Tag Archives: Khartoum

The truth becomes a question

That was the disgust I felt when I saw ‘US Leaders Know UAE Backs Massacres in Sudan. Stopping Them Would Be Too Costly’ today. As I see it, these lies should be set with liability claims towards the Truthout (at https://truthout.org/articles/us-leaders-know-uae-backs-massacres-in-sudan-stopping-them-would-be-too-costly/) and a major claim should also be handed to the writer “By Elfadil Ibrahim, Responsible Statecraft”, but what would I know about that. The inferred claim in the heading is merely the window dressing. What is the real claim that not only are the UAE and the United States mere puppets towards the Sudan, the setting that this (as far as I can tell) mere baseless claims are part of this all. So as I see “El Fasher was the last major city in Sudan’s Darfur region still outside the control of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary force that has been fighting Sudan’s national army, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), in a civil war that recently entered its fourth year. The war has morphed into a regional proxy conflict, with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) backing the RSF, while Egypt and Turkey have emerged as the army’s primary backers, providing weapons, drones, and training.” Comes with several parts. Do you think that the UAE was actually part of this and Egypt and Turkey opposing this? Don’t you think the world news media would have mentioned this at least once? You see, the Human Rights group (a party always in need of media coverage) makes claims that “Rights groups allege the UAE has supplied advanced drones, armored vehicles, and weapons to the RSF. Evidence indicates the UAE has also facilitated the transit of foreign mercenaries and private military contractors to aid the paramilitary group” If this was true and if there was any kind of evidence the word ‘allege’ would not be added, there would be statements ‘this evidence is provided’, it seemingly was not. Then the BBC makes claims that “The RSF has been widely accused of war crimes and ethnically targeted mass killings in Sudan. Because of the UAE’s alleged enabling role, Sudan filed a case against the UAE at the International Court of Justice, citing complicity in genocide” again with the words ‘allege’ in it, as such no evidence exists. Then we get a more ‘varied’ setting with “Mounting global evidence has led to growing demands from organizations like Human Rights Watch for international actors to break their silence and hold external backers of the Sudan conflict accountable” as such what mounting global evidence, where is it? What international actors?  What external backers and why are they not clearly named? I get that an insignificant party like the Human Rights Watch loves the limelight, but they are not giving anyone any clear evidence. So as we get “The same day that Boulos spoke before the Security Council, the U.S. Treasury Department announced sanctions on individuals and entities linked to both sides of Sudan’s civil war. Four days before that, State Department Spokesman Tommy Piggot warned that “mass atrocities could be imminent” in El Obeid.

At the time of these warnings from Trump administration officials, Secretary of State Marco Rubio had just completed a Gulf tour, reassuring allies shaken by the U.S.- Iran war. During the trip, Rubio told reporters in Kuwait that Washington “continues to engage” on Sudan with Gulf states at every opportunity.” We wonder what sanctions on which individuals? We see the mention of a spokesman and we see political truths, but connected to whom, to what?

These questions keep on mounting liabilities. So when we see “a finding that Washington effectively endorsed through its own sanctions, having designated multiple UAE-based companies in January 2025 for providing the RSF with weapons and financial cover.

Despite Washington’s own warnings of what’s to come, the political inaction means that the situation for the people of El Obeid is bleak. The RSF has set its sights on El Obeid because of its strategic location, linking Darfur to the Nile Valley and the capital, Khartoum. Whoever controls the city controls the central axis of movement across Sudan.” We merely see “UAE-based companies” is too shallow to be used as an instance. You see Microsoft, Oracle & Cisco Systems are based in the UAE. Are they responsible? Aren’t they American? As I see it, someone wants to make hay out of a small spot of grass and there isn’t any. No naming of any kind and seeing the evidence of “weapons and financial cover” usually comes with evidence. So if these weapons are AK-47, would that evidence not be Russian? Merely touching the setting, If the weapons were FN materials wouldn’t the evidence be Belgium? I am merely asking the obvious and whilst we like a good tale like the continuing stories of some president who went to the dogs (which is a muppet show reference) we need to see that evidence. And as we are given “An investigation by The Sentry found that Ahmed al-Humairi, a senior Emirati official, founded and once fully owned the company at the center of that network. He has since divested his shares, but he remains closely linked to the company’s current CEO, fellow Emirati businessman Mohamed Hamdan al-Zaabi. The UAE denies all of this, but members of Congress and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have all openly acknowledged the UAE’s role in arming the RSF. Despite the fact that this is now public knowledge, arms sales to the UAE have not been conditioned, nor has Abu Dhabi faced any real consequences from Washington.” I wonder who is the Sentry? What exactly is the connection to Ahmed al-Humairi, a senior Emirati official? Perhaps he is in charge of parking meters? And the reference is as shallow as anything I have ever seen. It’s like finding an embroidered tissue at a fire with “DT” and then claiming that President Donald Trump set the fire. It is that level of shallow. And the article ends with “This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.” When anyone hides behind these lines, you know that the media will not touch this and they keep on making populist statements to anyone without any kind of accountability and I am not having it. I would hope that the UAE looks into the dealings of Ahmed al-Humairi. In this I am not stating that he is guilty of anything, but the setting should be looked at, only to find the ridiculous setting of it. Then there is the setting of Mohamed Hamdan al-Zaabi. What did he do? Did he do anything illegal at all? 

