over’, and then we see “It was so huge it was heard in Cyprus. It was so huge it shattered glass and ripped doors off their hinges kilometres away. It incinerated trees, tore the red roofs off centuries-old buildings and brought the blue sea inland. It left 5,000 injured and 154 dead – so far. There are many still missing under the rubble”, which leaves us with the setting that it all went up in one big explosion, consider the fact that it required (read: used) 2,750,000 Kg of ammonium nitrate, I get that there might be an explosion, but IT ALL exploded at once is the larger issue, the facts do not support it. And the fear of some is merely strengthening my view. With “We don’t really know how this ammonium nitrate, confiscated from a ship and stored in unsafe conditions in the middle of our city for six years, ignited. Because those who are responsible are actively rejecting an international investigation”, and in this I see their fear, international experts will bare out what I expect, there were explosives there and that contributed to the much larger explosion, not a fire, and that gets us to Hezbollah, it will feel the brunt of rage from the Lebanese people. Something it cannot afford at present. My initial speculation that Iran handed out of date materials beneath cost price is still on the table, as dynamite sweats nitroglycerine and in the heat in Lebanon it would fuse the ammonium nitrate as well. Yet some media is giving us ‘it requires a combination of things and that seems to have happened’, or something to that regard. They all avoid Iran and Hezbollah in all this, true there would be some speculation linked to it, but things that go boom to this degree requires much more investigation, I do not disagree with this, but blasé painting over the stage with paint of the colour ‘that seems to have happened’ is not the way to go. 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics, Science

Boom goes the dynamite

Yup, I got this from a trainee presenter in an American show, it stuck and now as we see the numbers come from Beirut and the devastating boom that the population in Beirut is facing, the term stuck again. I have waded through 4 hours of video, I read the articles and the sage does not  make sense. Yet, be aware that a lot of it is speculative, so do not take this as gospel, or as given facts, even as I try to go from some of the revealed facts, they too are up for reconsideration of optional inaccurate facts.

The Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/aug/04/beirut-explosion-huge-blast-port-lebanon-capital), gives us a lot of small facts, but some sources like CNN (and others) give us “2,750 metric tons of ammonium nitrate, a highly explosive material used in fertilizers and bombs, had been stored for six years at a port warehouse without safety measures, “endangering the safety of citizens,” according to a statement”, first of all the number comes down to 2,750,000 kilograms, which is not a lot, it is a massive amount to have. In a nation (with explosive needs or not), where there is a shortage of all things, that amount of fertiliser amounts to 125 40 foot containers, filled to the brink with fertiliser, and it was there for 6 years (according to some). When you realise the events can be seen in other light, the numbers do not add up, yet the explosion was real. 

Speculation
So why if there was more than fertiliser there? Consider Iran has been supplying Hezbollah with volatile goods for a long time, what happens when TNT (or dynamite) stats sweating? Now consider that we weren’t dealing with 125 containers, but with a mere 4 containers, but with TNT and it was kept in what some would consider the safest place, also consider that it had been there for a few months and sweating explosives tend to sweat nitro glycerine. Consider that Iran made a deal with surplus stuff and it backfired on its customer.

It is speculation, but consider the blast, according to some the blast was noticed well over 100Km away. I do have a point of reference, the Fireworks blast in the Netherlands (Enschede) had a similar effect, but nowhere near the size, the video’s I saw told a different story, one car on the highway with a distance of around 2000 meters away got its windows blown out and the rear view mirrors got blown off the car, and that is one of a few video’s that show me that this was no ordinary blast. Even as it is understandable that the real cause cannot be known yet, we see within 13 hours “2,750 tons of chemicals detonated”, the explanation is very much too soon. But I get the inkling of dire need to set a story out there, in light of the explosive nature of goods that Hezbollah relies on in Beirut. So when we consider “Over time, regardless of the sorbent used, sticks of dynamite will “weep” or “sweat” nitroglycerin, which can then pool in the bottom of the box or storage area. For that reason, explosive manuals recommend the repeated turning over of boxes of dynamite in storage”, and when we consider that and the supplier to Hezbollah, no matter where it would be stored, is my speculation so thin? Or is it a lot closer to the truth than you would imagine? And when we consider the shortage seem in Lebanon, consider 125 containers of goods untouched for 6 years, or 4 containers with Dynamite untouched (or partially touched) for 6 months, what is more likely? 

