Tag Archives: King Abdullah Airport

The direction doesn’t matter

That is a weird stage to set things on, but for me in Australia, I am looking to events in the NW (actually WNW to North), Canada looks at it as events in the East (actually ESE) and Europe sees it as events to the South (actually SE), we look at things from a different perspective and in this the ABC (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-31/uae-saudi-arabia-yemen-strikes-port-weapons-shipment/106188568) we get ‘UAE withdraws personnel from Yemen after Saudi Arabia air strikes’ and the headline matters, but this is not the most important part. You see, I partially take offense to “The United Arab Emirates is pulling its personnel out of Yemen after Saudi Arabia’s bombing of an alleged shipment of weapons and vehicles it claimed had been going to a separatist group. The UAE Ministry of Defence said it would withdraw its remaining “counter-terrorism teams” from southern Yemen after Saudi Arabia issued a 24-hour deadline to the Emirates to leave and cease sending weapons and money to any group in the country.” This follows the issue I have with “Both Saudi Arabia and the Emirates intervened in Yemen’s civil war in 2015, as the major players in a coalition fighting the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in the north.” The ABC is wrong here, these aren’t Houthi rebels, they are Houthi Terrorists and they better realise their wrongful setting of the euphemism brush that they use in cases of Yemen events. As I see it,“A terrorist is an individual who uses or threatens violence against non-combatants (such as civilians) to create widespread fear and thereby achieve political, religious, or ideological goals.” And in all this Iran is equally guilty for enabling these terrorist events by delivering hardware and knowledge to the Houthi terrorists. We merely get “On 9 October 2021, Houthi forces launched two suicide drones on King Abdullah Airport in Jizan, Saudi Arabia. The attack left 10 wounded; six Saudi nationals, three Bangladeshi and one Sudanese as well as and minor damage to civilian property.” Yet, if the media took the trouble to question Colonel Turki bin Saleh al-Maliki of the Royal Saudi Air Force, they would get a number a lot higher and more recent of the attacks these terrorists made on Saudi Arabian soil, even though Yemeni hardware could never enabled these actions, neither was it possible to see the attacks on 14 September 2019, where drones were used to attack oil processing facilities. Houthi forces never had the knowhow and precision to follow through in that, making Iran the most likely culprit (I use culprit loosely as I never saw the evidence) and the western media is massively shy the reports on this, because that would enable Saudi Arabia to get the backing from the global population and that is a second setting the world was not ready for. It is all nice if one party is show to be the bad apple, but when too much evidence is showing to be incorrect, the people will ask questions and the media set themselves up for that stage. And there are developing stages here. As ABC gives us “But Dr Kendall said the Saudis and Emiratis supported different factions in southern Yemen, with Saudi Arabia preferring a united Yemen and the Emiratis supporting the separatist STC, which wants to create a new state in the south. That rivalry has intensified, especially after the UAE expanded its influence and military presence across southern Yemen and its islands, while Saudi Arabia responded by bombing the STC in Yemen’s eastern provinces last week. “Clashes have erupted in the past, most notably in 2019, but now is the most serious clash yet. This is a very serious disagreement about how, when and if the south should break away,” Dr Kendall said.” It shows that my knowledge is lacking involving Yemeni events and I blame the media for not keeping us up to date and that is the function of the media. ABC has been properly advising its readers (listeners and watchers too) of these events, but they likely have limiting resources. And as I see it, ABC stands mostly alone, whilst American, British and European news agencies let that chapter slide as (as I personally see it) Yemen isn’t sexy enough for the news. But that also implies that too many hand the bad card to Saudi Arabia whilst that is not the proper thing. As I see it, Iran is a lot more guilty of these bad cards than Saudi Arabia would have ever been entitled to.

We are also given ““The UAE categorically rejects any attempt to implicate the country in tensions among Yemeni parties and strongly denounces allegations that it exerted pressure on, or issued directives to, any Yemeni party to undertake military operations that would undermine the security of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or target its borders,” the Emirati government said in a statement.” I cannot counter that because the media never gave us the real deal, but I am willing to color both nations in happy green, whilst keeping Iran in evil red (as colours go in my view of things) and that makes coloring the borders a problem, because I have seen close (thought Arabian news sources) to half a dozen attacks on Saudi civilian targets, making the Houthi terrorist the guilty party. So why is the ABC labeling them ‘Houthi rebels’? 