So as I am trying to get that fifty taste out of my mouth by this piece, I am hoping my mind spots a lot more worthy material of a decent kind tomorrow. Perhaps I will continue a piece I started last week. It’s better than looking into the present political waves all over the world, so you all have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

From B to A

That is how this feels. After the ICJ drops the case against the UAE, which I discussed in ‘Accused United Arabs’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/05/07/accused-united-arabs/)

we get Aljazeera giving us (at https://aje.io/yppdhg) ‘UAE denies supplying Sudan paramilitaries with Chinese arms’ where the byline is “UAE says it “strongly rejects” accusations of arming Sudan’s paramilitary forces”. I for one am a little surprised. Is this news? Aren’t journalists supposed to be intelligent? We are also given “Salem Aljaberi, the UAE’s assistant minister for security and military affairs, said on social media on Friday that the allegations, contained in an Amnesty International report released the previous day, are “baseless” and “lack substantiated evidence”.” With the additional “Amnesty said on Thursday that it had verified footage showing RSF fighters using Chinese GB50A guided bombs and 155mm AH-4 howitzers during attacks in Khartoum and Darfur. According to the rights group, the UAE was the only known buyer of the howitzers from China, citing data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.” The UN has become more of a joke then most others as they are playing (as I personally see it) some political game, the same can be said for their hilarious essay’s against Saudi Arabia. And in this I wonder about the “lack of substantiated evidence”, what evidence does the UN give the world? How was the footage verified? Who what parties and why doesn’t AlJazeera show the footage? Same can be said for the 155mm howitzers. What evidence is there that the UAE send them? And as such the quote giving usSudan’s Defence Minister Yassin Ibrahim on Tuesday accused the UAE of violating the country’s sovereignty by backing the RSF, and the military government announced it would cut diplomatic relations.” What evidence has Defence Minister Ibrahim given the world that the UAE was behind this. I feel comfortable asking that question as the ICJ threw out the case with a 14-2 vote. So is the Sudan now in the market of staking Aljazeera for market research purposes so that the media can be the ‘match’ that lights the track of awareness for the Sudan. We get recognition by Aljazeera, followed by recall through the lager media, which gives us top of mind through people who have read the articles and preference of the accused party by all. And how were these weapons shipped (I got to this question a little early, but this will make sense shortly.

You see, the second article I saw in that hour was ‘Amnesty Says UAE Supplying Sudan Paramilitaries With Chinese Weapons’ (at https://thedefensepost.com/2025/05/09/amnesty-uae-sudan-rsf-weapons/), a piece even more debatable then the Aljazeera piece. They did give us “Amnesty said its research was based on weapons used by the RSF in operations in the western region Darfur and during its loss of the capital Khartoum in March.” So how is the origin of these weapons tracked? 

Perhaps some of these weapons still had the Abu Dhabi mall Toys-R-Us sticker, with the discount barcode so that the armies in the Sudan could afford them? I’m not sure, so I thought I’d ask.

