text:
Tulsi Gabbard: Trump continues to serve terrorist state Saudi Arabia
Posted in: Hypocrisy, ljf, Military, Nuclear war, Nuclear weapons, Nuclear winter, Political science, Saudi Arabia, Terrorism, USA, Venezuela, Wahabbism. Leave a comment
So, Iran and North Korea having nuclear weapons is not OK, but Pakistan, India, and Saudi Arabia having them is fine?
"President Trump's recent decision to allow U.S. companies to sell Saudi Arabia nuclear technology is both mind-blowing and inexplicable. How does it serve our interests to help Saudi Arabia develop nuclear weapons?"
With permission from
By Jonas E. Alexis
Whenever someone starts telling you that Maduro needs to go, just simply say, "What have you been smoking lately?"
If you think that Nicolás Maduro has to be dethroned while at the same time remain silent about the diabolical connection between the United States and Saudi Arabia, then you are almost certainly a political ideologue, a Neocon puppet, or a useful idiot. It's just that simple.
We keep hearing that Maduro has to go because he has literally stopped "democracy" and "freedom" in Venezuela, but the people who are perpetuating this stupid idea hasn't said a damn thing about how the United States is continuing to sell military weapons to Saudi Arabia, a country which has literally slaughtered men, women and children in Yemen! As Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has recently put it, Saudi Arabia is the
"primary exporter of jihadist ideology, Wahhabi Salafist ideology that is the motivation and inspiration for terrorist groups like ISIS and al Qaeda – groups that the Saudis both directly and indirectly support. President Trump's recent decision to allow U.S. companies to sell Saudi Arabia nuclear technology is both mind-blowing and inexplicable. How does it serve our interests to help Saudi Arabia develop nuclear weapons?"[1]
Archival documents from the US State Department from 2009 show that "donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide."[2]
Once again, the logic is pretty clear: if Maduro has to go, then the United States needs to start sending millions of troops to Saudi Arabia in order to fight the influx of terrorist cells in the Middle East. But the United States isn't even remotely suggesting that there has to be a military conflict with the Saudis.
So the prevailing mantra that Maduro has to go is complete nonsense. It is once again a New World Order ideology which has nothing to do with spreading "democracy" and "freedom" and has everything to do with imperialist maneuvering. In short, whenever someone starts telling you that Maduro needs to go, just simply say, "What have you been smoking lately?"
[1] 'How does this serve US interests?' Gabbard slams decision to sell Saudi Arabia nuclear weapons tech," Russia Today, April 1, 2019.
Finian CUNNINGHAM: 17 Years After 911, US Backs Al Qaeda in Syria
Posted in: 9/11, Al-Qaïda, Military, Political science, Syria, Terrorism, USA, Wahabbism, War, War on terror. Leave a comment
Finian CUNNINGHAM
The September 11 terror incidents in 2001 are said to be the biggest-ever deadly attack on US soil. Shamefully, exactly 17 years later, the US president and Pentagon military chiefs are threatening to go to war in Syria – to defend the same ilk of terrorists.
"Shamefully" is perhaps not the most fitting word here. "Consistently" would be more appropriate.
Officially, the spectacular plane-crashing mayhem 17 years ago in New York City was due to 19 Arab hijackers affiliated with the Al Qaeda terror network.
That account of the world-changing event has been hotly disputed, with many respected authors and organizations claiming that evidence shows the US intelligence agencies are implicated in an inside job. The death of some 3,000 American citizens was hence exploited as a pretext for launching a series of US overseas wars, whose hidden agenda was for promoting imperialist objectives.
In any case, the official story is that Al Qaeda operatives hijacked four airliners on the morning of September 11, 2001, and flew them into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York, as well as into the Pentagon building near Washington. The fourth plane crashed in a rural area in Pennsylvania, allegedly after passengers challenged
the terrorist pilots.
The Al Qaeda terror network, with its ideological links to Saudi-sponsored Wahhabism, was declared "enemy number one" by then President George W Bush, who proceeded to launch wars on Afghanistan and Iraq, supposedly to avenge the 911 atrocity perpetrated against
American civilians.
The so-called "war on terror" has since become a much-overused blank check for successive US governments and their NATO allies to launch wars anywhere in the world to "defeat terrorists". It has been used to justify increasing Western state surveillance powers against its own citizens in the name of counter-terrorism.
To be sure, the official story on 911 and subsequent US and NATO military rampaging around the globe has been challenged by skeptics and critics.
One of the key lines of contesting the official narrative is the documented evolution of the Al Qaeda terror franchise, which grew out of US sponsorship of motley radical Islamist groups in Afghanistan during the 1980s. That covert ploy was to give then occupying Soviet troops "their Vietnam". American and British military intelligence along with lavish Saudi funding created the Frankenstein Monster of Islamic terrorism that mutated and spread across the Middle East and beyond.
So, the very notion that, post-911, the American creators of the terrorist monster would serve to protect the civilized world from their own creation was always a deeply suspect proposition.
The truth is that the US never stopped colluding with these terror groups since the days of the putative Afghan Vietnam for the Soviet Union.
The 911 incidents may have been some form of "blowback" or, plausibly, it was American intelligence handlers contriving a plot which would give imperialist planners their much-desired "new Pearl Harbor" – a blank check to declare war on the planet for the benefit of advancing US strategic interests.
Granted, the success of that nefarious covert scheme is questionable given the unforeseen huge financial and social costs to American society, as well as from general bedlam undermining global security.
For observers willing to see, it seems indisputable that there is something of a symbiotic relationship between Islamist terror proxies and the US imperialist state. The official "enemy" is a boon for justifying oppressive state powers against citizens; it serves as a pump for bloated budgets to the military-industrial complex at the heart of the American capitalist economy; and this enemy can also serve as target practice for illegal military intervention in foreign countries – US interventions that would otherwise be seen for what they are, as "criminal aggression".
Further, the terror proxies continue to serve as a cat's paws for US imperialism, as in the earlier formation in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. Rather than direct large-scale American military involvement, the Al Qaeda brigades are deployed to do Washington's dirty work. Syria is emerging as the new Afghanistan.
Officially, the Pentagon and US corporate news media scoff at these claims of collusion with terrorists. "We are bombing Syria to defeat terrorists," so goes the mantra. Substitute any number of countries for "Syria", as required.
Well, if that's the case why have senior US military people like Michael Flynn admitted that the former Obama administration deliberately cultivated the terror brigades in Syria? Why have hundreds of millions of dollars gone into forming a non-existent "moderate rebel army" in Syria only for the American weaponry to end up in the hands of terror groups like Nusra Front?
What about credible reports of US military helicopters airlifting Nusra commanders out of harm's way to other, safer parts of Syria? Similar reports of airlifting, or airdropping weapons, have come out of Afghanistan, where the Pentagon is still "fighting terrorists" – 17 years after 911.
It has taken a painfully long time over the eight years of war in Syria to uncover the full and real extent of criminality by the US and its British and French allies, along with the Saudis, Turks and Israelis.
But now we are coming full circle. President Donald Trump and his officials are warning that they will launch military strikes on Syria if the Syrian army and its Russian and Iranian allies proceed with the offensive to retake Idlib province. The northwest province is the last-remaining stronghold of anti-government militants. These militants are not the illusory "moderate rebels" the Western media have long bamboozled the public with. The militants comprise Nusra Front, Ahrar al Sham, Islamic State, and other self-professed Wahhabi jihadists of the Al Qaeda franchise. The myriad, mercurial names are merely part of the US cynical cover.
Trump – the supposed non-interventionist president – has even discarded the earlier ruse of invoking "chemical weapons" as a pretext for a US military attack on Syria. He and his officials are simply saying that any offensive by the Syrian army to retake all of its territory is an "unacceptable escalation" that will be met with a US military response.
There is no other credible rationale for such military deployment by Washington in Syria. The Western media are as usual riding shotgun with the mendacity, claiming that the Syrian army offensive will trigger a "humanitarian crisis", rather than reporting the salient fact that the offensive is aimed at eradicating the most vile terror groups from that country.
In Syria, today, 17 years after 911, the real relationship between US authorities and terrorism is on display. The United States of Anarchy.
On the Brink of War
Posted in: Iran, Israel, Middle East, Political science, Saudi Arabia, USA, Wahabbism, War. Leave a comment
By Abdel Bari Atwan
LD: A war is being engineered in the Middle East in which Israel will eventually find itself pitted against Iran and Hezbollah. The destruction of Iran and Hezbollah would be Israel's objective, something Israel could do easily enough with help from the United States.
The two big questions therefore are these: (1) Will Trump give Netanyahu the help he needs to destroy Iran and bring Hezbollah to its knees, revealing himself in the process as a Zionist stooge? (2) Will Putin come to the rescue of Iran and Hezbollah, as he has already come to the rescue of Syria, and will this confrontation lead to WWIII?
Our region stands on the brink of war.
We should not let small details — such as the resignation of Lebanese Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri or the detention of princes and former ministers in Saudi Arabia — divert us from the big picture and the real developments taking place behind the scenes.
The really dangerous phase is the one that will follow Crown Prince Muhammad Bin-Salman's purge on the domestic Saudi front. It may be the precursor to scenarios for a regional war that could, without exaggeration, end up being the most devastating in its modern history.
All that is currently happening is part of a carefully planned and crafted scheme, and the prelude to a sectarian war waged in 'Arab nationalist' guise against the growing power of 'Shia' Iran and its surrogates in Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq with American, regional and Israeli backing.
The old Saudi Arabia is no more. Wahhabism is breathing its last, has been all but buried and is in the process of becoming history. A fourth Saudi state, dressed in the garb of modernity and based on different alliances, is being born.
When its would-be founder and man of the moment, Muhammad Bin-Salman, accuses Iran of mounting a 'direct military attack that may amount to an act of war' against his country by allegedly supplying missiles to factions in Yemen, and his stance is endorsed and supported by the US, it is clear that a new American-led alliance is taking shape in the region.
Muhammad Bin-Salman's domestic purge, including the detention of 11 princes and scores of businessmen and former officials under the banner of fighting corruption, is only a first phase. It seems to haves proceeded smoothly so far, without encountering any serious obstacles.
The man now has now brought the four major pillars of state power – the economy, the security and military forces, the media and the religious establishment — totally under his control. He has thrown all his opponents, and anyone who uttered any criticism of his rule, behind bars; or, in the case of the princes and other high-ranking figures, incarcerated them in a luxury hotel for now. The latest round of detentions is unlikely to be the last, for we are dealing here with a bulldozer that levels everything that stands in its path.
In due course, Muhammad Bin-Salman will move on to what we believe will be the second and more serious phase, that of military confrontation. This could include the following steps:
— First, precipitating a military confrontation with Iran against the backdrop of the crushing siege on Yemen, after imposing a total land, air, and sea blockade of the country on the pretext of preventing Iranian missiles from reaching the Houthis.
– Secondly, forming a new alliance along the lines of the Desert Storm coalition formed in 1990 to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait. Candidates for membership in addition to Saudi Arabia and the UAE include UAE, Jordan, Egypt, Sudan and Morocco. (The King of Morocco has, coincidentally, been in the UAE capital Abu-Dhabi reportedly seeking to mediate with Saudi Arabia over the recent detentions: but he was sent a clear message from Riyadh not to interfere in what is happening inside Saudi Arabia, according reliable sources).
– Third, the bombardment of Lebanon and destruction of its infrastructure on the pretext of trying to eradicate Hezbollah. Such an assault would prompt the party to retaliate with intensive missile strikes against Israel, and would be more likely than ever before to drag in Iran and Syria.
– Fourth, an invasion of Qatar by Egyptian, Emirati and Saudi forces aimed at overthrowing its regime, precipitating a clash with the 30,000-strong Turkish force deployed there.
– Fifth, an American-Saudi-Israeli counteroffensive in Syria aimed at recapturing the areas lost by the US and its allies' rebel proxies such as Aleppo, Homs and Deir az-Zour. The US cannot easily stomach its defeat in Syria at the hands of Russia and Iran, even at the risk of causing a collision with Russia. It deliberately foiled the Syrian national dialogue conference in Sochi which Moscow had called for by getting the Syrian opposition to boycott it.
– Sixth, mobilizing the Kurdish militias in northern Iraq and Syria as US proxies in these wars with the aim of weakening and destabilizing Iran, Turkey, and Iraq.
These are just the most obvious of the steps that may be taken by the new US-led alliance – whatever it chooses to call itself. But none of this means that it is assured of success in achieving its aims and reshaping the region to its specifications.
