Saudi football team... london terror attack

[Kenny]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...ack_uk_593a53c1e4b0b13f2c69206f?utm_hp_ref=uk

The Saudi Arabian Football Federation (SAFF) has issued an apology after its national team failed to observe a minute’s silence for the victims of the London terror attacks ahead of the start of a World Cup qualifier in Australia.

The team was playing against the Socceroos on Thursday night at Adelaide Oval when the Australian team lined up in the centre circle to pay tribute to the eight people who were killed and 50 injured after three attackers mowed down pedestrians on London Bridge before turning knives on them. Two of the dead were Australian.

Though silent, all bar one of the Saudi players dispersed around the pitch and continued to jog and stretch, prompting Australian supporters at the stadium to boo them.

 

[Smurf]

Says it all. But the narrative is to have Iran...

 

[egb_hibs]

Says it all. But the narrative is to have Iran...

Have? Iran are the bigger threat I'm afraid, on more than one count. I know there is an instinct to hope that our enemies enemy is our friend, but it ain't necessarily so.

 

[DarrenSQH]

You think that would generate more coverage in the news than it has.

 

[Jack]

You think that would generate more coverage in the news than it has.

Given the power and influence the Saudis wield around London, not just politically, I'm not surprised at all.

 

[gun ainm]

Have? Iran are the bigger threat I'm afraid, on more than one count. I know there is an instinct to hope that our enemies enemy is our friend, but it ain't necessarily so.

bigger threat to whom? and how does that threat manifest itself?

personally I think there'd be more merit in cultivating an understanding with Iran than with Saudi (if its a choice between the 2), abhorrent as I find many aspects of both states, I think there's more room for movement inside Iran. we'd be better to reappraise our cold war position, the world has moved on.

 

[egb_hibs]

bigger threat to whom? and how does that threat manifest itself?

personally I think there'd be more merit in cultivating an understanding with Iran than with Saudi (if its a choice between the 2), abhorrent as I find many aspects of both states, I think there's more room for movement inside Iran. we'd be better to reappraise our cold war position, the world has moved on.

I'm not sure where the Cold War comes in - certainly wasn't what I had in. I do agree that there relationships should be built with Iran. However, not without much caution; Iran are on the way to becoming a nuclear state prone to electing messianic leaders who want to smite Israel and possibly usher in an apocalypse.

Meanwhile, becoming their pal would be by an even bigger pretext for Sunni jihadis than anything we've bumbled into so far. They hate shi'ites even more than they hate gay women Christian capitalist socialists, who like pop music.

 

[gun ainm]

I'm not sure where the Cold War comes in - certainly wasn't what I had in. I do agree that there relationships should be built with Iran. However, not without much caution; Iran are on the way to becoming a nuclear state prone to electing messianic leaders who want to smite Israel and possibly usher in an apocalypse.

dynamic hasn't change since cold war - sino-soviets favoured Iran whle nato the Saudis. I wholeheartedly urge caution on Iran but equally we should be reviewing the foreign policy calculations which have seen Saudi as an ally againt Russian and Chinese regional influence

Meanwhile, becoming their pal would be by an even bigger pretext for Sunni jihadis than anything we've bumbled into so far. They hate shi'ites even more than they hate gay women Christian capitalist socialists, who like pop music.

so being friends with Saudi is moderating ISIS and other Jihadis? au contraire - imo part of TM's demise has been her uncritical relationship with the house of saud and people drawing the link between that and the advancement of violent and fundamentalist Islam in the UK/West (particularly in light of recent events)

 

[bigmanandy]

Terrorist supporting nation, not really surprising.

 

[Steve20]

Disgraceful but considering they won't be unhappy it happened, it would be more surprising if they did respect the silence.

 

[Doc Shrink]

Hopefully the Oz players booted fcuk out of them.

 

[Davy]

Mentioned this on fb, and a Muslim I know replied that we don't have 1 min silences for people dying in bomb attacks in Syria, Iraq etc

 

[Beagle]

Mentioned this on fb, and a Muslim I know replied that we don't have 1 min silences for people dying in bomb attacks in Syria, Iraq etc

He's right. In fact there are people in this country and the USA who celebrate the deaths of people elsewhere in the world.

 

[Jack]

Mentioned this on fb, and a Muslim I know replied that we don't have 1 min silences for people dying in bomb attacks in Syria, Iraq etc

A minutes silence has got to be a fairly close thing, close in terms of mileage, shared values, ties etc.. I'd maybe expand that to mega deaths caused by nature, like tsunamis, where the global shock is overwhelming.

For London and Manchester the UK was obviously affected, as were the countries of the victims one of which was Australia. Australia quite rightly had a minutes silence for their countrymen, the Saudis should have respected that being in that country.

I wouldn't expect a minutes silence to be held anywhere else. Nor would I expect the UK to have silences where there are no ties.

That's not to say Muslims, where they congregate in the UK etc., shouldn't hold a minutes silence, if it's part of their culture, for victims of terrorism when they feel it's appropriate to do so.

 

[Beagle]

A minutes silence has got to be a fairly close thing, close in terms of mileage, shared values, ties etc.. I'd maybe expand that to mega deaths caused by nature, like tsunamis, where the global shock is overwhelming.

For London and Manchester the UK was obviously affected, as were the countries of the victims one of which was Australia. Australia quite rightly had a minutes silence for their countrymen, the Saudis should have respected that being in that country.

I wouldn't expect a minutes silence to be held anywhere else. Nor would I expect the UK to have silences where there are no ties.

That's not to say Muslims, where they congregate in the UK etc., shouldn't hold a minutes silence, if it's part of their culture, for victims of terrorism when they feel it's appropriate to do so.

It's like the elephant in the room Jack. The whole world knows the Saudis are backers of global terrorism but they hold so much power (oil) that everyone is too feart to point the finger.

 

[egb_hibs]

dynamic hasn't change since cold war - sino-soviets favoured Iran whle nato the Saudis. I wholeheartedly urge caution on Iran but equally we should be reviewing the foreign policy calculations which have seen Saudi as an ally againt Russian and Chinese regional influence



so being friends with Saudi is moderating ISIS and other Jihadis? au contraire - imo part of TM's demise has been her uncritical relationship with the house of saud and people drawing the link between that and the advancement of violent and fundamentalist Islam in the UK/West (particularly in light of recent events)

We deal with Saudi because we need their oil and the role they play in the region, their two faced double dealing notwithstanding. What do you think would actually happened if we stepped away from them? As before you'd soon find out what a real war looks like and / or real starving people in the streets austerity. Some of team Corbyn would very possibly welcome this but I'm not sure many voters want it.

 

[gun ainm]

We deal with Saudi because we need their oil and the role they play in the region, their two faced double dealing notwithstanding. What do you think would actually happened if we stepped away from them? As before you'd soon find out what a real war looks like and / or real starving people in the streets austerity. Some of team Corbyn would very possibly welcome this but I'm not sure many voters want it.

our dependence on oil (and in particular their oil) is a policy decision, it could be changed. To suggest that folk would be starving in the streets if we chose a managed retreat from trading in Saudi oil is (to put it f'ing mildly) somewhat overstated for example we import 50% of our oil from Norway and energy consumption has been on a downward trend in the UK since the last millennium (about 20% in the last 20 years).

Is their role in the region so advantageous to the UK? I have my doubts many in Manchester or London would be rushing to agree with you, never mind the inhabitants of Yemen

so tell me whats your answer to the Saudi issue? accept the baggage as collateral damage?

I'm not saying we should isolate them what i am saying is we need to significantly review the current arrangement in a way that May et al have been worryingly silent on.