As such the laughable UN also sticks his fingers in here as we are given ““Sophisticated Chinese weaponry, re-exported by the United Arab Emirates, has been captured in Khartoum, as well as used in Darfur in a blatant breach of the existing UN arms embargo,” Amnesty said.” Please tell me what corroborating evidence is there? I am not dismissing these statements if there is evidence. What makes it the setting of the UAE? I asked the same question 3 days ago. What makes this a responsibility of the UAE? What proves that the UAE was active here, and not some idle quick rich wannabe Emirati citizen? The UAE has an estimate 116,500 millionaires. What evidence sets at least one of these in the limelight, what evidence makes the UAE the guilty party? None of any evidence I ever saw gives us that. The evidence the world has seen is bitterly little. As I see it UN chief Antonio Guterres is making more and more a fool of himself which lads to more countries now considering abandoning the UN charter. If only clear evidence was presented to the world at large. Even a nice picture of the Chinese goods found in Sudan would have helped, but all I saw were soldiers with Kalashnikovs (a Russian invention). 

The entire farce I have seen over the last three days completely lacks evidence. There is no documented money trail, there is not shipment trail and there is no physical evidence presented. That is a simple three way tier that is missing and Aljazeera takes itself serious with this?

It is easy for me to go from B to A, as the events have taken place and in that time responsible parties should have been ahead of me by some lengths. Even the Defence post shown from yesterday is lacking making the issue larger and more of a joke than a serious case of accusation. I for one agree with Salem Aljaberi, this is totally lacking substantiated evidence. I personally wonder what the editor of Aljazeera was doing, polishing his nails? Hoping for digital dollars? Your guess is as good as mine and consider that I saw the gaps in less then 30 minutes on these two articles, how long will it take you to see that this is about something else. 

Have a great day, for me it is a simple 90 minutes until breakfast.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

The stage of a game

We all have an idea, some have the idea of a life time, but I cannot make that claim, not because I do not have one, but because I have too many. Yes there is the call to make remasters (Knights of the Sky), there is the call to reinvent the wheel (System Shock by Nightdive Studios), or there is the need to take it to the next level, a next level that was not possible in the past, mainly because technology did not allow for it.

This is how I always saw Pirates (by Sid Meier), there was a chance where Black Flag was a nice tribute, but it was the dawn of PS4 and Xbox One and Ubisoft took a cowardly way to progress a franchise on a lack of factors. So as I initially played Black Flag, my mind went racing. And then I remembered another pirate game, a board game with additional bluff cards. So what happens, when w take the foundation of Black Flag and make it more towards the original the Sid Meier made? The map would be well over 20 times the size, a lot more like the actual map of the Caribbeans in those days, the game would not be some fruity assassin, it would be your version and you get to live the life of a cutthroat, a buccaneer, a privateer, it is up to you, to go from a small skiff to a full-grown galley or slave ship if you are good enough. You see, there is something totally awesome about the way the game Elite Dangerous is designed (by David Braben). There your life does not matter, the game does not care, nor should it and it is time to set that stage to RPG and a pirate RPG makes a lot of sense. You cannot always be a captain, you start as a simple sailor. And in this you could get to a rank if you are good enough. 

So how do we go about it, we tend to look towards the wars of adjustment, yet there are so many wars the were never on the radar, the Dutch independence wars (which took close to 80 years), the age of piracy and lets not forget the Sudan wars (Mahdist War 1881-1899), all places that seem to be forgotten. Who remembers the siege of Khartoum? Some are so set in a stage of winning, the we sometimes forget that half the fun is surviving, so how far will you get? The original siege went on from 13 March 1884 to 26 January 1885, so what happens when you are in charge, how long will you last? Games are so much about winning, the we forget the enduring is nothing less. To make it to the date or even past it would be a victory and a half. It is so American to be the victor the most of them do not understand ‘the Last Samurai’, it is not about winning, it is about not losing, or better stated, the way you live towards the final days matters more, we forgot about that part, didn’t we?

