Wednesday, September 18, 2019


"Attack on Saudi oil facilities highlights danger of 'kamikaze' drones" (Daigle):
"While it's not entirely clear who's responsible, it is known that since 2018, the Houthis have obtained advanced drones capable of attacks beyond Yemen's borders, according to a UN Security Council report released last January.

Identifying the devices as UAV-X (unmanned aerial vehicle X), the report said they could fly 1,500 kilometres and travel at speeds of up to 250 km/h.

What's more, the device can carry a warhead made up of 18 kilograms of explosives and ball bearings, making it potentially more lethal than other Houthi-owned drones, the UN report warned."
"Yemeni Killer Blow to House of Saud" (Cunningham).

It's odd that drones haven't yet been used for 'terrorism'.  The FBI/Khazars better get on that if they want to stay on top of the false-flaggery game.

Trump's backed off WWIII:  "War Averted? Trump Announces New Iran Sanctions Instead" (Durden).  Despite the sanctions, Trump - whose deep personal dislike of war is now obvious - is infinitely better for Iran than any plausible Democrat.  So why would they try to lead him to a war that will guarantee he loses the next election to that warmongering Democrat?

Of course, the Saudis are in deep shit if the Houthis can do this at will, and thus have every reason to lie about it:  "Saudi Arabia Says It Has "Material Evidence" Tying Iran To Aramco Attack".

What we've really learned is the extreme delicacy of the Saudi position.
blog comments powered by Disqus