It is linked to a second speculation, what if Iran had to get rid of explosives that have a limited time left? Who would be appreciative of receiving explosives at below cost price? I feel certain that this is a direction that Iran did not anticipated, but it is what it is and remember, I am speculating here, yet in this case is it more likely than not is the question and yes, we need to await the real news, but as I see it, the media is accepting the 2,750,000 kilograms of Ammonium nitrate that was in folly stored for 6 years, and remember one small detail “Ammonium nitrate does not burn on its own”, and there was already a fire, I will also give you “Ammonium nitrate decomposition can be set off if an explosion occurs where it’s stored, if there is an intense fire nearby. The latter is what happened in the 2015 Tianjin explosion, which killed 173 people after flammable chemicals and ammonium nitrate were stored together at a chemicals factory in eastern China” The events seem to add up, but the amounts do not (as I personally see it), no matter how we see this, certain people have lost a lot, they will lose a lot more and Iran gets to be a supplier yet once again.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Military, Politics, Science

Champion from Stockholm

I feel a little out of my league, I will be honest, the moment my view, the view I belief to be right is under fire by a Nobel laureate, I feel that I am on the losing side. Yet, the article cannot be avoided. To do this, there is a time track, no matter how we are given “Saudi Arabia is legally responsible for war crimes in Yemen”, we need to take a look at the time line. “The help from Saudi Arabia was requested by at that time the rightful ruler of Yemen. So as we are given “The human rights activist made her comment after it was reported that the French judiciary has opened an investigation against Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Zayed who is accused of complicity in the torture of prisoners in Yemen detention centres controlled by the UAE armed forces. The French can look into such cases on the basis of universal jurisdiction.” (at https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20200722-saudi-arabia-is-legally-responsible-for-war-crimes-in-yemen-insists-nobel-laureate/), we are not seeing the actions that both Hezbollah and Houthi forces are a part of, so how are these entered in the whole of things? 

As I see it no version of “In a related context” is seemingly correct, the matter does not add up, and optionally for me it never will, I am aware of that, yet there is no version and no related context where we can look at all this and set apart the atrocities of the Houthi forces, the acts by Hezbollah and all in a stage where Iran is the puppet master behind the screen. So whilst Houthi forces are calling for an investigation into both Saudi Arabia and the UAE, when will the acts of the Houthi forces be held to account, not after, that much is a given. 

In all this, my sage is that Nobel Laureate Tawakkol Karman has a rather large station to fill, in the first there is the ‘legally responsible’ part, a stage we ignore because it is uncomfortable, but the stage includes that official help was requested by a legitimate elected office and that office is what the Houthi forces detest. Their actions make the entire ‘legally responsible’ moot to say the least, and that is before we add the station where they fired on Saudi civilian targets, war is hell, but as I see it they ca take a kissing booth ticket and present it to the nearest Afreet (he is currently resting in a bed of sand and stone around 140 KM North of Ubar Oman), perhaps there they will find the ear they were hoping for, of course Aarif was never one to pass up the taste of the ignorant soul, so good luck with that. 

No matter how you view this case and we do agree that she (Tawakkol Karman) is entitled to a view, and as she is Yemeni, we can all (including myself) agree that she has a more entitled view than I have. Yet where was she in the last 5 years? When we seek her Google search entries, we do not see that many, and a few are not relating to her view on the war, so why is she ‘so active’ now? Is that not a fair question too?

