Dead at 90.
Nobody cares? FUCK ALL Y'ALL :mad:
Good riddance, motherfucker. :yeah:
Shameful display by the British government, honouring a motherfucker presiding over one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet.
Quote from: Caliga on January 22, 2015, 08:56:49 PM
Nobody cares? FUCK ALL Y'ALL :mad:
What's there to care about? The old king seems to have plenty of sons left and I'm pretty sure none of them will do anything different than their brothers. Him personally? Fuck 'im.
QuoteScottish Tory leader gives perfect response to tributes paid to late Saudi king
The leader of the Scottish Conservatives Ruth Davidson has condemned the UK for flying flags at half mast a tribute to the late Saudi Arabian King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz.
The 90-year-old monarch died after suffering from a lung infection, and is succeeded by his half-brother Salman.
The Prime Minister David Cameron has said he is "deeply saddened" by the passing of the King, and the Prince of Wales is to travel to Saudi Arabia to represent the queen and to "pay his condolences".
Despite floods of tributes from British figures, including claims that the King modernised or "reformed" Saudi Arabia, LGBT people still face harsh treatment there.
Davidson, who is openly gay, tweeted this afternoon to say flying the flags at half-mast was "a steaming pile of nonsense".
here are no legal protections for LGBT people in Saudi Arabia, and Britain and the US have often been criticised for being close to the oil-rich nation where gay people can be stoned to death.
She later replied to a follower saying it was a "stupid precedent to set".
A Scottish Conservative spokesman said: "Ruth's tweets on this matter speak for themselves.
"She is a strong advocate for the rights of women and disagrees with lowering government flags in Britain for the Saudi King."
Concerns were raised in during a state visit to the UK by the late King in 2007 about the treatment of women and gay people by the Saudi kingdom.
Women are not granted the vote, and are unable to drive in Saudi Arabia.
Many on Twitter have criticised the choice to fly all flags at half mast given the appalling treatment of LGBT people and women in the Saudi kingdom.
Brava!
Scotts seem to repeatedly show to be my kind of people. :scots:
He was a pig.
He was no worse than any other person who controlled the world's largest proven oil reserve.
Sic semper tyrannis.
What Marty? Living to a ripe old age in the very lap of luxury?
Germany only sent a discredited former president to pay condolences. And the government suspended all weapon deliveries to Saudi Arabia citing instability in the region.
At least the army understands the truth :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_RXMzXlQlw
An important US and western ally, even though it really seems a two edged sword with them as allies. But with all that's going on, Yemeni government falling to Iranian backed rebels, Iran's influence on the rise in Iraq, Lebanon/Hezbollah, Syria, the Saudis and other smaller nations like UAE are getting nervous as they're kind of surrounded by Iran. So IMO what happens in Saudi Arabia, who leads next, is very important for the US. President Obama is making a stop there this week on his return trip from India.
Yemen's govt falling is a biggie as it was working with the west against terrorists and now it's an even worse failed state. That government had come to power out of popular uprisings against the previous even less agreeable government, if I remember the events right.
Quote from: Martinus on January 23, 2015, 02:57:54 PM
Shameful display by the British government, honouring a motherfucker presiding over one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet.
Rather shameful all around on our governments. I understand political realities of why but still doesn't make the pill anymore palatable.
but Iran will be our biggest ally in the region. And the most deserving of our trust.
http://youtu.be/aZMbTFNp4wI
Quote from: Grey Fox on January 27, 2015, 12:13:32 PM
but Iran will be our biggest ally in the region. And the most deserving of our trust.
:mad:
Quote from: KRonn on January 27, 2015, 11:49:38 AM
Yemen's govt falling is a biggie as it was working with the west against terrorists and now it's an even worse failed state. That government had come to power out of popular uprisings against the previous even less agreeable government, if I remember the events right.
