Frothers Unite! UK

More random, eh random.

Guest wrote:

kyotebue2 wrote:Trump does more stupid shit. Saudi Arabia gets away with murder.

Do you think Khashoggi is clean?
He’s Muslim Brotherhood aka Al Quaeda.
To clarify, he was.
I say let the Wogs knock each other off.
It was a turf fight among gangsters. Period.
Trump is dealing with the strong horse, as Kashoggi’s good friend Osama bin Laden would phrase it.
As he should.

The above is Cuntservative "Values" and "Thought" in action. Wonder if the fucking idiot knows what happens to Saudi's who convert to Christianity?
Below is a movie recommendation for them.

You could ask random.

Stalin was an evil man and we supported him against Hitler.

Guest wrote:Stalin was an evil man and we supported him against Hitler.

Bit of a thick cunt ain't ya?
Or are you seriously saying a 60 year old journalist = Hitler?
Or do you think that because they oppose Iran they are somehow better than Iran?

You are astonishingly stupid and ignorant in either case and morally bankrupt as well.

Now fuck off back to watch "Trumps talking points" and forget which country was deeply involved in 9/11.

“I collapsed crying a while ago, heartbroken for you Abu Abdullah,” Mr. Khashoggi wrote on Twitter, using Bin Laden’s nickname. “You were beautiful and brave in those beautiful days in Afghanistan, before you surrendered to hatred and passion.”

Did you actually read that NYT column you linked?

Khashoggi left the Muslim Brotherhood, never joined Al Quaeda and the above quote was his right after Bin Laden was killed. More like a conservative Islamist (which is not per se a justification for killing someone) who did not approve of the violence of AQ and admittedly did support Bin Laden when he was fighting the Soviets (like the US who were all in on OBL).

He was actually tight with the House of Saud and only got murdered because he opposed the virulently insecure and weak MBS.

It still comes down to murdering a journalist over simple dissent and having the US government back the murderer out of simple (minded?) expediency.

Backing murderous thugs worked so well for us in the past in South Vietnam, Chile, Iran and Cuba that given the almost aggressively proud ignorance of history (also science, ethics and taste) the current Administration revels in, I am not surprised it and the myopic sycophants that support it are OK with yet another remake of "Dances with Vermin".

Did you actually read that NYT column you linked?

Yes, which is why I linked it. Didn't want to join the food fight and wanted to provide a more complete picture of the tangled relationship.

As it was provided without comment as a reference, and since the NYT isn't exactly a hotbed of RW opinion, why did you assume anyone would take it for anything other than what it was?

He was actually tight with the House of Saud

Meaning what exactly? As with many powerful families, there are many factions, not one united clan. Given that unlike the UK where there is an established line of succession, internal power politics, positioning, dirty dealing and the like to be named the successor is the rule of the day.

I'm just checking in to see if the goons got their marching orders yet that the Saudi's are totally cool, despite complaining a week ago that Obama sucked up to them?

Oh, they did? Cool. How does the sweaty ballsack of the guys who did 9/11 taste btw?

This is for all those hoping beyond hope that Mueller will find something to get Trump.
http://theweek.com/articles/802798/how- ... -tale-ends
“After 17 months of appending compound adjectives ("Russia-linked," "Kremlin-backed") to the names of an increasingly obscure cast of characters accused of things like sending spam emails and holding pointless meetings that went nowhere, it looks like we are finally getting close to the end of the Mueller probe.”
And the writer is definitely in the Never-Trump camp.
He got some clowns for lying about unpaid parking tickets, and trying to immanentize the Eschaton, but that’s about it. Good job!