We see all the mentions on her being part of the Muslim Brotherhood, her setting as a Yemeni-Turkish activist. It might be true, it might not, I have not investigated that evidence, this is about her view of making Saudi Arabia responsible. I am not stating that Saudi Arabia is innocent, but any guilt needs to include the actions of Houthi forces, Hezbollah forces in Yemen and Iran and that is not happening. So as we give visibility to this Stockholm Champion, we need to also see that she is painting an incomplete picture. As a Dutch comedian once said, you cannot refer to the book ‘Ali Baba and the 40 thieves’, it is apparantly now named ‘Ali Baba and the 40 fighters for the Palestinian cause’, time changes everything, even the foundation of what we see and the timeline is important in all this, time is thee only valid measurement. It shows us where the situation was and the mess started with the elected officials calling for help, it is interesting how many people are dismissing that part of the equation. And seemingly it includes people wth a Nobel Price, it is as interesting as the way that price got its money in the first place.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

A pawn in nuclearity

There was an article, now 7 hours old, but I had seen it before, a day earlier I believe. I left it alone as I had to ponder a few items in this stage. You see the article reading ‘Nuclear Gulf: Is Saudi Arabia pushing itself into a nuclear trap?’ (at https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/nuclear-gulf-saudi-arabia-pushing-nuclear-trap-200718155513128.html) is giving us the part that matters “if Iran gets them first”, and as I see it focusses less on the danger that Iran is to the entire Middle East if they have them first. Even as we notice “The spectre of the Saudi-Iran Cold War escalating into a nuclear arms race is not beyond the realm of possibility”, we remain increasingly ignorant of “EU says Iran has triggered nuclear deal dispute mechanism” (at https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/04/eu-says-iran-has-triggered-nuclear-deal-dispute-mechanism-348680). The setting is not merely that Iran is seeking to become a Nuclear power, when we see “In January, the European architects of the deal triggered the dispute resolution mechanism provision in the accord, which is aimed at forcing Iran to return to compliance or potentially face the reimposition of international sanctions. They later suspended the action” we see the setting that the EU is sanctifying the Iranian actions, whilst diminishing the powers to stop Iran, this is a path that EU (et al) want this to happen, there are forces that want destabilisation of the Middle East and Iran having a nuclear options achieves that. 

And that is not the end of the EGO of the EU, when we see “EU’s top diplomat said that he remains “determined to continue working with the participants of the JCPOA and the international community to preserve [the deal]” and we see that this was three months ago, all whilst since then  we see no later than yesterday ‘EU Vows Greater Efforts to Safeguard Nuclear Accord’ (source: Financial times) we need to realise that this imbalance will have larger consequences in the Middle East and the players are not of the cooperative type (read: the EU and Iran). So even as Saudi Arabia is not looking forward to becoming a nuclear power, they are pushed by a larger group into this direction, and I wonder why this is. The stated setting that adding to the nuclear pool was to be stopped by nuclear forces is now setting a stage where an entire corridor from India to Israel is nuclear loaded. How is this a good idea ever? Consider India v Pakistan, Iran v Saudi Arabia & Israel, this can only end in disaster and as I personally see it the EU ego is not ready to deal with the fallout from this (literally so), as such I wonder why a larger group of nations is not standing pro-Saudi Arabia or anti-Iran in this (which of the two does not really matter). So as Al Jazeera gives us “Saudi Arabia’s nuclear ambitions date back to at least 2006, when the kingdom started exploring nuclear power options as part of a joint programme with other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council”, they fail to give us the reasoning that Saudi Arabia “Saudi Arabia’s population has grown from 4 million in 1960 to over 31 million in 2016”, as I see it, power requirements have grown somewhere between 300%-500%, making Nuclear power one of the remaining options in the short term for Saudi Arabia, Iran on the other hand has been clear about becoming a nuclear power weapons wise, Al Jazeera also does not give us the fact that Saudi Arabia openly stated that they prefer not to have Nuclear weapons, but if Iran has them, Saudi Arabia feels forced to have them as well, making Iran the instigators in all this, yet the EU is seemingly oblivious to this. I wonder why? So when we look at the Financial Times again and see “He pointed to the beginning of discussions in 2003, which led to the conclusion of JCPOA and said, “It took 12 years to break the differences and to cut a deal. It was a big success for effective multilateralism and it has been a success because the JCPOA has delivered on its promises.”” We see an absence. The absence is that it took only 3 years for the deal to be broken by Iranian violations, but it seems that this part is largely not shown in many places. Yet in all this Saudi Arabia is named the pawn. I wonder why?