The counter-scenario may be that of the consolidation of an Iranian-Syrian-Turkish-Iraqi alliance with which Russia would sympathize to begin with, and which it may eventually end up leading. These countries combined possess formidable missile arsenals which would mostly be aimed at Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Israel. The targeted states' much-vaunted US-made Patriot anti-missile systems would be ineffective in the face of intensive strikes by thousands of missiles fired simultaneously.
The gauge of success in this anticipated and possibly imminent regional war would be the destruction of Iran, regime-change in Qatar and the eradication of Hezbollah. But its failure would mean devastation for Saudi Arabia, Israel and the UAE and the dismemberment of the Saudi kingdom into fragments.
We are neither soothsayers nor fortune-tellers. Nevertheless, this may prove to be the last war that transforms the region, changing its states, its borders, and perhaps its populations as well. The Arabs and Iranians will certainly survive such a cataclysm. But can Israel in its current form survive it too?
Pepe Escobar: Wheels And Deals: Trouble Is Brewing In The House Of Saud
Posted by Lou on October 2, 2017
Posted in: CIA, Political science, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Terrorism, Wahabbism, War. Leave a comment
Source: Wheels And Deals: Trouble Is Brewing In The House Of Saud | Zero Hedge
Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,
Saudi women being allowed to drive is a smokescreen – Salafi-jihadism is alive and well inside the Kingdom. What's more, another coup may be along shortly…
Suddenly, the ideological matrix of all strands of Salafi-jihadism is being hailed by the West as a model of progress – because Saudi women will finally be allowed to drive. Only next year. Only some women. And still subject to many restrictions.
What's certain is that the timing of the announcement – which comes after years of liberal American pressure – was calculated with precision, arriving only a few days before House of Saud capo King Salman drops in for a chat at Trump's White House. The soft power move was coordinated by the 32-year-old Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman, a.k.a. MBS, the Destroyer of Yemen; the king merely added his signature.
The diversionary tactic masks serious trouble in the court. A Gulf business source with intimate knowledge of the House of Saud, having held a number of personal meetings with members, told Asia Times that "the Fahd, Nayef, and Abdullah families, the descendants of King Abdulaziz al Saud and his wife Hassa bin Ahmed al-Sudairi, are forming an alliance against the ascendancy to the Kingship of the Crown Prince."
No wonder, considering that the ousted Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef – highly regarded in the Beltway, especially Langley – is under house arrest. His massive web of agents at the Interior Ministry has largely been "relieved of their authority". The new Interior Minister is Abdulaziz bin Saud bin Nayef, 34, the eldest son of the governor of the country's largely Shi'ite Eastern Province, where all the oil is. Curiously, the father is now reporting to his son. MBS is surrounded by inexperienced thirty-something princes, and alienating just about everyone else.
Former King Abdulaziz set up his Saudi succession based on the seniority of his sons; in theory, if each one lived to the same age all would have a shot at the throne, thus avoiding the bloodletting historically common in Arabian clans over lines of succession.
Now, says the source, "a bloodbath is predicted to be imminent." Especially because "the CIA is outraged that the compromise worked out in April, 2014 has been abrogated wherein the greatest anti-terrorist factor in the Middle East, Mohammed bin Nayef, was arrested." That may prompt "vigorous action taken against MBS possibly in early October." And it might even coincide with the Salman-Trump get together.
ISIS playing by the (Saudi) book
Asia Times' Gulf business source stresses how "the Saudi economy is under extreme strain based on their oil price war against Russia, and they are behind their bills in paying just about all their contractors. That could lead to the bankruptcy of some of the major enterprises in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi Arabia of MBS features the Crown Prince buying a US$600 million yacht and his father spending US$100 million on his summer vacation, highlighted on the front pages of the New York Times while the Kingdom strangles under their leadership."
MBS's pet project, the spun-to-death Vision 2030, in theory aims to diversify from mere oil profits and dependency on the US to a more modern economy (and a more independent foreign policy).
That's completely misguided, according to the source, because "the problem in Saudi Arabia is that their companies cannot function with their local population and [are] reliant on expatriates for about 70% or more of their staff. Aramco cannot run without expatriates. Therefore, selling 5% of Aramco to diversify does not solve the problem. If he wants a more productive society, and less handouts and meaningless government jobs, he has to first train and employ his own people."
The similarly lauded Aramco IPO, arguably the largest share sale in history and originally scheduled for next year, has once again been postponed – "possibly" to the second half of 2019, according to officials in Riyadh. And still no one knows where shares will be sold; the NYSE is far from a done deal.
In parallel, MBS's war on Yemen, and the Saudi drive for regime change in Syria and to reshape the Greater Middle East, have turned out to be spectacular disasters. Egypt and Pakistan have refused to send troops to Yemen, where relentless Saudi air bombing – with US and UK weapons – has accelerated malnutrition, famine and cholera, and configured a massive humanitarian crisis.
The Islamic State project was conceived as the ideal tool to force Iraq to implode. It's now public domain that the organization's funding came mostly from Saudi Arabia. Even the former imam of Mecca has publicly admitted ISIS' leadership "draw their ideas from what is written in our own books, our own principles."
Which brings us to the ultimate Saudi contradiction. Salafi-jihadism is more than alive inside the Kingdom even as MBS tries to spin a (fake) liberal trend (the "baby you can drive my car" stunt). The problem is Riyadh congenitally cannot deliver on any liberal promise; the only legitimacy for the House of Saud lies in those religious "books" and "principles."
In Syria, besides the fact that an absolute majority of the country's population does not wish to live in a Takfiristan, Saudi Arabia supported ISIS while Qatar supported al-Qaeda (Jabhat al-Nusra). That ended up in a crossfire bloodbath, with all those non-existent US-supported "moderate rebels" reduced to road kill.
And then there's the economic blockade against Qatar – another brilliant MBS plot. That has only served to improve Doha's relations with both Ankara and Tehran. Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani was not regime-changed, whether or not Trump really dissuaded Riyadh and Abu Dhabi from taking "military action." There was no economic strangulation: Total, for instance, is about to invest US$2 billion to expand production of Qatari natural gas. And Qatar, via its sovereign fund, counterpunched with the ultimate soft power move – it bought global footballing brand Neymar for PSG, and the "blockade" sank without a trace.
"Robbing their people blind"
In Enemy of the State, the latest Mitch Rapp thriller written by Kyle Mills, President Alexander, sitting at the White House, blurts, "the Middle East is imploding because those Saudi sons of bitches have been pumping up religious fundamentalism to hide the fact that they're robbing their people blind." That's a fair assessment.
No dissent whatsoever is allowed in Saudi Arabia. Even the economic analyst Isam Az-Zamil, very close to the top, has been arrested during the current repression campaign. So opposition to MBS does not come only from the royal family or some top clerics – although the official spin rules that only those supporting Muslim Brotherhood, Turkey, Iran and Qatari "terrorism" are being targeted.
In terms of what Washington wants, the CIA is not fond of MBS, to say the least. They want "their" man Nayef back. As for the Trump administration, rumors swirl it is "desperate for Saudi money, especially infrastructure investments in the Rust Belt."
It will be immensely enlightening to compare what Trump gets from Salman with what Putin gets from Salman: the ailing King will visit Moscow in late October. Rosneft is interested in buying shares of Aramco when the IPO takes place. Riyadh and Moscow are considering an OPEC deal extension as well as an OPEC-non-OPEC cooperation platform incorporating the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF).
Riyadh has read the writing on the new wall: Moscow's rising political / strategic capital all across the board, from Iran, Syria and Qatar to Turkey and Yemen.
That does not sit well with the US deep state.
Even if Trump gets some Rust Belt deals, the burning question is whether the CIA and its friends can live with MBS on the House of Saud throne.
Posted in: Britain, CIA, ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, Islamophobia, Israel, Military, Mossad, Political science, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Soviet Union, Terrorism, Wahabbism, War. Leave a comment
Source: Radical Islamic Terrorists: The Best Bad Guys Money Can Buy | The Freedom Articles
freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com
Makia Freeman
Radical Islamic Terrorists are everywhere, it seems. They're all over Syria and Iraq. They're in Libya and Nigeria too. They attacked the former Soviet Union from Afghanistan and modern day Russia from Chechnya. We've seen them in the Philippines. They attacked an Australian cafe in Sydney, so we were told. Recently they've been in Myanmar (Burma). They've infiltrated Europe and are behind various attacks in London, Paris, Berlin and Barcelona, so we were told. They're even in China (Uyghur/Xinjiang). And of course, they paid a grand visit to the US on 9/11 in 2001, right? Radical Islamic terrorists have scary beards, chant strange incantations and strike on every populated continent, so aren't they the real bad guys in the world? Well … you may think that, but there is far more than meets the eye here.
ISIS in the Philippines, radical Islamic terrorists in Myanmar … just a coincidence?
Radical Islamic Terrorists – Cause or Symptom of the World's Evils?
While I understand people's desire for border control and limited immigration policies, some who gravitate towards the right of the political spectrum are quick to demonize all immigrants, find fault with Islam as a religion and blame all Muslims for the world's evils. They point to radical Islamic terrorists as proof that anything Islamic has to be feared and hated. Aside from the obvious problems with this position – gross generalization, guilt by association, assigning collective guilt to individuals, judging that which you don't know or understand, etc. – it's only looking at the situation from a very superficial perspective. The game is being played at much, much deeper levels. We need to expand perception if we're going to see it.
The real issue is this: are radical Islamic terrorists the cause of all the world's ills – or are they just the symptom? What's behind radical Islamic terrorism? Who created it? Who keeps creating it? Who trains these radical Islamic terrorists? Who funds them? Who arms them? Who controls them? Answers to these questions will help shed light on the whole situation.
Saudi Arabia: First Layer Source of Radical Islamic Terrorists
You don't have to dig very deep to discover that Saudi Arabia is the veritable marble fountainhead of radical Islamic terrorism. Saudi Arabia is such a wellspring and source of radical Islamic terrorism that the terms Saudi Arabia and radical Islamic terrorism may as well be synonymous. Events really descended into the pit of absurdity when Saudi Arabia a few months ago had the gall to accuse Qatar of funding terrorism, claiming that was their reason for cutting ties with Qatar! No less absurd are Donald Trump's claims that he is fighting radical Islamic terrorists while sucking up to and cutting deals with the Saudis. Last time I checked, funding something and selling it your weapons is not a very effective way of fighting it. Iran, one of the few Middle Eastern nations that is genuinely committed to fighting terrorism, is constantly accused of being the biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world, but it's all a game of distraction, smoke and mirrors. The US levels accusations like that at Iran only because the US is being led along by Israel and Saudi Arabia, both of whom hate Iran with a vengeance.
Get 'em while they're young: young boys being trained to become the next generation of radical Islamic terrorists. Image credit: WorldAffairs.blog.
Saudi Arabia has entire networks of madrasses or schools that train jihadi terrorists and teach a militant form of Islam known as Wahhabism which espouses violence. Other terms used to describe radical Islamic terrorists are Salafists (fundamentalist and strict Muslims who claims to follow the exact teachings of Mohammad and support Sharia law) and Takfiris (literally an apostate or an unbeliever [i.e. worthy of being killed]). The depth and breadth of Saudi funding of radical Islamic terrorists is truly staggering, as this article explains:
"How does Saudi Arabia go about spreading extremism? The extremist agenda is not always clearly government-sanctioned, but in monarchies where the government money is spread around to various princes, there is little accountability for what the royal family does with their government funds. Much of the funding is via charitable organizations and is not military-related.
The money goes to constructing and operating mosques and madrassas that preach radical Wahhabism. The money also goes to training imams; media outreach and publishing; distribution of Wahhabi textbooks, and endowments to universities and cultural centers … Although the Wahhabi curriculum was modified after the 9/11 attacks, it remains backward and intolerant. Freedom House published a report on the revised curriculum, concluding that it "continues to propagate an ideology of hate toward the 'unbeliever,' which include Christians, Jews, Shiites, Sufis, Sunni Muslims who do not follow Wahhabi doctrine, Hindus, atheists and others." This is taught not only domestically but also enthusiastically exported abroad."
WikiLeaks has exposed cables where Hillary Clinton admitted the Saudi-radical Islamic terrorism connection, as well as cables discussing Saudi front companies:
"For instance, a Wikileaks cable clearly quotes then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying "donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide." She continues: "More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaeda, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups." … Other cables released by Wikileaks outline how Saudi front companies are also used to fund terrorism abroad."
This article states:
"… out of the 61 groups that are designated as terrorist organizations by the U.S. State Department, the overwhelming majority are Wahhabi-inspired and Saudi-funded groups, with a focus on the West and Iran as their primary enemy. Only two are Shi'a—Hezbollah and Kataib Hezbollah, and only four have ever claimed to receive support from Iran. Nearly all of the Sunni militant groups listed receive significant support from either the Saudi government or Saudi citizens."
It is important to understand that mainstream Sunni Islam rejects all types of militant Islam, as can be seen in the declarations and discussions of leading Islamic imams and scholars at this international Islamic Conference in 2016.
So there is a mountain of evidence that Saudi Arabia funds radical Islamic terrorists and exports its brand of militant Islam to Pakistan, Afghanistan and many other parts of the world. However, the story is much deeper than this, so let's peel back another layer of the onion.
Radical Islamic terrorists or radical CIAslamic terrorists?
The CIA and Mossad: Deeper Layer Source of Radical Islamic Terrorists
The psychopathic mindset of the NWO controllers views people and groups outside of itself as things to be used, dumped and/or expended as necessary. Islamic terrorism is one of its favorite tools. Let's face it: from the Anglo-American-Zionist New World Order point of view, radical Islamic terrorists are cheap, expendable, easy to arm and easy to fool (e.g. by using religion to trick them as Zbigniew Brzezinski did in this video). Yes, sometimes there is blowback, when you train an asset like Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden and then lose control of him, but as long as you still retain control, the results can be fantastic. It works like a charm.
CIA-Afghani textbooks used for indoctrination. Image credit: WorldAffairs.blog
Take a look at Afghanistan in the 1980s. The US, expanding the Empire on behalf of the NWO, was working on containment of Russia. They recruited Afghanis and turned them against the then Soviet Union by using religion as a weapon – where the narrative was holy righteous Islam against the godless communist USSR. These fighters became the Mujahideen – a proxy US army – and the whole Afghani-Russia war served as a template for how the US could use radical Islamic terrorists to achieve its geopolitical goals. The deployment of Islamic terrorism continued on into the 1990s, 2000s and beyond, as Chris Kanthan explains:
"When the Afghan war was about to be won, it dawned on us that the Mujahideen project was a brilliant playbook that could be replicated in other parts of the world. That's when Al Qaeda was formed … Without the knowledge of the American public, the Mujahideen were very active all throughout the 1990's in Bosnia, Kosovo, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Dagestan, Chechnya etc. These fighters were used for three major purposes:
throw out pro-Russia dictators
install pro-West leaders who would help us build oil/gas pipelines and agree to host US military bases, and
disrupt Russian pipelines and other interests
Azerbaijan was an easy one and we got our man in 1993. Georgia took a long time, but George Soros and his color revolution finally installed our guy in 2005. Within a year, we had a 1000-mile pipeline that linked Azerbaijan (Caspian Sea), Georgia and Turkey! Chechnya was a partial success. They were struggling for independence from Russia and thus gladly welcomed the Mujahideen who also had plenty of Saudi money and US weapons. Within a short time, the non-violent and mystical Sufism of Chechnya was taken over by Saudi Wahhabism."
The US through its agencies like the CIA has continued to use radical Islamic terrorists to do its dirty work throughout the world, especially in places like Libya and Syria. Al-Qaeda (Al-CIA-da) has been great, but ISIS (I-CIA-SIS) even better. We know that the CIA spent $2.2 billion on getting arms to radical Islamic terrorists in Syria (the so-called moderate rebels) – though this is just the tip of the iceberg.
US/Western funding is not the whole story. The other main force behind all the radical Islamic terrorists is Zionist Israel. In 1982, the Oded Yinon plan was released. It is a strategic plan for Israel with the explicit goal of capturing more territory to form Greater Israel – land all the way from the Nile (in Egypt) to the Euphrates (in Syria/Iraq). It therefore necessarily advocates the theft of land from various nations to achieve this goal, including Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
For the Israeli thinkers behind the Yinon plan, the only way that Israel can become a regional power is by gaining more land and by fracturing the nations around it, so that these nations will be weakened and offer less resistance to Zionist ambitions. Israel wants to balkanize the Middle East, just as the US did to Yugoslavia in the 1990s, to fracture Arab states by splitting them along sectarian and ethnic lines. This gameplan is being played out as you read this with the movement by the Kurds to hold a referendum to create their own nation of Kurdistan – thus taking land and population from Syria and Iraq (and potentially Turkey and Iran too, since they also have Kurdish people). Look how enthusiastically Israel has spoken out in favor of it!
The Oded Yinon plan for Greater Israel.
Make no mistake about it: Israel loves radical Islamic terrorists just as much as the West. The connections between Israel and ISIS, Nusra, FSA, Syrian rebels and other radical Islamic terrorists continue to mount by the day. Israel has a long history of framing Arab and Muslim patsies for Mossad-orchestrated crimes, the grandest of which to date is the 9/11 false flag op. The Mossad routinely uses fake passports and other tricks to implicate Arabs in their false flag terror operations. There are many examples, but a revealing one is Operation Trojan in 1986. Israel deliberately created false evidence of Arab terrorism in order to trick the US into going to war against an innocent nation (Libya). Ex-Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky admitted the plot in his book The Other Side of Deception, an excerpt of which is here:
"A Trojan was a special communication device that could be planted by naval commandos deep inside enemy territory. The device would act as a relay station for misleading transmissions made by the disinformation unit in the Mossad, called LAP, and intended to be received by American and British listening stations. Originating from an IDF navy ship out at sea, the prerecorded digital transmissions could be picked up only by the Trojan. The device would then rebroadcast the transmission on another frequency, one used for official business in the enemy country, at which point the transmission would finally be picked up by American ears in Britain. The listeners would have no doubt they had intercepted a genuine communication, hence the name Trojan, reminiscent of the mythical Trojan horse.
By the end of March, the Americans were already intercepting messages broadcast by the Trojan, which was only activated during heavy communication traffic hours. Using the Trojan, the Mossad tried to make it appear that a long series of terrorist orders were being transmitted to various Libyan embassies around the world (or, as they were called by the Libyans, Peoples' Bureaus). As the Mossad had hoped, the transmissions were deciphered by the Americans and construed as ample proof that the Libyans were active sponsors of terrorism. What's more, the Americans pointed out, Mossad reports confirmed it."
The Trojan transmitter planed in Tripoli Libya fooled the West into thinking that Libya was responsible for the killing of 2 Americans in the bombing of the La Belle discothèque in Germany. It was later proven that Libya had nothing to do with the bombing. Israel induced the American bombing of Libya by using radical Islamic terrorists as the pretext. More Zio-Islamic terrorism which killed innocent civilians …
Don't expect the West to counter radical Islamic terrorists anytime soon. They are too much of great weapon in the destabilization toolbox of the CIA and the Mossad. Britain is loving its weapons sales to the House of Saud – pity about all those innocent Yemenis who are getting slaughtered with them. The US, especially under Trump, is joined at the hip with the Saudis and Israelis, so it's business as usual. The Saudis and the US continue to sign devilish pacts with each other (oil, petrodollars, arms and expendable radical Islamic terrorists for geopolitical goals), becoming more and more bound to each other's destiny, so the US doesn't have as much bargaining power over the Saudis as it used to. Now, with the NWO wanting to conquer Eurasia, don't be surprised if radical Islamic terrorists are used against Iran (ISIS), Russia (Chechnya Wahhabis) and China (Uyghur Salafis) in the years to come.
After all, with their scary beards, weird hats and blood-curdling utterances, radical Islamic terrorists are the best bad guys that money can buy.
Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/israel-and-saudi-arabia-best-friends/
*http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-yousaf-butt-/saudi-wahhabism-islam-terrorism_b_6501916.html
*https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09STATE131801_a.html
*https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09STATE83026_a.html
*http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-real-largest-state-sponsor-of-terrorism_us_58cafc26e4b00705db4da8aa
*https://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/sunnis-denounce-salafist-takfiri-terror/
*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9RCFZnWGE0
*https://worldaffairs.blog/2017/05/28/embracing-islamic-terrorism/
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/top-10-proofs-isis-us-israeli-creation/
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/israeli-islamic-terrorism-11-clues/
*http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/deception.html
Modern Day Propaganda: Top 7 Pieces – Part 1 (Geopolitics)
Posted in: Big pharma, China, Hypocrisy, Iran, Israel, Makia, Military, New World Order, Political science, Propaganda, Refugees, Russia, Saudi Arabia, UK, Wahabbism, War, Zionism. Leave a comment
Source: Modern Day Propaganda: Top 7 Pieces – Part 1 (Geopolitics) | The Freedom Articles
Propaganda isn't just a thing of the past. Modern day propaganda is all around us. Part 1 of this series uncovers lies in the realm of geopolitics.
Modern day propaganda
is all around us. However, people have usually become so numb to it that they can no longer perceive it. Many people choose ignorance, complacency or apathy to deal with it. Often you can observe groups developing societal Stockholm Syndrome, where they praise they captors out of a forlorn hope that by doing so that may somehow change things or alleviate the pain. The control system uses all of its tentacles to keep people conditioned to a more a sheeplike and unconscious state. It is the politician's job to lie, the MSM (mainstream media's) job to program you and Big Pharma's job to keep you sedated with synthetic petrochemical drugs. It is a constant battle to broaden your awareness, uplift your consciousness and expand your perception in the face of these forces which seek to imprison humanity in a limited perception of Who We Are, who's running the world, how they're doing it and how we can change it. Propaganda does not just belong to Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia. Modern day propaganda is everywhere; sometimes subtle, sometimes overt, always pervasive.
With that in mind, here is a collection of the top 7 pieces of modern day propaganda, part 1 of a series.
Modern Day Propaganda in Geopolitics
1. The Syrian War is a civil war. False. The Syrian War has never been a civil war; it's a proxy war fought by foreign fighters with foreign aid. It has become an open secret that the US-UK-Israeli axis, along with the Saudis, have either created or are funding ISIS (or both). Evidence keeps coming to light showing that Israel is paying Syrian rebels and that ISIS gets their weaponry and Toyota trucks from the US. Many "rebels" fighting the Syrian Government of Bashar Al Assad are not even Syrian. Remember Obama's freudian slip that "we're training ISIL"?
2. The US is fighting ISIS in Syria. False. ISIS (aka Daesh, ISIL, IS) is the pet Frankenstein of the Anglo-American-Zionsit NWO and is a US-Israeli creation. The US has no real interest in defeating ISIS – at least not until ISIS has caused the maximum amount of chaos designed to unseat legitimate governments and facilitate regime change. The real target has always been Assad (then Iran, then Russia and China). There is copious evidence for this; 2 quick examples are the incessant mantra a few years ago that "Assad must go" (until the NWO controllers realized Assad was strong enough to defend himself and his nation) and the recent shooting down by the US Coalition of an SAA (Syrian Arab Army) jet.
3. All the refugees flowing into Europe are genuine refugees. False. Some (or many, depending on your perspective) refugees are economic migrants. They are being helped by a network of NGOs (e.g. those funded by George Soros) who have an entire system of transporting migrants from Libya to Italy for money. It's people smuggling / human trafficking. For the background to this and further analysis, see the article Mass Migration to Europe: All in Line with the New World Order.
4. US military intervention abroad makes us safer. What a load of nonsense! When he ran for US president in 2012, Ron Paul made a point of emphasizing the concept of blowback (which the CIA had written about) in some of his speeches. UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn recently had the courage to state the obvious in Britain: "Many experts, including professionals in our intelligence and security services have pointed to the connections between wars our government has supported or fought in other countries, such as Libya, and terrorism here at home". When a poorer and less militarily developed nation is picked on and attacked by a rich bully nation, the former is likely to harbor resentment and a desire to retaliate in the future. many North Koreans still hate the US for carpet bombing into oblivion after WW2. Therefore, Western foreign meddling, assassination and invasion has made America the new "Satan" and enemy #1 for many people around the world, and has become one of the motivations for attacks on England, France and Germany. Thus, the US is far more likely to be attacked than if it had not intervened.
5. Iran is the biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. Flat out false. While Iran may support Hamas in Palestine and Hezbollah in Lebanon, Iran has nothing on Saudi Arabia, who funds a pervasive network of extremist Wahhabi Islam schools (madrases) worldwide. It is utterly ridiculous and beyond hypocritical that Saudi Arabia now accuses Qatar of terrorism. Israel has also been behind many so-called "Muslim" and "Arab" terror incidents. Israel and Saudi Arabia now form a dark alliance – with the assistance of the US Empire, the biggest purveyor of war (and terrorism through funding it) the world has ever known. The US Government learned its tricks from the UK Government, both of which have been tools in the hands of the New World Order. The US alternatively backs and then disowns "terrorists" or local fighters in certain areas (e.g. Central America or the Middle East) as the NWO agenda dictates. Once a group has outlived its usefulness, the nomenclature changes from "freedom fighters / liberators" to "enemy combatants / terrorists".
6. Russia is the biggest threat the Western world is facing. Not true. At every turn, Russian President Vladimir Putin keeps insisting that Russia does not view the US an as enemy, that the 2 great nations were on the same side for both world wars and that mutual cooperation is the only way forward. The US ignominiously lied after the collapse of the Soviet Union by promising Russia that NATO would not expand eastwards – and meanwhile keeps adding numerous Eastern and Central European nations to its alliance such as Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic (1999), then Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia (2002-2004), Albania and Croatia (2009) and Montenegro (2017). Russophobia is a convenient political tool to justify NATO, get people scared and allow bigger domestic military budgets in Western nations. It's also a handy scapegoat for the Democrats to use in trying to account for the election loss of the incredible corrupt Hillary Clinton. Trump saw the obvious truth that it's better for everyone if the US and Russia get along – before the Deep State got to him.
7. Israel is only defending itself. False. Israel attacked its neighbors even before it gained official statehood in 1948, attacked Egypt to begin the 6 Day War in 1967, attacked Lebanon in 1982 and has been seizing Palestinian land ever since its inception. There's noting "defensive" about raw, naked aggression. The truth is that Zionism is a colonial endeavor. Look at the quotes of early Zionists like Ze'ev Jabotinsky, one of the main men behind the expansionist, militaristic and anti-Arab form of Israeli nationalism that now dominates the Likud Party and Israeli politics. Take a look at what Jabotinsky, as well as former Israeli prime Ministers David Ben Gurion and Ariel Sharon, have said about Zionism and the fact that it is intimately bound up with colonialism, eviction and expropriation:
Conclusion: Geopolitical Modern Day Propaganda is Rife
Modern day propaganda in the sphere of geopolitics is dangerously widespread. With people buying into the lies, distortions and disinformation listed above, conflict and war is much more likely to be started. Stay tuned for part 2.
*http://www.newsweek.com/israel-secretly-paying-salaries-syrian-rebels-golan-heights-627155
*http://www.globalresearch.ca/going-after-the-islamic-state/5401439
*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbmczLdvZVY
*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2NkjNvwuaU
*http://www.activistpost.com/2017/06/russia-threatens-shoot-down-us-jets.html
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/soros-hack-top-10-machinations/
*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfG1myglfhY
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/ngos-choice-tool-subversion-nwo/
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/mass-migration-to-europe-in-line-with-nwo/
*http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/june2017/2017/05/jeremy-corbyns-speech-terrorism-will-do-him-more-good-harm
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/north-korea-provocation-background/
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/zionism-vs-islam/
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/2017-nwo-anniversaries-2/
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/trumps-first-100-days/
The Politics of Terror Mirrors the Politics of Heroin
Posted in: Britain, CIA, History, Iraq, ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, Islam, Islamophobia, Mainstream media, Mind control, Political science, Saudi Arabia, Terrorism, USA, Vietnam, Wahabbism, War on drugs, War on terror. Leave a comment
"Our Western governments tell us that they're at war with "Islamic terror". Yet in the geopolitics of the Middle East our governments align themselves with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States – the kingdoms which sponsor "Islamic terror". Everyone with half a brain knows that Saudi Wahhabism is the mother of Al-Qaeda and ISIS."
Source: The Politics of Terror Mirrors the Politics of Heroin
http://www.counterpunch.org
by Aidan O'Brien
"The White House is not just doubling the bet in Iraq…..It's doubling the bet across the region [and the world]. This could get very complicated. Everything is upside down."
— Martin Indyk (former US ambassador to Israel) 2007
The West's policies in the Middle East are coming home. Remember the "Vietnamese" heroin that showed up in the body bags at home? Well there's a lot of body bags at home right now that are full of "Islamic" terrorism. And remember the army that invaded Basra? The British one! Well it's now on the streets of Britain. And the army that destroyed Libya? The French one! It's now on the streets of France. Meanwhile in America the US President is fighting the FBI and the US media are begging for a coup. And everywhere in the trans-Atlantic sewer the populists are freaking out the elitists. The Empire of chaos is a structural mess.
It is a case of one contradiction too many. On top of the West's never ending class wars and imperial wars, the West's latest "forever and ever war on terror" is a fiasco that has tipped the balance in favour disbelief and dissent. The illegitimacy of this "war on terrorism" points to the illegitimacy of all the structural wars the West is fighting across the planet. It is the domino theory in reverse. One imperial war stops making sense and so all the wars stop making sense (if they ever did). The Western establishment has tied itself in a knot in an attempt to prolong itself. Watch it fall.
Our Western governments tell us that they're at war with "Islamic terror". Yet in the geopolitics of the Middle East our governments align themselves with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States – the kingdoms which sponsor "Islamic terror". Everyone with half a brain knows that Saudi Wahhabism is the mother of Al-Qaeda and ISIS. And a half of that half a brain can connect the dots between Western Interests in Arabia and "Islamic terror". It's obvious that the West have used and still are using "Islamic terrorism" as a proxy in places like Syria, Libya and Iraq. So when these same "terrorists" pop up in the West and cause mayhem: what the fuck?
Could it be that the West's terrorists in the Middle East are still working for the West when they bomb and shoot in the West? Could our Western governments be targeting the West?
The House of Saud and the House of Commons as well as the White House (you can add the Houses of Rothschild and Rockefeller to this list of elite Houses) do nothing without each other. So if a Saudi linked death squad attacks the West: the Western establishment is complicit.
Why? To begin with the House of Saud was a British intelligence asset during World War I – long before Saudi Arabia was born in 1932. The British paid for Saudi head chopping back in the 1920s. And nothing has changed since then. For example, since the Saudi invasion of Yemen in 2015 the UK has sold £3.3 billion worth of military equipment to the Saudis.
The USA joined the Saudi bloodbath in the interwar period. The California -Arabian Standard Oil Company institutionalised this nefarious relationship in the 1930s. And Henry Kissinger cemented it in the 1970s. Oil and petrodollars therefore were the parents of Al-Qaeda. And any jihad since the 1980s has been a happy meeting of CIA and Saudi minds.
This includes ISIS. Seymour Hersh explains the latest US/Saudi cooperation explicitly in his 2007 New Yorker article 'The Redirection'. After the US lost control of Iraq, Washington DC allowed the Saudis to 'redirect' US foreign policy in the region – in an effort to "contain" Iran. The end result was Sunni extremism in Iraq and eventually ISIS. And a US/Saudi 2017 military deal worth $110 billion.
This fundamental link between the Western establishment and Saudi Arabia's overt and covert terror networks doesn't categorically connect the West's governments to the bullets and bombs of ISIS that explode in the West. It doesn't suggest anything else other than blowback. But a more sinister connection than 'guilt by association' comes to the surface if we analyse Western elite behaviour elsewhere. If we widen our perspective and look at the war on drugs and compare it to the war on terror, then what the Western elite are capable of within the West is alarming.
It isn't just blowback – it's by design. That's the lesson of the "war on drugs". Richard Nixon started this war in 1971. However in 2015, according to RT, the illegal drug market was "bigger than the automotive industry and it's volume is approaching that of the oil and gas sector". In his book The CIA As Organised Crime, Douglas Valentine answers the following question:
Ken McCarthy: A member of the Sinaloa cartel, Vicente Zambada-Niebla, is currently in prison in the US "on charges of trafficking more than a billion dollars in cocaine and heroin." Zambada's attorney is saying that since the late 1990s, the Sinaloa cartel has provided various US law enforcement agencies with information about the other cartels. They help the US eliminate their rivals and in exchange they're allowed to import limitless quantities of drugs into the US. Chicago is one of their main drop-off points.
So, Doug, has there ever been a case when the US government through its various law enforcement agencies gave a pass to drug dealers in exchange for something else? How often does it happen and how far back does it go?
Valentine: An old FBN [Federal Bureau of Narcotics] agent, Lenny Schrier, once told me: "The only way you can make cases is if your informant sells dope." So, yes; not only has it happened, and not only does it still happen, but giving dealers a free pass to deal drugs is the foundation stone upon which federal drug law enforcement is based. Once you realise that, you have to look beyond, at the political and economic context that makes such an extra-legal practice possible…
The point here, is that the "war on drugs" is a contradiction. The official Western attempt to stop the trafficking of drugs is responsible for the proliferation of drugs in the West. Valentine's point is that politics and economics trumps the law in the "war on drugs". For political and economic reasons the West and its intelligence agencies (primarily the CIA) allows drug trafficking to flourish.
Maybe the reason is that drug money is a good way to fund a secret war (the Contra war against Nicaragua in the 1980s, for example). Maybe drug money maintains Third World CIA assets (landlords, generals, right-wing politicians, organised criminals – the usual anti-communists). Maybe drugs destabilise and therefore controls a strategic country (Mexico) or a strategic class (the working class and underclass). Or maybe drug money fuels a key part of the economy (the Western banks and corporations). Whatever the political or economic reasons the world's illegal hard drugs are secretly tolerated and encouraged by the West despite the law.
If this is the reality of the war on drugs: can the same contradiction be found in the war on terror? If we superimpose the war on terror onto Valentine's description of the war on drugs: will the patterns of one fit into the patterns of the other? In the war on terror does politics and economics trump the law? Is terrorism secretly tolerated and encouraged by the Western powers? According to the UK's Independent newspaper in November 2016:
"A 650 per cent increase in deaths from terrorism in OECD countries and a marked rise in transnational terrorist attacks means the world is now a yet-more dangerous place in terms of terrorism, according to the IEP [Institute for Economics and Peace]."
Is the war on terror therefore like the war on drugs: does it actually promote what it allegedly is fighting against? The facts suggest that this is the case. Why?
As Valentine argues in relation to the war on drugs: the reasons concern politics and economics. The war on terror which George W. Bush began in the 2000s and which Donald Trump continues today is in fact similar to the war on terror which Ronald Reagan initiated in the 1980s. In short, it's a hoax. It's deceitful because to paraphrase Martin Luther King: the USA and the West back in the 1980s was, as it is today in the 2010s, the greatest purveyor of terror in the world. And it is so for political and economic reasons.
Like drugs, terrorism facilitates Western power. If no non-Western military force can compete with the military power of the West, then what scares the West? Why is the West panicking if it dominates the air, sea and land when it comes to conventional warfare? Why? Because that which makes the West nervous is the world's civilian population. Cue unconventional warfare!
When the US war on drugs began in 1971, the US and it's allies were producing heroin and killing civilians on a massive scale in South East Asia. A postmodern (anti-modern) partnership was born. A postmodern (two faced) pattern was set. Under the cover of Western self righteousness – drugs and terror became tools of the West. And they've been dovetailing each other ever since – targeting civilians all the way.
The template for the West's postmodern terror onslaught, according to Douglas Valentine, was the Phoenix Program that shaped the underbelly of America's war in Vietnam. Realising that the civilian population of South Vietnam was it's real enemy the US – using it's secret CIA "warriors" – in a very conscious, bureaucratic and bloody way covertly attacked it.
Secret detention centres, torture and executions terrorised the south Vietnamese population in the late 1960s and into the early 1970s. Up to 40,000 civilians were killed. And the rest were psyched out with propaganda – if they were not killed by a straightforward bombing raid. In this darkly coordinated approach to disobedient civilians the Western state-mafia found a formula that could be systematically used elsewhere. Like heroin, programmatic terrorism could be exported in a clandestine fashion. And in a massive scale it was.
The Phoenix Program was exported to Latin America in the 1970s and 1980s. It was called the 'Salvador Option' up north and 'Operation Condor' down south. And it ripped the guts out of civilian life in Central America and the Southern Cone.
A few hundred thousand executed civilians here and a few hundred thousand butchered civilians there. And, it's fair to say, every one of the Latin American state terrorists responsible for this systematic killing of civilians passed through the US [Terror] School of the Americas which was located in Panama and now, under the name the "Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation", is based in Fort Benning, Georgia. And, significantly, all of these terrorists had the political support of Latin America's Cocaine kings and that ultimate king of war: Henry Kissinger.
At about the same time the CIA was training the mujahideen in the arts of terror and letting them blow secular civilian life in Afghanistan to bits. And so the Phoenix Program slowly made its way back to Asia and the heroin business.
This Western attempt to contain modern civilian life around the world, by throwing hardcore drugs and organised terrorism in the way of social progress, doubled it's bet – in the 21st century – in Iraq, Syria and Libya.
If the Western 1% or 5% or 10% were to remain sure of their social position in global society, then they needed a countervailing primitive force or forces in the face of modern secular trends. Neoliberal capitalism and all it's talk of competitive market forces became the primitive mainstream ideology of the 1% – the myth of free market individualism. And as it turned out hardcore drugs and hardcore terrorism covered the social and political backs of this 1% as they globalised themselves.
The catch for the Western 1% was that globalisation implied universalism. In capitalist terms, globalisation weirdly implied global equality or at least a level playing field. The BRICS took advantage of this. And the West hit back with a plethora of excuses to maintain inequality and it's own privileged access to resources. Samuel Huntington's The Clash of Civilisations was one excuse. And 911 and the subsequent "war on terror" was another excuse. The bet was that chaos in the heart of the Eurasian continent (think Zbigniew Brzezinski) would divert globalisation back into the familiar ways of Western domination.
However universalism, or the 21st century global civilian, had already bolted from Western parochialism. It was too late to slam the doors of history shut. Hence the need to double the bet against the progressive secular tendencies of the 21st century – the global dimensions of science and technology (reason), and as a result the global (non-Western) dimensions of human society. Feeling unsure of itself the parochial 1% backtracked away from globalisation and doubled it's belief in the "Phoenix Program".
The 1% and it's allies and tools – NATO, Israel, the Saudis and all their secret services – combined in an attempt to divide and rule the world's citizens one more time. Strategic cultural and political fractures were exploited in order to engineer social chaos and social reaction. The reason was Western power. And no price was too much for that.
Since World War II, at least, Western governments (the US leading the pack) have had no qualms about working with drug dealers so as to promote their interests. Likewise, since at least the Vietnam War, the West has systematically used for it's own benefit terrorism and terrorists freely. From Vietnam to the Middle East – via Latin America – even the names of the Western teachers of terror are the same. For example, US colonel James Steele and US diplomat John Negroponte. And hovering above the likes of these are the gods of terror – the CIA, MI6, Mossad, etc. (figures like the ghostly Ted Shackley).
Which brings us back to Saudi Arabia and it's "free pass" to commit acts of terrorism in what Seymour Hersh calls "The Redirection". The importance of Saudi Arabia to the financial and petroleum heights of the Western establishment are beyond doubt. So the question now is whether that Saudi free pass extends to Western cities? Are policies like the Salvador Option on the elite table when dealing with Western countries?
If the war on drugs is any guide then Western society is as much a target for a "Phoenix type Program" as any other Third World society. Indeed Douglas Valentine believes that The United States Department of Homeland Security is a direct descendant of the Phoenix Program.
And the bombs and bullets in the streets of Europe? If the black neighbourhoods of Los Angeles could be flooded with drugs with the discreet blessing of a US government which was allegedly fighting a war against drugs: then the working class streets of Europe can be flooded with terrorism with the surreptitious blessing of the Western governments which are allegedly fighting a war against terror.
More articles by:Aidan O'Brien
Aidan O'Brien is a hospital worker in Dublin, Ireland.
Pepe Escobar: Trump's Sword Dance Sets Off the War of the Wahhabis
Posted in: Iran, ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, Israel, Military, Money, Oil, Pipelines, Political science, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Terrorism, Wahabbism, War, War on terror, Wikileaks, Zionism. Leave a comment
Source: Trump's Sword Dance Sets Off the War of the Wahhabis
sputniknews.com
US President Donald Trump could not possibly have predicted the game-changing after-effects of his triumphal sword dance in Riyadh.
Or could he?
© AFP 2017/ KHALED AL-SAYYED
Next Step – Invasion? Why Saudi Arabia Moved to Cut Ties With Qatar
The fact is the House of Saud went amok, in a flash, going after Qatar and bombing from the inside that glorious Arab NATO project – call it NATOGCC — sworn with pomp over a glowing orb.An excited Trump tweeted three times his approval for Riyadh going after Doha.
Trump and NATOGCC had equaled Daesh and Iran as "terrorists". The House of Saud went one up — and denounced Qatar for top terror financing, which equals Don Corleone hurling Mafioso accusations against Tony Soprano.
But then, in an unexpected plot twist, Daesh, handily, graphically, underlined the cosmic stupidity of the whole charade – staging, or at least claiming to stage a terror attack against the Parliament and the Imam Khomeini shrine in Tehran.
© AP Photo/ Lukasz Szelemej, file
Qatari Conflict: 'Proxy Battle Between Iran and Saudis Going to the Next Level'
The current Emir of Qatar, Tamim bin Hamad al Thani, now "guilty" for not blaming Iran as the root of all evils in the Arab peninsula, might even be following the steps of his own father, Hamad, who invented modern Qatar and deposed himself – under Saudi pressure – in favor of his son in 2013.We can't forget that Bandar bin Sultan, a.k.a. Bandar Bush, notorious former top assembler/weaponizer of jihadis, and frustrated "liberator of Syria", had famously described Qatar in the past as "300 people and a TV station".
So what is really going on in this noxious petrodollar swamp?
The Israel-UAE connection
Let's cut to the chase and establish that this nasty inter-GCC cannibalization has nothing to do with the Global War on Terror (GWOT).
Among massive disinformation crossfire, a trail of evidence points to a concerted strategy elaborated by the Israeli lobby (via the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, founded, among others, by nefarious casino schemer Sheldon Adelson, and very close to Bibi Netanyahu); US neocon/Ziocon/neoliberalcon elements; and the UAE ambassador in Washington, Yousef al-Otaiba.
Leaked emails have shown how Otaiba – widely idolized in the Beltway because of his "largesse" – and the neocon Foundation for Defense of Democracies have discussed means of teaching Qatar a lesson for its support of Hamas, and overall non-confrontational policies towards Iran. Otaiba also happens to be close to Jared Kushner – which would explain Trump's reaction to the anti-Qatar blitzkrieg.
CC BY 2.0 / momo / Israel National Flag
The Usual Suspect: Israel Accused of Seeking to Destroy Gulf States' Unity
Unlike Qatar, the House of Saud and the UAE are one step away from establishing diplomatic relations with Israel – the sine qua non condition imposed by Washington to insert Israel in an anti-Iran Arab NATO guided by Riyadh.A previous row in 2014 offers additional background. Regional intel operatives confirm at the time there were military Emirati maneuvers not far from the Qatari border; London and Paris, for instance, knew all about it.
But the head of the House of Saud in charge at the time was the late King Abdullah, who was in fact an appeaser. The Head-Chopper-in-Chief now is Warrior Prince Mohamed bin Salman, a.k.a. MBS, an arrogant twat who's already, miserably, losing a war on Yemen — conducted with billions of dollars in US and UK weapons — that has provoked a horrific humanitarian crisis in the poorest nation in the region. It is MBS who ordered the Saudi demonization of Qatar.
Let me out of the terror train
The "terra terra terra" shorthand, for the House of Saud, applies mostly to the accusation of Qatar supporting Shi'ite protest movements in eastern Saudi Arabia. That's ridiculous; Doha is not involved.
And then there's the accusation of Qatar supporting Islamists. That's exactly what powerful Saudi donors – many linked to the monarchy – do.
© REUTERS/ U.S. Air Force/Tech. Sgt. Terrica Y. Jones
While Trump Says Qatar Funds Islamic Extremism, Pentagon Urges Business as Usual with Doha
Doha does support, big time, the Muslim Brotherhood – which has not much to do with al-Qaeda and/or Daesh, and is hated with a vengeance by Riyadh and its puppet al-Sisi in Cairo, who survives on Saudi handouts. What powerful Qatari donors did (up to $3 billion) was support al-Qaeda in Syria, a.k.a. Jabhat al-Nusra, which vast US neocon/neoliberalcon sectors brand as "moderate rebels".
The Saudis, meanwhile, supported their own jihadis in Syria – and elsewhere. WikiLeaks has unequivocally proved how "donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide".
Apart from complex tribal rivalry issues, the key religious factor is that Qatar – unlike Saudi Arabia – is tolerant towards non-Salafis, or "revolutionary" Salafis like the Muslim Brotherhood, and does not try to globally export its version of Wahhabism. For all practical purposes, hardcore Saudi imams consider Qataris heretics. As if they're almost as bad as "apostate" Shi'ites.
© AFP 2017/ FAYEZ NURELDINE
Clinton Emails Give Evidence of Saudi, Qatari Gov'ts Financing Daesh – Assange
The schism has translated, in practice, into a proxy war in Libya for example. Doha supports Islamic militias in Misrata as well as those faithful to the "Mufti of Qatar" Sadiq al-Ghariani. The Emirates and Egypt support Gen. Khalifa Haftar, the chief of the self-styled Libya National Army (LNA).It's a gas, gas, gas
Saudi intel disinformation agents are spreading that "Turkey and Qatar are the last two states run by the Muslim Brotherhood. Most probably Qatar will experience a change of regime and exit being the bankroller on behalf of Britain to support all kind of chaos in the region, and that include playing from behind the scenes with Teheran."
Utter diversionist nonsense. The plain fact is the House of Saud is absolutely desperate. Oil price remains low, around $50 a barrel. The monster Saudi IPO on Aramco is only 12 months away. The House of Saud needs to move the markets towards a higher oil price by any means necessary – ultimatums and threats of war included.
A non-ideological US intel source goes further, stressing how "Turkey, Iran and Russia are moving closer together. The question remains who will control the Gulf States and the oil price — which was being manipulated so far to destroy Russia. The deal between Saudi Arabia and Russia is really just a minor improvement."
© AP Photo/ Leo Correa
Global Oil Prices Unlikely to See Big Impact From Diplomatic Tension in Middle East
So no wonder obfuscation remains the norm – with narratives taking attention away from the House of Saud and placing it on Iran, and now also Qatar.And then there's the key Pipelineistan angle, mixed with how Qatar as a natural gas powerhouse is immensely annoying OPEC producers Saudi Arabia and UAE.
Qatar is the largest global exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG). That's what has allowed it to shape a foreign policy completely independent from the House of Saud. Add to it that Qatar's fabulous gas wealth yields from the massive offshore North Field, shared with Iran (who controls what it calls South Pars).
There's been speculation, obviously unconfirmed by Tehran and Doha, that Iran and Qatar may have reached an agreement on sharing the rights for a gas pipeline from North Dome/South Pars to the eastern Mediterranean in Syria, as long as Doha stops supporting al-Nusra.
Were that to happen, it would signal the spectacular closure of one of the key motives for the Syrian tragedy. The Obama administration had fully approved a Qatar to Turkey – via Saudi Arabia and Syria – gas pipeline as a means of trying to undermine Gazprom. It took a lot of dead bodies and horrific destruction for Doha to realize Moscow would never allow it.
CC0 / Pixabay /
Good or Bad for Russia? What Impact the Qatar Crisis Will Have on Natural Gas Prices
Thus Qatar's strategic pivot towards Russia – materialized, for instance, via Qatar's sovereign wealth fund investing $2.7 billion in Rosneft. This may be spelling out, in the medium term, a Qatar way more amenable to the Russia-Iran-Syria connection. Considering that Qatar hosts CENTCOM and is home to Al-'Udayd, the largest US military base in the Middle East, that certainly does not go down very well at the Pentagon. As far as the US game is concerned, it's terminally naïve to believe Washington would not have provided a green light to its Saudi satrap to go after Doha.
Add to it Qatar opening the first yuan clearing center in the Middle East; that's something that did not go down well with financial Masters of the Universe. In parallel, the much-lauded Trump $100 billion weapons deal announced in Riyadh may have been devised in exchange for the House of Saud delaying as long as possible Chinese oil payments in yuan that would bypass the petrodollar.
To weave conspiracy theories is an idle undertaking. "T.Rex" Tillerson, from his ExxonMobil days, knows the Qatari leadership quite well. And so does "Mad Dog" Mattis, former head of CENTCOM. Watch them; how they act in the follow-up will unveil at least some layers of the current shadow play – and whether the whole charade packs way more punch than mere House of Saud desperation.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.
ISIS Puppet Show Continues: Attacks Philippines, Australia, Britain and Now Iran
Posted in: Deep state, False flag operations, Iran, ISIS, Israel, Makia, New World Order, Philippines, Political science, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Terrorism, USA, Wahabbism, War, Zionism. Leave a comment
Source: ISIS Puppet Show Continues: Attacks Philippines, Australia, Britain and Now Iran | The Freedom Articles
The ISIS puppet show continues. In addition to recent attacks on the Philippines, Australia & Britain, ISIS has now attacked Iran. How do they do it?
The ISIS Puppet Show shows no sign
of abating in recent weeks, with the fanatical mercenary group miraculously branching out to somehow attack the Philippines, Australia, Britain and now even Iran. Yesterday on June 7th, 2017, ISIS has claimed responsibility for what was actually a twin attack on Iran. The attackers (some of whom were disguised as women) shocked Iran by simultaneously striking its Parliament building and the tomb of its revolutionary founder Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of the 1979 revolution. It was the worst terrorist attack in the Islamic republic for a long time, with 46 wounded and at least 12 killed. By calling it the "ISIS Puppet Show", I am in no way implying that the attacks are faked or hoaxed, nor am I making light of the fact that real innocent people are dying whenever ISIS carries out its brutal and barbaric attacks. However, the ISIS phenomenon always leads to more questions. How on earth is ISIS able to export its terror to both hemispheres and virtually every continent on earth? How is it able magically bypass the security of all these nations? Who is pulling the strings of the ISIS Puppet Show?
Bomb blasts as ISIS attacks Iranian Parliament. Image credit: PressTV & JamaranNews.
Twin ISIS attacks in Tehran, Iran. Image credit: PressTV
ISIS Attack on Iran: Both In Accord and Not in Accord with the Zionist-US Script
You can look at the ISIS attack on Iran from different perspectives. On one hand, is surprising since it appears to contradict the line that you hear coming from Israel, the Zionist Trump Administration and the US Deep State (Military Intelligence Complex) that Iran is "the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the world". Those groups are pushing that lie because they want to an excuse to subjugate and overtake Iran, who thus far has successfully resisted the Zionist-Saudi influence in that region. In many ways this ISIS attack will generate sympathy for Iran. Unfortunately for the propagators of the "Iran sponsors terrorism" myth, this ISIS attack on Iran contradicts the idea that Iran is the biggest funder of terrorism. It's giving Iran a platform to (rightfully) accuse Saudi Arabia, the home of the extreme Wahhabi brand of Islam that ISIS embraces, as being the true source and funder of international terrorism.
Are the Saudis Sending the Iranians a Message with their ISIS Takfiris?
However, on the other hand, it's important to remember the ISIS puppet show is a tool in the hands of US-UK-Zionist New World Order – and it's a tool that can be wielded in many ways. Up until a few months ago, ISIS was for 2 main purposes: to attack Assad in Syria and help allow US proxy forces to overthrow him, as well as to scare the crap out of the general public in Western countries like the US, UK, France, Germany, Australia and Canada with occasional false flag ops. Now, the scope has broadened; with ISIS attacking both the Philippines and Iran, it appears that the US-UK-Israeli puppetmasters are embarking upon a new strategy of directing their pet Frankenstein against "recalcitrant" leaders and nations that aren't falling into the line with the globalist NWO plan.
By using ISIS to directly attack Iran (who is both Israel's and Saudi Arabia's arch enemy), Saudi Arabia, emboldened by its recent weapons deal with the US, is no doubt sending a warning to Iran that it means business. Furthermore, this attack is sure to stir all sorts of up trouble in the turbulent Middle East. As mentioned above, Iran already reacted very quickly to the attack by accusing Saudi Arabia of masterminding it. This comes on the heels of stunning recent developments in the Gulf as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain and UAE (United Arab Emirates) have all cuts ties with Qatar (all of whom are members of the oil-exporting GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council]). Saudi Arabia has even closed its land border with Qatar! Why? Because the Saudis are demanding loyalty from Qatar and don't like how Qatar is maintaining friendly ties with Iran. Consequently, Qatar is now looking to Iran and Turkey for food supplies in the coming weeks.
Saudi Pot Calls the Qatari Kettle Black
On top of all that, Saudi Arabia is claiming that it's cutting off ties with Qatar because Qatar is funding too much terrorism! Pot calling the kettle black couldn't even begin to describe that one. It's an open secret that Saudi Arabia is hands down the biggest funder of terrorism in the entire world. Here is a quote from the article How Saudi Wahhabism Is the Fountainhead of Islamist Terrorism:
"It would be troublesome but perhaps acceptable for the House of Saud to promote the intolerant and extremist Wahhabi creed just domestically. But, unfortunately, for decades the Saudis have also lavishly financed its propagation abroad. Exact numbers are not known, but it is thought that more than $100 billion have been spent on exporting fanatical Wahhabism to various much poorer Muslim nations worldwide over the past three decades. It might well be twice that number. By comparison, the Soviets spent about $7 billion spreading communism worldwide in the 70 years from 1921 and 1991.
This appears to be a monumental campaign to bulldoze the more moderate strains of Islam, and replace them with the theo-fascist Saudi variety. Despite being well aware of the issue, Western powers continue to coddle the Saudis or, at most, protest meekly from time to time."
Think about those numbers for a moment. Russia's $7 billion on funding communism vs. Saudi Arabia's $100 billion on funding Wahhabism (which espouses violence and promotes Islamic terrorism). Think about how much war and destruction was undertaken by the US in the name of stopping the spread of communism. Yet, Saudi Arabia spends over 14 times more than Russia on a dangerous ideology and the US supports it with open arms, billion-dollar arms deals and the petrodollar arrangement.
Look who's behind the ISIS puppet show.
Islamic Terrorism: An Old, Old Game of the US-UK-Israeli Axis
Islamic terrorism, or more accurately, the Islamic terrorism psyop, is an old game that has been played for a long time by Britain, Israel and the United States. In the article Zionism vs Islam – Which is More Dangerous?, I discussed how the Israelis (especially agencies like the Mossad) have perfected the art of framing Arabs and Muslims for their Zionist terrorist attacks and false flag ops. Israeli leaders have created "Zio-Islamic terrorism" which has fooled most of the world into hating Muslims for the evil things that Israel planned.
The US has a history of using Islamic terrorism to its advantage too, starting in 1979 with the infamous mujahideen of Afghanistan who were tricked into helping the US achieve its geopolitical objective by pushing back against the USSR. The now deceased arch globalist Zbigniew Brzezinski always comes to mind when I think of how the West used Islamic terrorists as cannon fodder when he told them that the fight was just and that god was on their side.
The truly brilliant article Islamic Terrorism: Our Ally for 38 Years goes into great detail about the use of Islamic terrorism by the US for almost 4 decades, long before the ISIS puppet show:
"Islamic terrorists are wonderful instruments for proxy wars – they cost very little but fight fearlessly. They are a global resource that can be brought into any local conflict. They are also expendable – we use them when convenient and kill them when inconvenient.
If this shocks the conscience of people, it just means they haven't been paying keen attention. Consider the following examples:
Thomas Friedman of The New York Times wrote that we shouldn't attack ISIS in Syria; and we should even consider arming ISIS to overthrow Assad
John Kerry admitted, "U.S. tried to use ISIS to force Assad into negotiations."
Israeli military chief explained, "Israel prefers ISIS to Assad"
Israeli defense minister recounted, "ISIS never intentionally attacks us; and when it happened once, ISIS apologized immediately." Hello!
Hillary Clinton wrote, "Saudi Arabia and Qatar fund and arm ISIS."
Joe Biden, Gen. Martin Dempsey, Gen. Wesley Clark all have stated that US allies in the Middle East arm and fund Al Qaeda and ISIS.
Several State Department cables have clearly laid out how Saudi Arabia is the #1 source of funding for terrorism around the world – not just in the Middle East.
Ever wonder why we never go to war against or impose sanctions on these sponsors of terrorism? Heck we don't even condemn them!
What goes through a reader's mind when they see an article titled "Accepting Al Qaeda" that is published by Council on Foreign Relations – the think tank behind US foreign policy? Or when Hillary Clinton's chief foreign policy advisor wrote to her, "Al Qaeda is on our side"?"
See the original article for links to back up all its quotes. The game is rather obvious if you're paying attention – and rather funny when you consider that ISIS recruits were caught ordering the "Koran for Dummies". There are many more than 10 reasons that ISIS is a US-Israeli creation. The article continues on by referencing the spread of Islamic terrorism and ISIS throughout the world, particular to the Philippines:
"In Asia, we need to prevail upon Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines. Without them, we lose much of Asia to China. Sharia Law and Salafism are gaining momentum in Indonesia, which is a positive sign. Philippines' crazy leader, Duterte, has been too friendly with Russia and China. He will lose his popularity and get replaced if the ISIS affiliate – Abu Sayyaf – causes enough problems. If he fights back against ISIS, we will cry "human rights" and "Islamophobia" at the UN and impose sanctions."
The ISIS puppet show teleports itself to all corners of the earth, and now just happens to attack the Philippines. Image credit: David Icke
Finally, the article alludes to the possible plan the NWO conspirators may have to even use Islamic terrorism against China, the last of the 2 big enemies (alongside Russia) to be encircled and conquered:
"Moving forward, the biggest economic challenge for us will be China. However, it has an Achilles heel – the western province of Xinjiang that is predominantly made up of Muslims. With help from Turkey, we have already created in Xinjiang an Islamist movement that is calling for secession. China's One Belt One Road is very dependent on freight trains safely traveling through that region on their way to Europe. Our future Mujahideen in Xinjiang will come in handy if China starts to misbehave."
Why the US Love the Saudis So Much
The US loves Saudi Arabia, no matter how many women it stones to death, how many people it beheads and how many lashes it doles out to its free speech bloggers. What can compare with the Saudi network of mosques and madrases teaching militant Wahhabi Islam? The Saudis help the US do its dirty work in a way that no other nation can, as this article explains:
"It is clear that despite the New York Times attempting to make a connection between Saudi-funded indoctrination at mosques and madrasas and terrorism as ambiguous as possible, Saudi funding is the primary factor driving extremism and filling the ranks of terrorist organisations like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State.
Coupled with covert, indirect and direct military support when these extremists reach various battlefields around the world, Saudi-funded extremism represents what is essentially a mercenary expeditionary force, auxiliaries used in pursuit of modern day empire.
As witnessed in Libya and Syria, the purpose behind the United States and Europe supporting Saudi Arabia and turning an intentional blind-eye to its global network of extremist indoctrination and the terrorist organisations these networks feed into, is targeting and overthrowing governments the United States and Europe are incapable of overthrowing directly with military force.
Saudi-funded indoctrination filling the ranks of this virtual global mercenary force, can be used as a tool for regime change. Saudi-funded extremists were instrumental in overthrowing the Libyan government in 2011, and have led the fight to oust the Syrian government."
The ISIS puppet show is the latest installment of a decades-old plan to use fanatics, fools and mercenaries to get the job done.
Expect the ISIS Puppet Show to Continue
So now Iran has been hit. Will it stop here? No. Expect the ISIS puppet show to continue showing up in nations around the world who aren't toeing the NWO line. However, there's one place that ISIS has never hit, despite that fact it's right next door to their home base, and despite the fact they follow the kind of doctrine that encourages them to hate Christians, Shiites and Jews. That nation is Israel.
Wonder why?
*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WqIvxywUU0
*http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/638.htm
*http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/last-nights-tv-the-quran-channel-4-banged-up-five-867474.html
*http://annaqed.com/en/terrorism/saudi-arabia-wahhabism-and-the-spread-of-sunni-theofascism
*http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/06/qatar-talks-turkey-iran-providing-food-170607140629417.html
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/isis-recruits-order-koran-dummies/
*http://journal-neo.org/2017/05/31/islamic-state-in-asia-saudi-funding-and-naive-policymakers-endanger-region/
London Terror Attack: It's Time to Confront Wahhabism and Saudi Arabia
Posted in: Britain, Islam, London, Military, Political science, Saudi Arabia, Terrorism, Wahabbism. Leave a comment
Source: London Terror Attack: It's Time to Confront Wahhabism and Saudi Arabia
With permisson from
by John Wight
It is time for an honest conversation about Wahhabism, specifically the part this Saudi-sponsored ideology plays in radicalizing young Muslims both across the Arab and Muslim world and in the West, where in the UK people are dealing with the aftermath of yet another terrorist attack in which innocent civilians were butchered and injured, this time in London.
The US, British and French governments can no longer credibly claim to be serious about fighting terrorism or religious extremism while cosying up to what is a medieval kleptocracy in Riyadh. Just days prior to the attack in London it was reported that a UK government inquiry into the role of Saudi money in funding terrorism is likely to be shelved, due to the sensitive nature of its findings. The report was originally commissioned at the behest of the Liberal Democrats, while in coalition government with the Tories back in 2015. It was sanctioned by then Prime Minister David Cameron in return for Lib Dem parliamentary support for British airstrikes in Syria. Given that the British government just signed £3.5 billion worth of arms export licences to Saudi Arabia, the suppression of the report's findings is a scandal.
The Saudis have long enjoyed diplomatic and political support from successive British governments, based on its largesse as the biggest customer of UK arms sales, which according to the UK-based organization, Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT), has been worth £4.1 billion since 2015. Some of the weapons sold to the Saudis are being used in its on-going war in Yemen, where its forces have been engaged in war crimes and crimes against humanity.
There are also the billions in Saudi investment into London, especially in the city's lucrative property market. Money, as everyone knows, buys influence, including political influence, which is where we discern the pristine and unalloyed hypocrisy involved in demonizing Russia, Syria, and Iran, the countries that are in the front line against this medieval poison, while courting Saudi, Qatari, and other Gulf State business and money, where state-sanctioned imams spew out hate speech against 'apostates' and 'infidels' on a regular basis.
The most concerning development in recent years, however, vis-à-vis Saudi influence in the West, is the extent to which Riyadh has been funding the building of mosques as a way of promoting its ultra-conservative and puritanical interpretation of Islam, one completely incompatible with the 21st century.
In 2015 Germany's Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel came out in public and accused the Saudis of funding mosques in which extremism is regularly promoted. In an interview with the German magazine Bild am Sonntag, Mr Gabriel said, "We have to make clear to the Saudis that the time of looking away is over. Wahhabi mosques all over the world are financed by Saudi Arabia. Many Islamists who are a threat to public safety come from these communities in Germany."
Religious sectarianism and rigid adherence to an anti-human 7th century doctrine underpins what passes for justice in the kingdom itself. We are talking a country in which people are regularly and ritually beheaded, flogged, and even crucified for transgressing the law. In 2016 alone Saudi Arabia carried out 154 executions, many of those for non-violent crimes. Yet, regardless, for those who claim the mantle of democracy and human rights, slavishly defending the kingdom and its vile and barbaric practices has long been a received truth.
Let us be clear: Britain's longstanding alliance with Saudi Arabia benefits nobody apart from UK arms companies and their shareholders. It is undeniably an alliance inimical to the country's security, bringing its entire political establishment into disrepute as a consequence.
Three terrorist attacks in the space of three months carried out in the UK, in which civilians have been slaughtered, is an unacceptable price to pay for a foreign policy which at best is informed by cognitive dissonance and at worst sheer unadulterated mendacity.
Western governments cannot have it both ways; they cannot expect to defeat terrorism and protect their citizens while continuing to refuse to grasp the issue by its roots. The world is dealing with a malignant ideology, one that whether associated with Daesh, Nusra, or Saudi Arabia is the same. That this ideology has grown in traction in recent years is now self-evident, thus begging the question: what are we going to do about it?
People have the right to go out and enjoy themselves without being slaughtered. It is a fundamental right that unites people in London, Moscow, Paris, and Damascus. Those who would seek to deny them this right are the enemy of humanity and must be regarded and treated accordingly.
Make no mistake: the head of this Salafi-jihadi snake resides in Riyadh.
More articles by:John Wight
John Wight is the author of a politically incorrect and irreverent Hollywood memoir – Dreams That Die – published by Zero Books. He's also written five novels, which are available as Kindle eBooks. You can follow him on Twitter at @JohnWight1
John Pilger: Terror in Britain, What Did the Prime Minister Know?
Posted in: Britain, False flag operations, Lybia, Saudi Arabia, Terrorism, Wahabbism. Leave a comment
Source: Terror in Britain: What Did the Prime Minister Know?
by John Pilger
The unsayable in Britain's general election campaign is this. The causes of the Manchester atrocity, in which 22 mostly young people were murdered by a jihadist, are being suppressed to protect the secrets of British foreign policy.
Critical questions – such as why the security service MI5 maintained terrorist "assets" in Manchester and why the government did not warn the public of the threat in their midst – remain unanswered, deflected by the promise of an internal "review".
The alleged suicide bomber, Salman Abedi, was part of an extremist group, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, that thrived in Manchester and was cultivated and used by MI5 for more than 20 years.
The LIFG is proscribed by Britain as a terrorist organisation which seeks a "hardline Islamic state" in Libya and "is part of the wider global Islamist extremist movement, as inspired by al-Qaida".
The "smoking gun" is that when Theresa May was Home Secretary, LIFG jihadists were allowed to travel unhindered across Europe and encouraged to engage in "battle": first to remove Mu'ammar Gadaffi in Libya, then to join al-Qaida affiliated groups in Syria.
Last year, the FBI reportedly placed Abedi on a "terrorist watch list" and warned MI5 that his group was looking for a "political target" in Britain. Why wasn't he apprehended and the network around him prevented from planning and executing the atrocity on 22 May?
These questions arise because of an FBI leak that demolished the "lone wolf" spin in the wake of the 22 May attack – thus, the panicky, uncharacteristic outrage directed at Washington from London and Donald Trump's apology.
The Manchester atrocity lifts the rock of British foreign policy to reveal its Faustian alliance with extreme Islam, especially the sect known as Wahhabism or Salafism, whose principal custodian and banker is the oil kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Britain's biggest weapons customer.
This imperial marriage reaches back to the Second World War and the early days of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. The aim of British policy was to stop pan-Arabism: Arab states developing a modern secularism, asserting their independence from the imperial west and controlling their resources. The creation of a rapacious Israel was meant to expedite this. Pan-Arabism has since been crushed; the goal now is division and conquest.
In 2011, according to Middle East Eye, the LIFG in Manchester were known as the "Manchester boys". Implacably opposed to Mu'ammar Gadaffi, they were considered high risk and a number were under Home Office control orders – house arrest – when anti-Gadaffi demonstrations broke out in Libya, a country forged from myriad tribal enmities.
Suddenly the control orders were lifted. "I was allowed to go, no questions asked," said one LIFG member. MI5 returned their passports and counter-terrorism police at Heathrow airport were told to let them board their flights.
The overthrow of Gaddafi, who controlled Africa's largest oil reserves, had been long been planned in Washington and London. According to French intelligence, the LIFG made several assassination attempts on Gadaffi in the 1990s – bank-rolled by British intelligence. In March 2011, France, Britain and the US seized the opportunity of a "humanitarian intervention" and attacked Libya. They were joined by Nato under cover of a UN resolution to "protect civilians".
Last September, a House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee inquiry concluded that then Prime Minister David Cameron had taken the country to war against Gaddafi on a series of "erroneous assumptions" and that the attack "had led to the rise of Islamic State in North Africa". The Commons committee quoted what it called Barack Obama's "pithy" description of Cameron's role in Libya as a "shit show".
In fact, Obama was a leading actor in the "shit show", urged on by his warmongering Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, and a media accusing Gaddafi of planning "genocide" against his own people. "We knew… that if we waited one more day," said Obama, "Benghazi, a city the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world."
The massacre story was fabricated by Salafist militias facing defeat by Libyan government forces. They told Reuters there would be "a real bloodbath, a massacre like we saw in Rwanda". The Commons committee reported, "The proposition that Mu'ammarGaddafi would have ordered the massacre of civilians in Benghazi was not supported by the available evidence".
Britain, France and the United States effectively destroyed Libya as a modern state. According to its own records, Nato launched 9,700 "strike sorties", of which more than a third hit civilian targets. They included fragmentation bombs and missiles with uranium warheads. The cities of Misurata and Sirte were carpet-bombed. Unicef, the UN children's organisation, reported a high proportion of the children killed "were under the age of ten".
More than "giving rise" to Islamic State — ISIS had already taken root in the ruins of Iraq following the Blair and Bush invasion in 2003 — these ultimate medievalists now had all of north Africa as a base. The attack also triggered a stampede of refugees fleeing to Europe.
Cameron was celebrated in Tripoli as a "liberator", or imagined he was. The crowds cheering him included those secretly supplied and trained by Britain's SAS and inspired by Islamic State, such as the "Manchester boys".
To the Americans and British, Gadaffi's true crime was his iconoclastic independence and his plan to abandon the petrodollar, a pillar of American imperial power. He had audaciously planned to underwrite a common African currency backed by gold, establish an all-Africa bank and promote economic union among poor countries with prized resources. Whether or not this would have happened, the very notion was intolerable to the US as it prepared to "enter" Africa and bribe African governments with military "partnerships".
The fallen dictator fled for his life. A Royal Air Force plane spotted his convoy, and in the rubble of Sirte, he was sodomised with a knife by a fanatic described in the news as "a rebel".
Having plundered Libya's $30 billion arsenal, the "rebels" advanced south, terrorising towns and villages. Crossing into sub-Saharan Mali, they destroyed that country's fragile stability. The ever-eager French sent planes and troops to their former colony "to fight al-Qaida", or the menace they had helped create.
On 14 October, 2011, President Obama announced he was sending special forces troops to Uganda to join the civil war there. In the next few months, US combat troops were sent to South Sudan, Congo and the Central African Republic. With Libya secured, an American invasion of the African continent was under way, largely unreported.
In London, one of the world's biggest arms fairs was staged by the British government. The buzz in the stands was the "demonstration effect in Libya". The London Chamber of Commerce and Industry held a preview entitled "Middle East: A vast market for UK defence and security companies". The host was the Royal Bank of Scotland, a major investor in cluster bombs, which were used extensively against civilian targets in Libya. The blurb for the bank's arms party lauded the "unprecedented opportunities for UK defence and security companies."
Last month, Prime Minister Theresa May was in Saudi Arabia, selling more of the £3 billion worth of British arms which the Saudis have used against Yemen. Based in control rooms in Riyadh, British military advisers assist the Saudi bombing raids, which have killed more than 10,000 civilians. There are now clear signs of famine. A Yemeni child dies every 10 minutes from preventable disease, says Unicef.
The Manchester atrocity on 22 May was the product of such unrelenting state violence in faraway places, much of it British sponsored. The lives and names of the victims are almost never known to us.
This truth struggles to be heard, just as it struggled to be heard when the London Underground was bombed on July 7, 2005. Occasionally, a member of the public would break the silence, such as the east Londoner who walked in front of a CNN camera crew and reporter in mid-platitude. "Iraq!" he said. "We invaded Iraq. What did we expect? Go on, say it."
At a large media gathering I attended, many of the important guests uttered "Iraq" and "Blair" as a kind of catharsis for that which they dared not say professionally and publicly.
Yet, before he invaded Iraq, Blair was warned by the Joint Intelligence Committee that "the threat from al-Qaida will increase at the onset of any military action against Iraq … The worldwide threat from other Islamist terrorist groups and individuals will increase significantly".
Just as Blair brought home to Britain the violence of his and George W Bush's blood-soaked "shit show", so David Cameron, supported by Theresa May, compounded his crime in Libya and its horrific aftermath, including those killed and maimed in Manchester Arena on 22 May.
The spin is back, not surprisingly. Salman Abedi acted alone. He was a petty criminal, no more. The extensive network revealed last week by the American leak has vanished. But the questions have not.
Why was Abedi able to travel freely through Europe to Libya and back to Manchester only days before he committed his terrible crime? Was Theresa May told by MI5 that the FBI had tracked him as part of an Islamic cell planning to attack a "political target" in Britain?
In the current election campaign, the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has made a guarded reference to a "war on terror that has failed". As he knows, it was never a war on terror but a war of conquest and subjugation. Palestine. Afghanistan. Iraq. Libya. Syria. Iran is said to be next. Before there is another Manchester, who will have the courage to say that?
John Pilger can be reached through his website: www.johnpilger.com
More articles by:John Pilger
Donald of Arabia: Trump in the Middle East
Posted in: History, Imperialism, ISIS, Israel, Middle East, Political science, Presstitutes, Religion, Saudi Arabia, Terrorism, Trumpf, USA, Wahabbism, War. Leave a comment
Source: Donald of Arabia: Trump in the Middle East
by Robert Fisk
Not since Ibn Batuta, travelled the Middle East in the 14th century has anyone set out with higher ambitions that Donald Trump. Batuta, a Moroccan Muslim traveller and scholar, had a few things in common with Trump. He reached what is now Saudi Arabia. He went to Jerusalem. He even had a keen eye for nubile ladies – there were a few wives, not to mention a Greek slave girl to be groped. But there the parallels end. For Ibn Batuta was sane.
Yet now we know that Trump thinks he's touching the three monotheistic religions because he's going to Riyadh, Jerusalem and then the Vatican (not quite in the Middle East but what's a hundred miles for a guy like Trump). A few problems, of course. He can't go to Holy Mecca because Christians are banned and the old king of Saudi Arabia represents a head-chopping Wahabi autocracy some of whose citizens have paid for – and fought alongside – the dreaded Isis which Trump thinks he is fighting.