The Yemeni government was great as a "What drones? Where?" rubber stamp for our Whack-A-Mole War On Evildoers, but Yemen's biggest asset for the United States are the tribesmen of south Yemen--they're the ones on the front lines fighting A-Q, and have driven them out of the towns and enclaves before when they've tried to entrench themselves.
I'm not sure favouring Saudi Arabia over Iran is a good idea anymore. At least Iran has a central religious authority and tends to be more overt about the funding of their guerrilla / terrorist operations, and more easily able to control them when it suits them.
Bed sheets vs truly awful suits. Tough choice.
Watch the new Adam Curtis film 'Bitter Lake' in part about the US relationship with Saudi Arabia and a fair bit about the propagation of Saudi extremism in the ME and particularly in Afghanistan.
Many of our right-wingers here, should watch it, if only for a good cardiac workout; I think Yi would end up having kittens. :D
I don't agree with much of what's said, but worth viewing for some excellently restored archive footage/newsreel material.
edit:
About the Saudi king, I forgot to say, Fuck him. :)
Why would I have kittens? :huh:
Quote from: mongers on January 27, 2015, 03:06:30 PM
Watch the new Adam Curtis film 'Bitter Lake' in part about the US relationship with Saudi Arabia and a fair bit about the propagation of Saudi extremism in the ME and particularly in Afghanistan.
Many of our right-wingers here, should watch it, if only for a good cardiac workout; I think Yi would end up having kittens. :D
I don't agree with much of what's said, but worth viewing for some excellently restored archive footage/newsreel material.
edit:
About the Saudi king, I forgot to say, Fuck him. :)
The Saudis have been funding and spreading their version of extremism for years, from what I've heard reported. That includes to the US and west, not just the Mid East.
Quote from: mongers on January 27, 2015, 08:59:17 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 27, 2015, 08:28:04 PM
Why would I have kittens? :huh:
Just google for a youtube video of it and you'll see within about 2.363 seconds. :D
http://youtu.be/xvOsERMs2Ds
I guess after that, he would have kittens.
Quote from: Scipio on January 24, 2015, 09:47:53 AM
He was no worse than any other person who controlled the world's largest proven oil reserve.
That's a little harsh on the Rockefeller's isn't it?
Michelle Obama at the funeral:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthedailybanter.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F01%2FFLOTUS-600x383.jpg&hash=f5adaad3e9f83f656e24f9f9b32aece1e964d63b)
Love her. Apparently the Saudis threw a fit. :showoff: :cheers: :yeah: :punk: :thumbsup:
Quote from: Martinus on January 28, 2015, 12:46:41 AM
Love her. Apparently the Saudis threw a fit.
I'm not sure I understand the point.
I understand taking a stand on principle and saying "fuck you" to the Saudis.
I also understand playing the geopolitics and sucking up to the Saudis.
A visit like this, combining the "fuck you" aspect with the sucking up, seems to communicate the mixed signal: "we really don't like you, we are going to play along for now because of geopolitics, but don't count on us backing you up if it isn't in our immediate interest." Which is of course true, and I'm sure the Saudis know this, but pissing them off at a funeral for their king is only going to push them to look for friends elsewhere.
I think the point is that she is making a personal statement, which she can make because, unlike her husband, she is not the head of state. And if she did not come, the Saudis would simply think that Barrack told his wife to stay home. So to me, the point she is making is crystal clear - it's the official American policy towards Saudi Arabia that is muddled and shitty.
That's why I praised her, not the American government, for doing that.
What exactly makes the theocracy in Iran so much worse than the theocracy in Saudi Arabia?
Iran is more hostile towards Israel, but for the rest of the West, Saudi Arabia seems to be a much more potent sponsor or at least origin of terrorism.
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
What exactly makes the theocracy in Iran so much worse than the theocracy in Saudi Arabia?
Iran is more hostile towards Israel, but for the rest of the West, Saudi Arabia seems to be a much more potent sponsor or at least origin of terrorism.
Not to mention, their internal oppressiveness is on par (or even Saudi Arabia is worse).
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
What exactly makes the theocracy in Iran so much worse than the theocracy in Saudi Arabia?
Iran is more hostile towards Israel, but for the rest of the West, Saudi Arabia seems to be a much more potent sponsor or at least origin of terrorism.
Saudi Arabia doesn't lobby for OPEC to jack up the price of oil?
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
Iran is more hostile towards Israel and the United States,
FYP.
Quotebut for the rest of the West, Saudi Arabia seems to be a much more potent sponsor or at least origin of terrorism.
I suppose you missed the 1980s and most of the 1990s then.
Kind of tough to call but I'd probably favor an alliance with Saudi Arabia than Iran, as Iran has intentions to take over what ever nations in the region it can. It's a major sponsor of terrorism, and in Iraq Iran is responsible for killing or assisting hostile groups in the killing/wounding thousands of US and allied soldiers. They're also the most agressive and dangerous nation in the region. No other nation has similar intentions on the region that they do and it's a major concern to US/western allies or friendly nations like Jordan, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Israel and others.
The Saudis are more subtle in some ways. They fund/sponsor mosques around the world and in doing so spread their Wahibi religion and imams to those places. Some Saudis also fund/sponsor terrorism and extremist groups so that's a major concern but it's not the government's policy as it is with Iran. The US/west has been able to work with Saudi Arabia on many issues over the years so there's been a mutually beneficial alliance, though as I say it's quite a two edged sword given Saudi activities. Saudis being a major OPEC supplier means having to keep them as some kind of friend for the many nations that rely on its oil and gas.
Can't believe Michelle insulted our Saudi allies :angry:
Quote from: derspiess on January 28, 2015, 10:25:03 AM
Can't believe Michelle insulted our Saudi allies :angry:
Exceptions are made for foreigners, however, and Michelle — who did wear loose clothing that fully covered her arms — appears to have been one of them. In photographs from the official events, other foreign female guests are also shown not wearing headscarves.Republican non story? I guess so...
It's a fucking desert. Too goddamned hot for shit on your head. The locals want to wear their Sunday Best table linen, that's on them.
Quote from: alfred russel on January 28, 2015, 10:02:10 AM
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
What exactly makes the theocracy in Iran so much worse than the theocracy in Saudi Arabia?
Iran is more hostile towards Israel, but for the rest of the West, Saudi Arabia seems to be a much more potent sponsor or at least origin of terrorism.
Saudi Arabia doesn't lobby for OPEC to jack up the price of oil?
You think they are doing that for the benefit of the West?
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 28, 2015, 11:09:20 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on January 28, 2015, 10:02:10 AM
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
What exactly makes the theocracy in Iran so much worse than the theocracy in Saudi Arabia?
Iran is more hostile towards Israel, but for the rest of the West, Saudi Arabia seems to be a much more potent sponsor or at least origin of terrorism.
Saudi Arabia doesn't lobby for OPEC to jack up the price of oil?
You think they are doing that for the benefit of the West?
Hell no. However, I do think they value a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" relationship with the West, and that plays into their decision making process.
Absolutist monarchs dying of old age make Ghost Marat cry :cry:
Anyway may the next King of the House of Saud be the last.
It was still a state funeral, to be frank, it's one of the few instances where people covering themselves - male and female - is sort of observed in the West too.
Ed has a saud.
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
What exactly makes the theocracy in Iran so much worse than the theocracy in Saudi Arabia?
Iran is more hostile towards Israel, but for the rest of the West, Saudi Arabia seems to be a much more potent sponsor or at least origin of terrorism.
The Iranians not on our side and they are building nuclear weapons.
Too bad he died before the technological singularity.
He could have enjoyed a much longer life, an indefinite lifespam of raping young boys and old donkeys.
Quote from: alfred russel on January 28, 2015, 11:57:44 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 28, 2015, 11:09:20 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on January 28, 2015, 10:02:10 AM
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
What exactly makes the theocracy in Iran so much worse than the theocracy in Saudi Arabia?
Iran is more hostile towards Israel, but for the rest of the West, Saudi Arabia seems to be a much more potent sponsor or at least origin of terrorism.
Saudi Arabia doesn't lobby for OPEC to jack up the price of oil?
You think they are doing that for the benefit of the West?
Hell no. However, I do think they value a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" relationship with the West, and that plays into their decision making process.
How is low oil prices which are so low they undercut the efforts of North America to become oil self sufficient (not to mention the efforts to develop alternative energy) scratching the back of the West. They are not doing any favours here. They have their focus on their own long term interest.
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 28, 2015, 12:36:37 PM
How is low oil prices which are so low they undercut the efforts of North America to become oil self sufficient (not to mention the efforts to develop alternative energy) scratching the back of the West. They are not doing any favours here. They have their focus on their own long term interest.
The oil will still be there 10, 20, 50 years from now. If technology in the short term supersedes oil then better that we don't cause whatever environmental damage it causes to extract it. If technology takes a significantly longer time to catch up to the market prices of oil then this price drop is only temporary and the NA oil will still be well worth getting later.
Technology development might, at most, be slowed down by a few years, and that's only if prices stay low for a good while longer.
I consider this a huge favor, even if they don't mean it as such.
I can't believe the motherfucking Republicans are shitting on Michelle for that.
I think she did the right thing.
When Obama did the opposite and bowed, they also shat on him. I bet if Michelle wore a headscarf these fucks would conclude the Obamas are Muslim after all.
What a bunch of fucking faggots.
Quote from: celedhring on January 28, 2015, 12:01:31 PM
It was still a state funeral, to be frank, it's one of the few instances where people covering themselves - male and female - is sort of observed in the West too.
Fuck that.
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 28, 2015, 12:36:37 PM
How is low oil prices which are so low they undercut the efforts of North America to become oil self sufficient (not to mention the efforts to develop alternative energy) scratching the back of the West. They are not doing any favours here. They have their focus on their own long term interest.
Cheap oil means that consumers and businesses spend less for petro products and have more money to spend on other products, thus improving the standard of living in the West (and everywhere else except the oil exporting countries). Everyone has their focus on their own long term self-interest, unless they are morons.
North American oil "self-sufficiency" is the scam, not world spot market prices for oil.
Quote from: The Brain on January 28, 2015, 12:01:44 PM
Ed has a saud.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg4.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20120107205421%2Fnation%2Fimages%2Ff%2Ffd%2F...oh_you%21.jpg&hash=4548f8beaaca4357dc64c37cbda09cc3ecae3729)
Quote from: frunk on January 28, 2015, 12:53:53 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 28, 2015, 12:36:37 PM
How is low oil prices which are so low they undercut the efforts of North America to become oil self sufficient (not to mention the efforts to develop alternative energy) scratching the back of the West. They are not doing any favours here. They have their focus on their own long term interest.
The oil will still be there 10, 20, 50 years from now. If technology in the short term supersedes oil then better that we don't cause whatever environmental damage it causes to extract it. If technology takes a significantly longer time to catch up to the market prices of oil then this price drop is only temporary and the NA oil will still be well worth getting later.
Technology development might, at most, be slowed down by a few years, and that's only if prices stay low for a good while longer.
I consider this a huge favor, even if they don't mean it as such.
But you have to ignore all the other forms of energy technology that are undercut by cheap oil for it to be a favour. Absent a carbon tax which balances the effect of cheap oil the Saudi's will get what they want - continued dominance in the energy market until their reserves run dry. Not much of a favour.
Quote from: crazy canuck on January 28, 2015, 07:35:36 PM
But you have to ignore all the other forms of energy technology that are undercut by cheap oil for it to be a favour. Absent a carbon tax which balances the effect of cheap oil the Saudi's will get what they want - continued dominance in the energy market until their reserves run dry. Not much of a favour.
A carbon tax is a good idea if oil is $50 or $150 a barrel. I doubt the Saudis can keep the price suppressed for more than 10 years. If they do just about every oil exporter in the world will be hurting, badly. Even a less than one year period with low oil prices has already put severe strains on most of them.
Let's run through the list of other energy technology (assuming cheap oil for a long time):
Coal - Oil is generally the better alternative if you are worried about pollution/environment.
Nuclear - It might slow down new plant construction, but current plants will continue to run. Big chunks of the world are already leaving this for one reason or another (most of them stupid). I think India is one of the few looking to expand.
Hydro - Existing plants will still run, new construction might slow.
Solar - Price point is still a bit high ATM, even with more expensive oil. Existing setups will continue to run (as all the cost is in installation). Presumably the price point is going to continue to drop, no matter the price of oil. Also causes power infrastructure problems if there is serious uptake.
Fusion - Still in development.
Are there any I might have missed? Too much of this energy technology relies on long time windows for plant creation to worry about short term jumps in the price of oil (except coal). It would require a continued and long period (10+ years) of cheap oil for significant shifts in usage patterns for most of them.
What about natural gas?
And wind.
Does anyone still burn oil to generate electricity?
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
What exactly makes the theocracy in Iran so much worse than the theocracy in Saudi Arabia?
That it's a theocracy and not an oligarchy run by mostly religiously observant people. Also, the nuclear program. And the government sanctioned hostage taking- we haven't forgotten.
Quote from: Martinus on January 28, 2015, 04:40:45 PM
I can't believe the motherfucking Republicans are shitting on Michelle for that.
I think she did the right thing.
When Obama did the opposite and bowed, they also shat on him. I bet if Michelle wore a headscarf these fucks would conclude the Obamas are Muslim after all.
What a bunch of fucking faggots.
Are they? There was a remarkable silence from the most sources. Normally "offending a key ally", is one of those things that Obama is accused of when caught "trying to degrade American on the world stage". Republicans would make terrible writers. Obama's motives are almost always on par with supervillians. He's normally trying to destroy America. Beyond that there is rarely a reason why beyond him hating America and freedom.
I don't really care if the Saudis get what they want. That is not my concern. My concern is if I get what I want, which is stable sources of energy at a reasonable price. If the Saudis happen to fulfill that need, we have a deal. That's what is happening and I don't see what the problem is.
Quote from: frunk on January 28, 2015, 10:16:26 PM
Coal - Oil is generally the better alternative if you are worried about pollution/environment.
Nuclear - It might slow down new plant construction, but current plants will continue to run. Big chunks of the world are already leaving this for one reason or another (most of them stupid). I think India is one of the few looking to expand.
Hydro - Existing plants will still run, new construction might slow.
Solar - Price point is still a bit high ATM, even with more expensive oil. Existing setups will continue to run (as all the cost is in installation). Presumably the price point is going to continue to drop, no matter the price of oil. Also causes power infrastructure problems if there is serious uptake.
Fusion - Still in development.
Oil is generally used for fuel, not electricity, so is generally not in competition with those things. Unless we are talking about electric vehicles. I mean I doubt there are any of steam powered trains out there using coal.
I mean oil is used for electricity, about 5% of the worlds electricity is generated with oil, but this is not a very economical use of petroleum.
Quote from: Monoriu on January 28, 2015, 10:44:08 PM
I don't really care if the Saudis get what they want. That is not my concern. My concern is if I get what I want, which is stable sources of energy at a reasonable price. If the Saudis happen to fulfill that need, we have a deal. That's what is happening and I don't see what the problem is.
Do you even own a car in Hong Kong? Why do you care about fuel prices?
Quote from: Valmy on January 28, 2015, 11:02:17 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on January 28, 2015, 10:44:08 PM
I don't really care if the Saudis get what they want. That is not my concern. My concern is if I get what I want, which is stable sources of energy at a reasonable price. If the Saudis happen to fulfill that need, we have a deal. That's what is happening and I don't see what the problem is.
Do you even own a car in Hong Kong? Why do you care about fuel prices?
I do own a car. I also hold stocks and bonds in various energy companies like CNOOC.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on January 28, 2015, 10:31:42 PM
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
What exactly makes the theocracy in Iran so much worse than the theocracy in Saudi Arabia?
That it's a theocracy and not an oligarchy run by mostly religiously observant people. Also, the nuclear program. And the government sanctioned hostage taking- we haven't forgotten.
The nuclear program and the government sanctioned hostage taking are all actions taken because of hostility with America - I doubt Iran would be engaging in those (especially against the West) if it was a Western ally.
Quote from: Monoriu on January 28, 2015, 10:44:08 PM
I don't really care if the Saudis get what they want. That is not my concern. My concern is if I get what I want, which is stable sources of energy at a reasonable price. If the Saudis happen to fulfill that need, we have a deal. That's what is happening and I don't see what the problem is.
That, and unblocked streets.
Quote from: Martinus on January 29, 2015, 01:38:45 AM
The nuclear program and the government sanctioned hostage taking are all actions taken because of hostility with America - I doubt Iran would be engaging in those (especially against the West) if it was a Western ally.
It was a Western ally, that was the problem.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on January 28, 2015, 10:05:34 AM
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
Iran is more hostile towards Israel and the United States,
FYP.
Quotebut for the rest of the West, Saudi Arabia seems to be a much more potent sponsor or at least origin of terrorism.
I suppose you missed the 1980s and most of the 1990s then.
Guess you missed everything that's happened since 1998 then.
Quote from: Martinus on January 29, 2015, 01:38:45 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on January 28, 2015, 10:31:42 PM
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
What exactly makes the theocracy in Iran so much worse than the theocracy in Saudi Arabia?
That it's a theocracy and not an oligarchy run by mostly religiously observant people. Also, the nuclear program. And the government sanctioned hostage taking- we haven't forgotten.
The nuclear program and the government sanctioned hostage taking are all actions taken because of hostility with America - I doubt Iran would be engaging in those (especially against the West) if it was a Western ally.
At the moment though, Iran is allying with Russia.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on January 28, 2015, 10:31:42 PM
... And the government sanctioned hostage taking- we haven't forgotten.
yeah, what was that called... extraordinary rendition?
Quote from: Martinus on January 29, 2015, 01:38:45 AM
The nuclear program and the government sanctioned hostage taking are all actions taken because of hostility with America - I doubt Iran would be engaging in those (especially against the West) if it was a Western ally.
Not so. Iran's nuclear program is aimed at Israel, not the US. Its support for Hezbollah (and the "hostage"-taking) are aimed at the Christians and Sunnis in the Middle East. Even as a "western ally" Iran would be engaged in those activities to some degree. Hell, the nuclear program started under the Shah.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on January 29, 2015, 02:01:13 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on January 28, 2015, 10:05:34 AM
Quote from: Zanza on January 28, 2015, 02:19:08 AM
Iran is more hostile towards Israel and the United States,
FYP.
Quotebut for the rest of the West, Saudi Arabia seems to be a much more potent sponsor or at least origin of terrorism.
I suppose you missed the 1980s and most of the 1990s then.
Guess you missed everything that's happened since 1998 then.
I'm rubber you're glue, so there, nyah nyah nyah.
Fuck off and die in an industrial rickshaw accident, you fucking assfuck.
Quote from: Valmy on January 28, 2015, 11:00:52 PM
Oil is generally used for fuel, not electricity, so is generally not in competition with those things. Unless we are talking about electric vehicles. I mean I doubt there are any of steam powered trains out there using coal.
I mean oil is used for electricity, about 5% of the worlds electricity is generated with oil, but this is not a very economical use of petroleum.
It is generally not in competition because the oil fuel cost was generally too high to make it efficient unless the plant had other advantages (being close to the source of the oil). Long term cheap oil could change that equation, but it would have to be long term and not just a couple of years.
Quote from: Martinus on January 28, 2015, 04:40:45 PM
I can't believe the motherfucking Republicans are shitting on Michelle for that.
I think she did the right thing.
When Obama did the opposite and bowed, they also shat on him. I bet if Michelle wore a headscarf these fucks would conclude the Obamas are Muslim after all.
What a bunch of fucking faggots.
I thought I had convincinly proven Barack Hussein Obama is a muslim in that other thread....
By the way, it's a good thing that Riyadh is not on the other side of the world, unlike Paris. Otherwise, it would probably be very difficult to get all those high ranking US officials to the funeral at such a short notice.
Quote from: Martinus on January 30, 2015, 02:27:58 AM
By the way, it's a good thing that Riyadh is not on the other side of the world, unlike Paris. Otherwise, it would probably be very difficult to get all those high ranking US officials to the funeral at such a short notice.
I see what you did there. :lol:
Quote from: Martinus on January 28, 2015, 04:40:45 PM
I can't believe the motherfucking Republicans are shitting on Michelle for that.
I think she did the right thing.
When Obama did the opposite and bowed, they also shat on him. I bet if Michelle wore a headscarf these fucks would conclude the Obamas are Muslim after all.
Of course she shouldn't wear a headscarf.
Normal protocol in all of these places is for women to wear what they normally wear. No visiting female dignitaries wear headscarves, and no Saudis were offended except possibly a few Siegy-equivalents on the internet.
That was 100% a manufactured storm in a teacup.
Quote from: Jacob on January 30, 2015, 11:44:15 AM
Of course she shouldn't wear a headscarf.
Normal protocol in all of these places is for women to wear what they normally wear. No visiting female dignitaries wear headscarves, and no Saudis were offended except possibly a few Siegy-equivalents on the internet.
That was 100% a manufactured storm in a teacup.
My earlier troll aside, I don't give a shit. But apparently Saudis are pissed about it, claiming she covered her head in Indonesia but not in Saudi Arabia. And apparently her face was blurred on Saudi TV.
Quote from: derspiess on January 30, 2015, 12:32:36 PM
... But apparently Saudis are pissed about it, claiming she covered her head in Indonesia but not in Saudi Arabia. And apparently her face was blurred on Saudi TV.
Is this "apparently" like the "apparently Obama wasn't born in the US," or is there some evidence behind the Republican inanity this time?
Quote from: Siege on January 29, 2015, 10:00:04 AM
Quote from: Martinus on January 28, 2015, 04:40:45 PM
I can't believe the motherfucking Republicans are shitting on Michelle for that.
I think she did the right thing.
When Obama did the opposite and bowed, they also shat on him. I bet if Michelle wore a headscarf these fucks would conclude the Obamas are Muslim after all.
What a bunch of fucking faggots.
I thought I had convincinly proven Barack Hussein Obama is a muslim in that other thread....
You haven't even convincingly proven that you are a Jew.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Fnewsfeed%2F000%2F252%2F589%2Fd49.png&hash=fea90f3c9eacf0b04233b151d23e0ea5d835b2c4)
Quote from: grumbler on January 30, 2015, 01:40:42 PM
Quote from: derspiess on January 30, 2015, 12:32:36 PM
... But apparently Saudis are pissed about it, claiming she covered her head in Indonesia but not in Saudi Arabia. And apparently her face was blurred on Saudi TV.
Is this "apparently" like the "apparently Obama wasn't born in the US," or is there some evidence behind the Republican inanity this time?
Or maybe I should have said: "obviously"
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fthumb%2F0%2F06%2FAuto-Tune_the_News_12c_screenshot.jpg%2F220px-Auto-Tune_the_News_12c_screenshot.jpg&hash=db144bcb02a772199d2ff4f2d838e0b0c9c3b7d0)
Quote from: grumbler on January 30, 2015, 01:40:42 PM
Quote from: derspiess on January 30, 2015, 12:32:36 PM
... But apparently Saudis are pissed about it, claiming she covered her head in Indonesia but not in Saudi Arabia. And apparently her face was blurred on Saudi TV.
Is this "apparently" like the "apparently Obama wasn't born in the US," or is there some evidence behind the Republican inanity this time?
They don't require evidence.
Quote from: Martinus on January 30, 2015, 02:38:24 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Fnewsfeed%2F000%2F252%2F589%2Fd49.png&hash=fea90f3c9eacf0b04233b151d23e0ea5d835b2c4)
Do you always respond this way to allegations of Jewishness? :hmm:
I don't think Marty is that sharp. :XD:
Martinus likes to jump on minor one-ups like that to get some of the reflected glory since he is quite incapable of any wit himself.
Quote from: 11B4V on January 30, 2015, 04:05:23 PM
I don't think Marty is that sharp. :XD:
I think Mart is, at least in this case. Poles are experts on this subject after all.
:D
Actually, I admit that was accidental. :P
Quote from: derspiess on January 30, 2015, 12:32:36 PM
And apparently her face was blurred on Saudi TV.
Maybe she was just suffering from jet lag.
;)
Of course that actually didn't happen. Check your snopes, people.
Quote from: Razgovory on January 30, 2015, 02:24:06 PM
Quote from: Siege on January 29, 2015, 10:00:04 AM
Quote from: Martinus on January 28, 2015, 04:40:45 PM
I can't believe the motherfucking Republicans are shitting on Michelle for that.
I think she did the right thing.
When Obama did the opposite and bowed, they also shat on him. I bet if Michelle wore a headscarf these fucks would conclude the Obamas are Muslim after all.
What a bunch of fucking faggots.
I thought I had convincinly proven Barack Hussein Obama is a muslim in that other thread....
You haven't even convincingly proven that you are a Jew.
I'll show you my circunsicion.
Come closer, kneel down...
Quote from: Siege on February 01, 2015, 02:42:30 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on January 30, 2015, 02:24:06 PM
Quote from: Siege on January 29, 2015, 10:00:04 AM
Quote from: Martinus on January 28, 2015, 04:40:45 PM
I can't believe the motherfucking Republicans are shitting on Michelle for that.
I think she did the right thing.
When Obama did the opposite and bowed, they also shat on him. I bet if Michelle wore a headscarf these fucks would conclude the Obamas are Muslim after all.
What a bunch of fucking faggots.
I thought I had convincinly proven Barack Hussein Obama is a muslim in that other thread....
You haven't even convincingly proven that you are a Jew.
I'll show you my circunsicion.
Come closer, kneel down...
You could be Muslim, or worse American.
Quote from: Martinus on January 30, 2015, 02:38:24 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Fnewsfeed%2F000%2F252%2F589%2Fd49.png&hash=fea90f3c9eacf0b04233b151d23e0ea5d835b2c4)
[size=10] I AIN'T AFRAID OF FIRE[/SIZE]
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpreviews.123rf.com%2Fimages%2Fhasenonkel%2Fhasenonkel0911%2Fhasenonkel091100025%2F5892292-the-hot-burning-contour-of-a-menorah-menorah-hanukkah.jpg&hash=807ae4cb0589146fee09547c0f2f72f7c36fc8f1)[/size]
Quote from: derspiess on January 30, 2015, 03:58:36 PM
Or maybe I should have said: "obviously"
Well, the use of "obviously" would have cost you very little credibility.
It would have cost you all the credibility you have, but very little credibility overall.