We can set any gaming stage, but it is how we play where we see if we measure up, not if we merely tap the mile poles in a game. I reckon that the achievements made us all a little complacent in games. We can go in any direction, a Hindenburg flight simulator, yet in there we will always come up short against the Microsoft flight simulator, it makes more sense for them to add the Hindenburg. Yet what happens when we turn the script? What happens when we set the stage to a simple thing, what if the player is a no one, yet his/her grandfather was Hades, Poseidon or Zeus? What happens when we map a place like Monte Carlo completely and get him to retrieve a relic that one of the 2,261 millionaires or 50 billionaires has. Is it in a house, is it on a boat or is it somewhere else (like a museum)? We can simplify any game for as much as we can, but in the end we need a healthy story and for the most Wars tend to do that (an unhealthy endeavour if ever there was one). I saw the need of a game on mines, and remembered some bomb defusing game on the CBM-64, so where to go from there? The stage of a game is important, because it sets a vested interest of the gamer, Ubisoft had the down to perfection in Assassins Creed 2 and Brotherhood and after the they lost the plot, they almost won it back in AC4 Black Flag and they definitely got it back in Origins. I would think the a Battlestar Galactica RPG is one the would be favourable with the BSG fans, but not much outside that, the same can be said for Babylon 5, the Star Trek fanbase is huge, so that tends to be a close win any given day of the week, but that does not guarantee a good game, the issue is seen when an idea with a small base entices a large following, that is the stage we all seek. CD Project Red did so with Witcher and seemingly is about to do it again with Cyberpunk 2077.  It is the setting the fuels the story, and the story is everything, I have always believed that, it is the power of an RPG. It is because of the that we see out the great stories (Tolkien), yet I wonder what happens when we try this with Herbert on a larger scale with Dune, not merely on Arrakis, why if all the other places become involved? Perhaps a visionary will see that option with the next Dune movie (2020). In this books have been the strongest source of inspiration, mainly because there are so many of them. Yet most of us go to the same source, why? I agree that it is appealing, but there are so many nations with alternatives. That is something we saw when someone created the Untitled Goose Game, brilliant t in its foundation, as such I wondered if someone had considered the same thing with a cat (Minoes, Annie M. G. Schmidt), a writer the has a following of millions in the Netherlands and Belgium. In that same setting, as Skyrim became such a hit, did anyone ever look towards the famous Spanish Comic books of the Mercenary by Segrelles? It has all the makings of a much larger game, a stage where some are set not in multiple games, but one game with a season pass and several DLC’s.

Then there is the comic hero Rork, by Andreas, or even the Trigan Empire by Don Lawrence. I remember growing up to these stories and the stories of Ravian (Valerian), I am a little surprised that the Trigan Empire never made it to the silver screen or the computer, Don Lawrence has a flair for imagery and the computer always needs this. So what is the stage of a game that will be set next? The is the question and the is where players like Sony and Google/Apple will find themselves. Microsoft might be acquiring the brands (Bethesda), yet they do not have the stage alone and the next innovator might be just around the corner. For me, the idea that the $7,500,000,000 lemon the Microsoft acquired (not Bethesda mind you) would backfire largely and loudly and the would be OK with me.

As I personally see it, Microsoft pissed of true gamers and that group of people doesn’t pull punches when they play with their idols, we do not fault Bethesda in any of this, but aligning with Microsoft was not the best idea, as some say, you are only as good as your next game and Bethesda had plenty of winners, but what is next? We look not merely to the stage of the game, but to the next stage of gaming and I believe that they are too often hiding behind terms like ‘hype worthy games’, yet that is a setting from the mind of a marketing department, they predict that people who play games, will think this is a hype. Yet true hypes come from games the are on the edge of what is possible in gaming, the Witcher 3 is the perfect example there. Cyberpunk is also on the stage, neither of them are Microsoft games. Yet it was brilliant to buy Bethesda, but the also means that those who do not love the Microsoft console will look to the borders and see what else is possible, optionally setting the stage for the $7,500,000,000 lemon, not because of Bethesda, but because gamers have a lack of trust in Microsoft and the fact that some had the numbers that only 1 out of 3 considered the new Microsoft console, the gives me the impression that Microsoft has a much larger problem and buying software houses will not solve it, making visionary games do and the is the lesson Microsoft has not learned. They opened the door for Sony to look what else is out there, what else could become an exclusive and the is where Sony will win and gamers will win. Because it is on the edge of possible gaming where new gamers will be born, new games will be born and at the end of my life I see that there are options coming towards gamers, games the will create new gamers, it will create new creativity and new thinking through gaming and this is a good thing. The simple truth is the there is real gaming beyond Ubisoft and Microsoft, true gaming is never soft, it is challenging and the is where we need to look, we need to look where they are not looking. That is how I got most my IP in several fields. Not by being some bullet point presenter like all the others, but by looking in a direction they decided not to bother looking. That is how most revolutionary IP is created, and it is funny as this is the way Microsoft and Ubisoft started, to look where no was. Too bad they forgot about the part of the equation and I reckon the Sony is waking up to that lesson at present.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, movies