So as Saudi Arabia is entering the nuclear stage soon enough, we need to worry in other ways too. The EU was massively ignorant, or perhaps from my point of view it was intentionally ignorant on all these Houthi forces (as well as Hezbollah) have been practicing their missile firing abilities on Saudi Arabia, who what happens when one of them is a nuclear one? What happens when Iran ‘accidentally’ misplaces two of them? One for Israel and one for Saudi Arabia? Where will we find these Eu ego’s? The issues we have seen over the past give rise to this train of thought and Iran is not above the act of misplacing items. Has anyone found all these misplaced drones yet that accidentally made it into Houthi hands?

When we see the amount of pussyfooting around Iran, we need to consider the trap we set up for ourselves, it does not make Saudi Arabia the pawn, it makes us all the payers of high priced oil, because when this goes bad, really bad he price of oil will be close to 400% of what it is today, so when you at the pump, you realise what is about to happen to your budget, all thanks to the ego of some EU officials who should have played hard ball from the start.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

When is a terrorist not a terrorist?

Isn’t that an interesting question? You might think it is not, but what happens when we consider our own pat, the letters of marque and the bounty arrangements many European nations had preceding the 19th century? And when we consider those ‘privateers’, how far away were they from being pirates?

That is underlying the stage we see in the Jerusalem Post when we see ‘EU must designate Hezbollah as terror organization, 230 lawmakers say’ (at https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/eu-must-designate-hezbollah-as-terror-organization-230-lawmakers-say-635378). We can argue on the premise of this, yet let’s be clear, when was Hezbollah not a terrorist organisation? The quote “The EU already recognizes Hezbollah’s military wing as a terrorist group, but has not extended that designation to the organization’s political wing. Such a designation must be made by the unanimous consent of the EU’s Council of foreign ministers, where opinions on the matter are divided”, So apparently there are white sheep and black sheep, yet what about the grey and brown sheep? The letter as stated had all these signatures, so for the record we see “Signatories to the letter included 131 members of European national legislatures, 73 members of the European Parliament, 17 members of the US Congress, eight members of the Parliament of Canada and six Knesset members” In addition we see “Among those who already recognize Hezbollah in its entirety is Argentina, Bahrain, Canada, Colombia, Germany, Honduras, Israel, Japan, the Netherlands, Paraguay, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States”, So apart from the fact that 2 EU members are already seeing Hezbollah as a complete danger, what gain is there for the EU to keep this debate going? This entire sheep fur issue is what gives Hezbollah the edge they need to remain a danger in the EU and beyond. 

This is seen in a different way, I remember, I was (indirectly) around in 1982 when Hezbollah started. When we see the quote “For Iran, the creation of Hezbollah represented the realisation of the revolutionary state’s zealous campaign to spread the message of the self-styled ‘‘Islamic revolution’’, whereas for Syria the Shia party was a fortuitous instrument for preserving its interests: Syria’s alliance with Iran presented it with the means to strike indirectly at both Israel and the United States, as well to keep Lebanese allies, including the Amal movement, in line.” We get this from The Role of Hezbollah in Lebanese Domestic Politics by Augustus Richard Norton. We see the clear and direct interaction of its political and military side, this could not have continued if military and political sides were not in the same direction, which means that they needed to align, which gets us the direct interaction. We might think that they are clever, using a seemingly Chinese wall side with different people, but they have a connection through a person and optionally through other links as well. “Hezbollah’s speedy distribution of $12,000 payments to each family made homeless by the war. The opposition alliance, formally sealed in a written compact on February 2006, has proven remarkably durable. It comes with the reference The full translated text may be found at yalibnan.com/site/archives/2006/02/full_english_te.php. The military did not have the funds, there is a larger political connection meaning that they are not separate, no matter the reason for the interaction, there is interaction. In the stage that I see it, the EU is seemingly knowingly blind to that interaction, perhaps as a way to keep the door open for business, this is my speculative implied  consideration that when it comes to money the EU is willing to let go of whatever ethical needs it has, it is not beyond the scope of things, but the idea that they remain in denial of that small part is a little to sour for consideration. 