It is a setting that due to one sided and limited exposure a setting of question and whilst we might see the UAE and Saudi Arabia as the noble sides, there is more going on in Yemen and that could give us a setting of doubt and we are able and willing to be in doubt, because as I see it, most of the media isn’t doing their job (as I personally see it).

All whilst ABC gave us this image which is striking. There is a whole range of elements in action, some in the hearts of the Yemeni and the media just won’t give us the real deal. Why is that?

Have a great day and today is the last day of the year here, tomorrow will be another year.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics

Repetition of a speculated lie

That is the setting that the Guardian is giving us (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/07/saudi-arabia-ukraine-us-talks-analysis) with the underlying text “a country with ambitions to be a major diplomatic player despite its horrific human rights record, including the kidnap and murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018”, so how often does a lie need to be repeated before people might accept it as a truth? 

You see on February 27, 2021 I wrote ‘That was easy!’ (At https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/02/27/that-was-easy/) where I blew the massive disregard for evidence to smithereens, an essay presumably written by UN essay writer Eggy Calamari. The report of a lot of pages and several times I blew their ‘assessment’ apart on simple logic. So, does that make me correct? No, but I firmly believe that a person is innocent until PROVEN guilty and that was not to be seen. Just as an apology is not a valid defense, a ‘highly likely’ from the CIA does not constitute evidence. ‘Highly likely’ is a speculation at best, as such it is not evidence. Moreover no one actually did a forensic analyses on these so called tapes. As such it is a mere document of collected speculations. One source gave me that JK escaped to Tora Tora with a young mistress. I do not believe that, but there are speculations all over the field and now with the Guardian 4 years later I basically had enough. 

The terms “kidnap and murder”and “murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi” connects to other articles, so there is that too. The first one connects to a 5 year old article named ‘‘Mockery of justice’ after Saudis convict eight over Khashoggi killing’ and the other is ‘‘He couldn’t see light at the end of the tunnel’: Jamal Khashoggi’s widow on their life and his death’. All speculative views. So in 5 years no one was able to prove anything, as such his Royal Highness Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud as well as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are innocent. You think I am kidding? No, I am not. Evidence is central here and the media have been using the JK case as a cash cow for digital dollars. 

I think it is high time that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia takes new steps to silence these innuendo’s. If I had anything to say about this, I would give the media a taste of its own medicine. The Guardian (at al) would be banned from covering sport (and other) news in Saudi Arabia. I reckon that The Times, The Express, The Observer and others (the UK has dozens of newspapers) can cover Sport in Saudi Arabia, the Guardian gets banned until 2035 for all these events. When they are on the outside looking in, they will soon start screaming like little tea grannies on how unfair life is for them. 

I personally also think out is time for Saudi Arabia to take a harder stance on who their allies really are. It is nice that President Trump is coming for a investment donation of 1 trillion, however the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been barred from the F35 for a long time now. So if China could arrange for the J20 to be released to Saudi Arabia, they would be a much more worthy ally. So why doesn’t Saudi Arabia invest that money in China? Their might be larger considerations and I would not be privy to them, but an ally that merely claims to be an ally and whilst Saudi Arabia was under attack from Houthi terrorists, The US channels or assistance remains closed, even though several parties (including Colonel Turki bin Saleh Al-Maliki) who had shown several times that the Houthi terrorists were using Iranian drones to attack civilian Saudi targets (King Abdullah Airport in the southwestern Jizan province). The western media overlooked (I my view intentionally) that side of the story. And there is a lot more. As I personally see it intentionally silencing these matters should be seen as worse, but that is merely my point of view.

Oh, and the fact that I saw in hours these facts over 4 years ago and the ‘media’ never corrected their point of view is another matter entirely. They had no problems with replicating that work of fiction ‘Blood and Oil’ who used art of effective or persuasive writing, especially the exploitation of figures of speech to make a case that never was. That is how I see it (to be certain I bought the book and I shot it to hell within the hour (I only looked at the Khashoggi mentions)

So how is the Guardian sizing up right now?

I reckon that there is a price to pay for these settings and it is time that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is making these people pay for the intentional distortion of truth, but I am not in command of anything in Saudi Arabia, so my view could be ignored. If it wan’t for that pesky setting that China has another option to put America (and the UK) out of business in certain parts of the world. I wonder if Iran could hand America a trillion dollars (and a lot more for several other parts). 

Did I oversimplify matter for the average reader? Have a great Saturday. I am off to a decent Saturday and Vancouver is still 9 hours away from Saturday.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics