america's insincere outrage against islamic terrorism

truthbetold wrote:This article slams republicans for their inability to bring themselves to criticize saudi arabia (similar to pseudo seculars of India struggling to criticize jehadi terrorists and  advice Indians to be tolerant after every terrorist mayhem and murder.).

The author was right in his/her criticism. But he/she was only half right. He/she conveniently ignored the fact that president Obama, Bill Clinton and all other senior democratic leaders cozy upto Saudi money and its leaders.

Max's failure to clarify one sided nature of this insincere polemical analysis is duly noted.

In January of 2015, Saudi King Abdullah died. President Obama shortened an official visit with India to attend the funeral. John Kerry, John McCain, Nancy Pelosi and Condoleezza Rice joined him: a rare moment of bipartisanship to honor the life of a vicious opponent of human rights, and a generous friend of Islamic fundamentalism.

truthbetold wrote:Just in case you missed, the article also included at the end:
"In none of this year’s Republican or Democratic debates has a single candidate offered any disapproval for the brutality and barbarity of Saudi’s routine abuse, torture and murder of foreign nationals and its own citizens."

However the title and most of the examples are about republicans. That leads to the question is Salon talking about the problem with Saudis or is it the problem with republican chicken hawks?

truthbetold wrote:This article slams republicans for their inability to bring themselves to criticize saudi arabia (similar to pseudo seculars of India struggling to criticize jehadi terrorists and  advice Indians to be tolerant after every terrorist mayhem and murder.).

The author was right in his/her criticism. But he/she was only half right. He/she conveniently ignored the fact that president Obama, Bill Clinton and all other senior democratic leaders cozy upto Saudi money and its leaders.

Max's failure to clarify one sided nature of this insincere polemical analysis is duly noted.

truthbetold wrote:hey jehadi apologist,

when you graduate from limpwristed breastbeating (which is actually a shia women's gesture in sorrow), we can have a sensible conversation.

It is you who unload insults on people who disagree with you and display arrogant attitude.  

Your inability to see obvious conflicts in logic is not new. This problem becomes acutely intense when the issue involves viewpoints different from yours.

If you have anything useful to say about the issue on hand, have the courage to state it. Otherwise there is no point in exchanging useless oft repeated personal insults.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:The reasons behind the usual outrage against libbies, sikulars, dkheads, and other sundry imagined enemies is not clear in reaction to this particular post. I thought the article was quite balanced in upbraiding the entire U.S. political establishment and not just republicans. They are all complicit in offering blow jobs to the Saudi govt.