It all gets worse when you consider the Arab News (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/1705556) where we see ‘Desperate Lebanese forced to look to Hezbollah’, and here we get “It is already clear that the tribunal will issue a judgment concerning the four accused and not against the group to which they belong: Hezbollah. This means that each of the nowhere-to-be-found accused will be issued with a judgment independently, which insulates Hezbollah from any direct legal accusation, even though the political accusation has been issued by all since the day of the assassination of Rafik Hariri in 2005” a political push to insulate Hezbollah? Do you still think that there is not a stronger level of interactions and at what point will the military arm not herald the consequences of the desperate Lebanese? The essential pushes, now intensified through Covid-19 on a global scale means that Hezbollah has a larger and wider stage of interactions. Still the EU considers the military and political arm apart? What evidence do they have that there is no interaction when there are mountains of evidence (A Golan joke if you please) that there is interaction?

And when the issues between Israel and Syria starts, how much more interactions within Hezbollah will be ignored? At some point we will need to accept that the EU needs a much closer look on who they go to bed with and a publication of names connected to the EU Gravy train will suddenly be stopped on national security reasons, there are more interactions and there is more denial than too many politicians are comfortable with and the stage that unfolds will have a few larger traps, I wonder how it will turn out.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Military, Politics

The Price of knowledge

There was an article in the BBC two days ago, I kept it on the side as I wanted the knowledge to sink in. There is optionally nothing wring with the writer, yet the stage is flawed. The stage includes everyones favourite Essay writer with a matching political agenda, It’s Eggy Calamari. Although she apparently uses her altar ego identity Agnes Calamard at 405 East 42nd Street, New York. The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-53345885) gives us ‘Qasem Soleimani: US strike on Iran general was unlawful, UN expert says’, OK, we are in a stage where we need to differ between what is just and what is lawful, and I get that. Not all just actions are lawful and plenty of lawful actions are not just. That is how it has always has been, so what gives in this case? Well that part is seen with “the US had not provided sufficient evidence of an imminent threat to life to justify the attack”. Are these people for real? Qasem Soleimani was direct threat to Middle East stability every moment he was breathing. This is not some general like most nations have them, this was an absolute virtuoso in the art of terrorism wherever he went. 

So when we see “He was in charge of the Quds Force’s clandestine missions and its provision of guidance, funding, weapons, intelligence, and logistical support to allied governments and armed groups, including Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad”, we see that apart from whatever lawful way he had destabilising the Middle East, we also see that he funded three terrorist organisations, namely Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and that is not enough evidence? These three are a constant threat to imminent threat of life any given day of the week. It seems to me that just like in previous attempts, Agnes Calamard is all about catering to the ‘concerns’ of Iran for some politicians to keep the conversation going for whatever needs these politicians have.

For those who are not in the know of General QS. Let’s take a look. First is 2019, when we consider Iraq, we are given Baghdad: The Iraqi people refuse the pro Iranian personalities”, I will let you guess what happens next, next we see “Soleimani traveled to Iraq aiming to convince various political parties to maintain Mohammed Shia’ Sabbar al-Sudani? as the new candidate for the prime ministry, the Al-Arabiya website reported on December 16. Al-Sudani? is member of the Islamic Dawa Party led by former Iraqi PM Nouri Al-Maleki who is charged with embezzlement, corruption, murder and terrorizing his opponents. al-Sudani? was also a minister in Maleki’s cabinet. Another candidate is Ghosi Al-Sahih. He was a minister in Adel Abdol Mehdi’s cabinet and close to Nouri Al-Maleki. Following his nomination for the PM post, the Iraqi people protested in numerous cities including Baghdad, Naseriyah, Najaf and Basra.” The issues becomes that Qasam Soleimani is not a diplomat, he doesn’t negotiates, he hands out ultimatums and if they do  not know that at the UN, then those people have become slightly less than useless. 

We can go back in time, 2018, 2017, 2016, Qasam Soleimani was there dispersing his brand of justice through the powerful arms of terrorist organisations in the Middle East. That can all be set to the stage of a direct threat to life, an imminent threat to life and an absolute waging of war against civilians. So when we see two botched reports (as I personally see it) against Saudi Arabia, relying on cone cure and ignoring the lack of evidence and now we see her making a black letter law call? I wonder who is paying her ticket, I am not much for conjecture but this is the third case that calls for an investigations into the acts of Agnes Calamard, the fact that this is not happening, implies that certain people require the need for Middle Eastern imbalance and who does that serve? In this economy it actually serves no one but the ones needing funds to go in specific directions for a longer time to come, whilst the need cannot be shown. I would ask the people at Palantir, but they are too busy going public regarding their shares (I am not stating that this is illegal or a bad call).

We can hide behind the price of knowledge, but the actions of Qasam Soleimani are well documented for close to half a century and the opposition got to him before he made a mess of Iraq as well. I reckon that this is the part that upsets them optionally more then taking out the financier of three terrorist organisations, and those are the three we openly know about, there is enough to indicate Qasam Soleimani in dozens of other cases, other fund distributing actions. In most cases he merely approved them, he was not directly involved and we will never find any, including his hands in the entire Yemeni situation, which is interestingly not investigated. Can anyone tell me how 50+ Iranian drones and 200+ Iranian missiles got into Houthi hands without him knowing and approving it? #Just-asking

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Military, Politics

Light reading

We all have those moments, when the reading gets tough, because we decided to take a stab at Umberto Eco’s the Name of the Rose, James SA Corey’s Tiamat’s Wrath or Neil Gaiman’s American Gods, we tend to require some light reading, in this I am no different, although, my choice was ‘Country Reports on Terrorism 2019’ the US Department of State to provide to Congress a full and complete annual report on terrorism for those countries and groups meeting the criteria of the Act.  It is here that I found a few items that made me wonder, I’ll merely look at one of them.

Now, the important part in all this is the fact that we need to consider what constitutes ‘a complete annual report’, I need to set it in that way, for the simple reason that the application of ‘complete’ is not always a given in some settings. This piece of light reading is set to 304 pages, so I will safe you the state of affairs in a few items and focus on an immediate issue that could be seen as a direct danger and not merely to the US.

Hezbollah, is there another one?

The US Department of State names them Hizballah and then gives us “Aka the Party of God; Islamic Jihad; Islamic Jihad Organization; Revolutionary Justice Organization; Organization of the Oppressed on Earth; Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine; Organization of Right Against Wrong; Ansar Allah; Followers of the Prophet Muhammed; Lebanese Hizballah; Lebanese Hezbollah; LH; Foreign Relations Department; FRD; External Security Organization; ESO; Foreign Action Unit; Hizballah ESO: Hizballah International; Special Operations Branch; External Services Organization; External Security Organization of Hizballah”, OK, fair enough, they are known in several ways, so we get the entire list of references and no one will ever object to clarity. Yet then we see “In September 2018, Brazil arrested a Hizballah financier, and in December 2018, tunnels reportedly built by the group were discovered on Israeli territory along the boundary with Lebanon. In September 2019, Hizballah launched attacks directly on the Israeli military, firing anti-tank missiles targeting an army base and vehicles near the border. 

Strength: Hizballah has tens of thousands of supporters and members worldwide. 

Location/Area of Operation: Lebanon and Syria

This is all true, yet it is incomplete. The entire setting to Hezbollah in Yemen is overlooked, intentionally or not is not important. 

The first source is Reuters (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-group/saudi-led-coalition-says-hezbollah-fighters-killed-in-yemen-battles-idUSKBN1JL0YR). They give us ‘Saudi-led coalition says Hezbollah fighters killed in Yemen battle’ in June 2018 “Forces backed by a Saudi-led coalition have killed eight members of Lebanon’s Hezbollah group in Yemen in battles with the Iran-aligned Houthis, the coalition said on Monday. Hezbollah officials could not immediately be reached for comment.” In addition we see ‘Yemen’s Houthi rebels raise nearly $300,000 for Hezbollah’ in 2019 and the entire setting continues until deep into 2020. As I personally see it, the Area of Operation has been proven (via several sources) to include Yemen and that is overlooked. In 2019 there are over half a dozen sources giving us news of Hezbollah in Yemen, I see that as a massive reason for actions and identification, especially as several sources name Hezbollah as the trainer/co-operating partner in the missile attacks on Saudi Arabia.

It gets to be worse if some sources can be trusted (unchecked), When we see ‘Hezbollah Isn’t Just in Beirut. It’s in New York, Too. The trial of a senior operative reveals the extent of the terrorist organization’s reach in the United States and Canada.’ We need to equally question “But last month, the criminal prosecution and conviction in New York of the Hezbollah operative Ali Kourani revealed disturbing new information about the extent of Hezbollah’s operations and activities in the United States and Canada.” The issue is as I see it a lot larger, it is not enough that they are recognised as a terrorist force, yet the lack of mentions of their activities outside of the Middle East in 2019 is a rather large factor, especially if their activities in the US, Canada and Europe were published by media sources. The British newspaper ‘the Telegraph’ (OK, not the greatest reliable source) gives us ‘Europe has not faced up to the threat of Hizbollah’ with the added text “Iran’s primary terrorist proxy group, Lebanese Hizbollah, has been deploying operatives to Europe for many years.” We can add text after text, yet the question in all this becomes, why is the ‘Country Reports on Terrorism 2019’ incomplete? As I personally see it, it is an ‘incomplete annual report’, all this whilst this year there are added factors, that give rise to the fact that the Houthi forces as well as Hezbollah has been firing drones and missiles on civil targets in Saudi Arabia making them a much larger threat and optionally the proven threat that Israel has always claimed them to be. 

Light reading or not, when the item is set to complete, I say, it is not. I wonder if I am the only one claiming this and the only one claiming that Hezbollah is a much larger problem than the US Congress is being made aware of. I wonder why?

Country-Reports-on-Terrorism-2019-2

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

What others decide

We see it every day, there is a side that withholds resources, because it is theirs to do so, and there is a side where people decide to keep resources away from others for reasons like margins, profit and needs. They are at times not nice decisions, but the decision was theirs to take, at times we have to accept that. Now we need to consider what the wisdom is in keeping information away from us. Not intelligence, that is up to those grim boffins to decide on, butthe events that have taken place and the news decides to not inform us, so what is the wisdom there and how does that reflect on them? 

ABC seemingly does not inform us, yet the BBC gives us ‘France’s ancient burial brotherhood’, Reuters has no mention of it as far as I can tell, yet the BBC gives us ‘What will clothes shopping look like’, and as I mention the BBC a few times, they have nothing either.

It is Al Jazeera that gives us ‘Saudi-led coalition says it destroyed missile targeting Najran’. The news 17 hours old gives us that Houthi forces are still targeting Saudi civil population and the people in charge of bolstering peace (or so they claim) are seemingly making sure that this news does not reach us. In that news given to us we get the words from the coalition spokesperson Turki al-Malki gives us the part that the missile was launched from Saada, all factual given. What Al Jazeera does not give us (for decent reasons) is that there is still uncertainty how much support the Houthis get from Iran, how ‘supportive’ Hezbollah remains in all this. Elements that matter, but too many sources are intentionally blind to that part of the equation. In Yemen the bulk of all UN support will falter due to a lack of funding, as such the stage of humanitarian aid will close down leaving the Yemeni population to die.

Even now as Iran makes claims that the Iranian-Russian ties serve international security, we see a faltering level of information by the newsgroups. Even as the source can be debated, the information lacks scrutiny because the public was not informed, it has not been informed for months at a time, as some ego driven politicians had the nuclear accords carrot and they needed that carrot to be looking as sweet as possible, and keeping people in the dark on what was actually happening was a first. 

Yet the Russian collaboration with Iran gives Iran the nuclear parts that they need and the Yemeni pressures are almost an insuring valve that the parts are to be used, Saudi Arabia is between the sea of Dammam and a hard case and its so called allies are floundering the support in the empty air. A stage where Iran is the larger evil and the news is either embargoed, or stupidly keeping the people in the dark on the actual setting. Because shopping for clothes is where the actual newsworthy part is at, or is it? 

We can point and blame all we like, but the Houthi events are a larger stage and the news is not covering it, why not? The largest humanitarian collapse in history is about to happen to a nation and the people are left in the dark, optionally merely because of the resources.

A stage we all made happen, and we now need to be blind of the actions that follow, why will we never learn?

We might not have resources, we might not have power, these things happen, yet when we accept that information is filtered to what others decide what we need to know, that is when we give up our own personal power, when did we decide that this was ever going to be a good thing?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics