Question to Webmaster and moderator team

[Chak Bamu]

Analysis article from Washington Institute that I had used to start the thread is a propaganda source???? Please explain that

And before you do, here is Who who in Washington Institute; Considering their credentials, calling these people source of propaganda is bit out of your league and PDF for that matter.

Our Experts - The Washington Institute for Near East Policy



When someone criticizes policy of Saudi rulers, why KSA posters feel they have to defend rulers policies unless they work for and/or support KSA's rulers????? Besides, KSA posters can expressed their opinion just like any one else and state rebuttal. Instead, KSA posters ask PDF team to remove posts, threads and PDF oblige by (according to you) :

1) NOT allowing criticism of Saudi rulers in PDF under pretext of "no KSA poster should be put in a position where they have to answer for their country's policies".

2) Labeling institutions like Washington institute and UK's Independent News as "propaganda source".

Good Work, PDF actions must elevated PDF credentials by these practices.

First, there seems to have been a misunderstanding on my part. "Washington Institute" is not the same as "Washington Blog". The rationale to delete the thread is question seems to have been wrong on the face of it.

However, the article from Washington Institute says this:

"At present, there is no credible evidence that the Saudi government is financially supporting ISIS."

Since you have been very active in bashing and criticizing KSA, I do not understand what you hoped to achieve by sharing an article based on a misleading, but appealing headline? Just for this reason, moderation decision to delete that thread appears to be correct.

Perhaps one of your deleted posts on a KSA tourism thread should be quoted as an example of your OT trolling:

"Unfortunately two of Islam Holiest places are occupied today by agents of zions - house of saud."

Source: "Makkah and Madinah News and Updates" | Page 7

Also, on the same thread, you have shared another OT about security company G4S's local Saudi affiliate winning some contract in KSA related to Hajj Operation:

"Saudi Hires “Israel Friendly” Security Firm to Overlook Hajj, Muslim Pilgrimage to Mecca"

Source: "Makkah and Madinah News and Updates" | Page 7

The article wishes to bring up the role of G4S, a renowned global security equipment & services firm, in light of BDS campaign. The article also states:

"Shuaibi, speaking to Al-Akhbar, said that the BDS campaign contacted the Palestinian Ministry of Economy, being the competent authority in the issue of boycotting settlements, such as the ones serviced by G4S. But according to Shuaibi, “The ministry did not bother to respond or take action to stop the abuse, even as the company violates Palestinian law...""

The article makes a connection between torture of Palestinian prisoners and G4S by citing the company as having provided security equipment. Do note that Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, UAE, KSA, Morocco, and many other Muslim countries buy & use American equipment for their Air Forces, just like Israel also uses F-16s, F-15s, etc... for bombing Palestinians. BDS could be a good excuse for making a similar case with all the Muslim countries too. I hope it is clear that your wish to troll Saudis makes you ignore even the elementary principles in assessing sources.

It is quite clear that you are motivated by hatred for KSA, and not objectivity. You have been making insulting posts left and right about moderation. Knowing your proclivity to bash KSA, I can not allow you to wage your one-sided 'Jihad'. You troll Saudis just because you hate KSA.

 

[al-Hasani]

Analysis article from Washington Institute that I had used to start the thread is a propaganda source???? Please explain that

And before you do, here is Who who in Washington Institute; Considering their credentials, calling these people source of propaganda is bit out of your league and PDF for that matter.

Our Experts - The Washington Institute for Near East Policy



When someone criticizes policy of Saudi rulers, why KSA posters feel they have to defend rulers policies unless they work for and/or support KSA's rulers????? Besides, KSA posters can expressed their opinion just like any one else and state rebuttal. Instead, KSA posters ask PDF team to remove posts, threads and PDF oblige by (according to you) :

1) NOT allowing criticism of Saudi rulers in PDF under pretext of "no KSA poster should be put in a position where they have to answer for their country's policies".

2) Labeling institutions like Washington institute and UK's Independent News as "propaganda source".

Good Work, PDF actions must elevated PDF credentials by these practices.

This is beyond ridiculous. You do realize that none of your articles show any direct proof. It's always theories and no proof is shown. Always "we have no proof of direct Saudi Arabian support or involvement but we believe that x or y donor can have been involved". What kind of sources are those?

You are obviously anti-KSA or anti-Arab. At least it is obvious that you hate the House of Saud and for that reason you often troll KSA. Like in all of those examples that @Chak Bamu mentioned or when you started trolling my "Makkah and Madinah News and Updates thread" that over 100 users have thanked and which is neutral and solely about news concerning Makkah and Madinah and the updates regarding the expansion work etc. There are many other similar incidents.

This thread is a joke. KSA bashing is a pastime favorite among almost all Farsi users on PDF who are mostly Arab-obsessed for historical reasons we are all familiar with and several Pakistani, Indian, Bangladeshi etc. users and frequent lies and most importantly propaganda sources (such as PressTV and other similar sources) are mostly used 90% of the time and of course no sane person can take that seriously.

The Arab users on PDF (active ones) can be counted on 6 hands or so too. This means that a lot of false historical lies (I have corrected such lies 1000 times by using objective sources and well-known facts but I am usually also one of the few that bothers and I can't be here 24/7), trolling etc. is taking place due to that very reason.

You have no direct proof of KSA supporting anything. If KSA was really supporting even 1/10 of what those mentioned PDF users think then KSA must be a superpower because otherwise I am sure that it would have had huge consequences.

Just today a well-known Farsi troll made 2 propaganda threads against KSA and the 450 million Arabs. Hell, there is not even 1 week where an Farsi user is not making at least 1 anti-KSA thread from PressTV (PISSTV as I call that absurd Mullah propaganda controlled "news" outlet) as they have anti-KSA propaganda news on a daily basis which everyone can see just by seeing that page.

Also I find that Abii users comment about how Saudi Arabians and Arabs view Pakistanis as very insulting. We are not hosting 2 million Pakistanis and considering them as brothers and brotherly allies without a reason nor do Saudi Arabians and Pakistanis human-to-human have very good relations without reason which many Pakistani users here can confirm.

Saudi Arabians are one of the few people on earth that overwhelmingly support Pakistan and Pakistanis by more than 90%. There is almost no negative perception about Pakistan in KSA.

Thousands of Pakistani men married Saudi Arabian women last year yet that troll claims that we will not even sit with a Pakistani on a table when this is common place in every major city in KSA and often the food is even prepared by both Pakistanis and Saudi Arabians and others.

What a joke.

PS: For anyone thinking that @Chak Bamu or anyone else keeps a "hand" over me or other Arab users here then he recently gave me 2 infractions that resulted in a 2 week ban and earlier 1-2 other infractions. But of course people have no idea about that and just bash the moderators.

 

[idune]

First, there seems to have been a misunderstanding on my part. "Washington Institute" is not the same as "Washington Blog". The rationale to delete the thread is question seems to have been wrong on the face of it.

However, the article from Washington Institute says this:

"At present, there is no credible evidence that the Saudi government is financially supporting ISIS."

Your credibility once again hit the rock bottom. Because, one - you used biased and preconceive notion to moderate; two - you are now trying to justify one wrong doing with another.

I posted the analysis as is and if there was doubt that is readers to make opinion how to take it. Not you to force readers to make opinion on your biased way. By doing so you are undermining members ability to make up their own opinion.

Since you have been very active in bashing and criticizing KSA, I do not understand what you hoped to achieve by sharing an article based on a misleading, but appealing headline? Just for this reason, moderation decision to delete that thread appears to be correct.

Perhaps one of your deleted posts on a KSA tourism thread should be quoted as an example of your OT trolling:

"Unfortunately two of Islam Holiest places are occupied today by agents of zions - house of saud."

Source: "Makkah and Madinah News and Updates" | Page 7

Let's make clear one thing about your biased and motivated action to purge out thread and opinion about Saudi rulers. Even a novice could understand "house of saud" means Saudi rulers, that does NOT mean KSA as a country. BUT you using deceptive and biased twist to extend criticism of Saudi ruler to KSA as country and on its people are not only preposterous but also morally bankrupt tactics.

I stood by my comments on house of saud (minus your preposterous attempt to label KSA) but you seems to desperately grasping for new falsehood and biased excuse to keep article and analysis about house of saud out of PDF.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Your credibility once again hit the rock bottom. Because, one - you used biased and preconceive notion to moderate; two - you are now trying to justify one wrong doing with another.

I posted the analysis as is and if there was doubt that is readers to make opinion how to take it. Not you to force readers to make opinion on your biased way. By doing so you are undermining members ability to make up their own opinion.



Let's make clear one thing about your biased and motivated action to purge out thread and opinion about Saudi rulers. Even a novice could understand "house of saud" means Saudi rulers, that does NOT mean KSA as a country. BUT you using deceptive and biased twist to extend criticism of Saudi ruler to KSA as country and on its people are not only preposterous but also morally bankrupt tactics.

I stood by my comments on house of saud (minus your preposterous attempt to label KSA) but you seems to desperately grasping for new falsehood and biased excuse to keep article and analysis about house of saud out of PDF.

Yeah right.... In both the cases, your posts following both the quoted examples prove my point. Your "as is", "house of saud" excuses evaporate in thin air when looked at within context. Why would you troll a tourism thread? Why would you quote a bunch of misleading articles? You are a critic of Arabs/Saudis/KSA (Whatever else) and you just want to justify it somehow.

Read @al-Hasani 's post again and again until you finally realize that we are here to enforce forum rules and for making sure that a balance is kept.