Then when he goes to Jerusalem, he will meet Benjamin Netanyahu who hardly represents world Jewry and plans to go on thieving Arab lands in the West Bank for Jews, and Jews only, whatever Trump thinks. Then he'll turn up at the Vatican to confront a man who – great guy though he may be – only represents Roman Catholics and doesn't much like Trump anyway. Ibn Batuta was away from home for around a quarter of a century. Thank heavens Trump's cutting that back to three days.
Of course, he's no more going to be talking to "Islam" in Saudi Arabia than he is "Judaism" in Jerusalem. The Sunni Saudis are going to talk about crushing the "snake" of Shia Iran – and we must remember that Trump is the crackpot who shed crocodile tears over the Sunni babies killed in Syria last month but none for the Shia babies killed in Syria a few days later – and hope they can re-establish real relations between their execution-happy kingdom with the execution-happy US. Trump might just try to read UN rapporteur Ben Emmerson's latest report on the imprisonment of human rights defenders and the torture of "terror" suspects in Saudi Arabia. No. Forget it.
Anyway, the king is no imam. Any more than Netanyahu is a rabbi. But Jerusalem will be a great gig because Trump will be able to ask Netanyahu for help against Isis without – presumably – realising that Israel bombs only the Syrian army and the Shia Hezbollah in Syria but has never – ever – bombed Isis in Syria. In fact, the Israelis have given medical aid to fighters from Jabhat al-Nusra, which is part of al-Qaeda which (maybe Trump has heard of this) attacked the United States on 9/11. So maybe the Vatican will be a relief.
Of course, Trump might have dropped by Lebanon to meet Patriarch Beshara Rai, a Christian prelate who at least lives in the Middle East and who might have been able to tell Trump a few home truths about Syria. Or, since Trump would be "honoured" to meet the Great Leader of North Korea, he might even have shocked the world by dropping by for a couple of hours with Bashar al-Assad. At least Ibn Batuta got to Damascus.
But no, Trump is searching for "friends and partners" to fight "terrorism" – something which has never, of course, been inflicted on Yemen by Saudi Arabia or on Lebanon and the Palestinians by Israel. Nor will it be mentioned by the boys and girls of CNN, ABC and all the US media titans who will – in the interest of promoting their importance by pretending that their President is not mad – grovellingly follow their crackpot President around the region with all the usual nonsense about "policies" and "key players" and "moderates" (as in "moderate Saudi Arabia") and all the other fantastical creatures which they inject into their reports.
Oh yes, and Trump also wants to bring "peace" to the Holy Land. And so he will move from the king of head choppers to the thief of Palestinian lands and end up with the poor old Holy Father who is wisely giving the President only a few early-morning minutes before his weekly general audience. Since the Pope described Trump's views as "not Christian" – an unsaintly thing for Pope Francis to say of a mentally ill man – and Trump called the Pope's words "disgraceful", this is not going to be a barrel of laughs.
But then again, the Pope shook the hand of the Sultan of Egypt only a week ago, the equally saintly Field Marshal President Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi, whose coup overthrew an elected president and who now "disappears" his enemies. Trump should be a piece of cake after that. Ibn Batuta, by the way, got as far as Beijing in his travels but was never "honoured" to meet the "smart cookie" who was ruling in Korea (which did actually exist in the 14th century).
But being a verbose chap, Ibn Batuta did record his homecoming in these words: "I have indeed … attained my desire in this world, which was to travel through the Earth, and I have attained this honour, which no ordinary person has attained." That's a real "honour" by the way. But you couldn't fit Ibn Batuta into a tweet.
Robert Fisk writes for the Independent, where this column originally appeared.
More articles by:Robert Fisk
Sunnis Distance Themselves From Radical Salafist Muslims and Takfiri Terrorism
Posted in: ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, Islam, Jihad, Makia, Media, Saudi Arabia, Terrorism, Wahabbism, Zionism. Leave a comment
Source: Sunnis Distance Themselves From Radical Salafist Muslims & Takfiri Terrorism | The Freedom Articles
toolsforfreedom.com
At the International Islamic Conference in 2016, Sunni Muslims re-defined Sunni Islam and distanced themselves from radical Salafist, Wahhabist and Takfiri terrorism.
Salafist Muslims in general,
and Saudi Arabia (the home of many Salafists) in particular, did not like an event which took place in August 2016 at Grozny, Chechnya, Russia. This under-publicized event was an international Islamic Conference. Over 200 leading Sunni imams, scholars and clerics, including from Egypt, India, Russia, Syria, Turkey, Britain, Lebanon, South Africa and Jordan, attended. The purpose of the conference was to bring Muslims together and to answer the question of what it meant to be a Sunni Muslim. The Sunni leaders in attendance made a point of distancing themselves and disassociating from Salafist people and groups, the most famous of which is ISIS. According to many commentators, this important event didn't receive the wide coverage that it should have due to the influence of Saudi Arabia, who assert that the conference was designed to exclude Wahhabi Salafism.
Salafist, Wahhabi and Takfiri
The key Sunni leaders at the conference made it clear that the radical, violent and murderous actions of some Arabs calling themselves Muslims (Salafist, Wahhabi or Takfiri) did not represent Islam. Although the main 2 sects of Islam are Sunni and Shia, there are some smaller branches. Salafist, Wahhabist and Takfiri Muslims are the kind of extremists some associate with radical Islamic terrorism. The 3 terms are often used interchangeably, although technically, a Salafist is one who practices fundamental Islam (from the Arabic term "salad" [predecessors, ancestors] used to identify the earliest Muslims). Wahhabism is synonymous with Salafism and is named after Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, a fundamentalist Muslim who lived in Saudi Arabia from 1703-1792. Takfiri denotes a Muslim who accuses another Muslim of apostasy (i.e. being a non-believer or kafir). The accusation itself is called a takfir. Many writers now refer to groups like ISIS as Salafist-Takfiri, because they claim the right to declare, as they see fit and according to their interpretation of Muhammad's teachings and Islam, any Muslim an apostate, as well as any non-Muslim.
Sunni leaders at the International Islamic Conference.
Significance of the Islamic Conference: Changing the Perception of Islam in the West
According to this article in the Indian website First Post:
"The globally renowned Sunni Islamic scholars and clergy unanimously took a stand that the Takfiri terrorists, who loudly claim to belong to 'Sunni' Islam, are not from among the Ahlus Sunnah (the Islamic terminology for the mainstream Sunni Muslims in the world) …
Having said that, Sheikh Ahmad al-Tayeb allegedly excluded the "Salafists" from the term of Ahluls Sunna (Sunnis) stating that Salafists – also known as Wahhabis – are not from among the Sunnis. This was, probably the first time that the global Sunni Islamic scholars have disassociated themselves so clearly from the Salafists, who also claim to be the Ahluls Sunna or 'Sunnis'.
Though this report has not received the media attention it deserved, it should be caught up as one of the most underlying news emanating from the Muslim world."
The article goes to emphasize that the Islamic Conference was all about denouncing takfiri terrorism in the strongest possible terms and the Sunnis distancing themselves from it. It is reasonable to assume that part of the motivation for doing this is to change the perception of Islam in the West, which is probably at an all-time low:
"Given the significance of this epoch-making conference, the participating religious leaders called the conference a "significant turning point to correct the treacherous and lethal deviation from the true definition of Ahlus Sunna, as a result of the extremists' attempts to hijack this glorious epithet, misusing it for themselves" …
Notably, the Sunni leaders of the Chechnya conference have recommended the establishment of a national television channel, at the level of Russia, whose objective would be to "communicate the true image of Islam.""
The conference speech of Cairo Grand Imam Dr. Ahmed el-Tayeb is said to have included this quote:
""Terrorists and Islam have no relation whatsoever, instead these terrorists are inclined towards spreading a radical ideology among Muslims, so that Islam is misunderstood world over.""
The article Grozny Conference: The First International Conference Dedicated To Answering The Question: Who Are The Sunnis? praised the aim of the conference:
"For the first time in nearly 50 years, Sunni Muslims are challenging the ideology that sustains the genocidal wars waged by groups like al-Qaeda and its derivatives who are waging wars with the intent to purge countries from people who are not followers of "true Islam" as they define it."
The points emphasized at the conference echo a point I made in an earlier article The True Meaning of Jihad: that the term jihad really means the inner spiritual struggle, not outer violent action.
It is the understatement of the century to say that Islam has a PR problem in the West. It is a positive move to see leading Islamic figures make a strong proclamation of their values and have a public discussion of what Islam is and what it is not. Through the treachery and deception of Zionism, plus the unfortunate radical and violent acts of some who have twisted Islam and used it as justification for murder, Islam has become a feared and hated concept in many Western parts of the world including the US, Europe and Australia.
Hopefully, more people can begin to see the shades of grey with the whole topic of Islam, and move out of fear, rather than having their beliefs and opinions manipulated by the Zionist MSM – who are using sophisticated perception management techniques to advance their geopolitical agenda in the Middle East and attempt to bring about a New World Order.
*http://www.firstpost.com/world/islamic-conference-in-chechnya-why-sunnis-are-disassociating-themselves-from-salafists-2998018.html
*http://english.aawsat.com/2016/11/article55362476/al-azhars-grand-imam-speech-not-exclude-sect-grozny
*http://www.reasonedcomments.org/2016/09/the-first-international-conference.html
*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/the-true-meaning-of-jihad/
Will Trump Dump The Wahabbi Autocrats?
Posted in: Iran, Iraq, ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, Islam, Israel, Political science, Terrorism, Trumpf, Wahabbism, War. 1 Comment
Source: Will Trump Dump The Wahabbi Autocrats? | New Eastern Outlook
journal-neo.org
Caleb Maupin
US leaders almost always justify their foreign policy with words about "democracy" and "human rights." Especially when talking about the Middle East, the insincerity of such words are blatantly obvious. While US leaders criticize Iran and Syria for alleged human rights violations, the entire world can see that the US allies in the region are serial human rights violators.
Israel has been widely condemned for its treatment of Palestinians. Saudi Arabia is a country where even the basic notion of human rights does not exist. The Kingdom is an absolute monarchy where people can still be executed by beheading or crucifixion in the 21st century. Crimes punishable by death under the Saudi regime include "sorcery" and "insulting the King." Under Saudi law, the people are not citizens with rights, but rather "subjects" who are essentially the King's property.
Qatar is yet another repressive regime. Like Saudi Arabia, it is an absolute monarchy, where a King serves as the unelected autocrat.
Bahrain is known not only for its lack of democratic structures, but for its repression of the Shia Muslim majority who frequently take to the streets, demanding their rights.
The United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Jordan, and almost every other US-aligned regime in the Arab world has a primitive political system, centered on an autocratic monarchy. These regimes are known to torture, behead, flog, repress free speech, oppress religious minorities, and do all kinds of things US leaders claim to oppose.
This does not prevent the United States from selling weapons to these regimes, or from purchasing their oil. This also does not prevent the USA from establishing military bases on their soil, and otherwise coddling them.
In fact, the Financial Times describes how the United Arab Emirates is becoming a beloved "tax haven" for the rich and powerful in the western world. While western leaders love to talk about human rights, they have no problem with autocratic emirates handling their money.
The Roots of Wahabbi Terrorism
More shockingly, the involvement of these regimes in terrorism has not deterred US support. It took 15 years for the classified 28 pages of the 9/11 Commission report to be released. The pages revealed that Saudi government officials had collaborated with the 9/11 hijackers. It furthermore revealed that Saudi Arabia had been uncooperative and offered minimal support to US officials with their investigations during the aftermath of the attacks.
The Saudi Royal family owes its reign to the British Empire. During the 1800s the British discovered that the House of Saud were useful allies against the Ottoman Empire, and were more than willing to sell their oil at a reasonable price. The Saudi monarchy professes a particularly conservative brand of Islam known as "Wahabbism."
While not every Wahabbi has been involved in terrorism, Al-Queda, ISIS, Al-Nusra, Osama Bin Laden, Omar Mateen, and nearly every Middle-Eastern or Central-Asian terrorist who has menaced the world in recent years has been an adherent of Wahabbism. Wahabbism is particularly anti-Western and anti-American. Opponents of the Saudi ideology it often call it "Takfirism," a term that refers to Wahabbi's willingness to kill other Muslims with whom they disagree.
The relationship between Wahabbi fanatics and Britain's wealthy has not ended. A recent article in the Financial Times describes how British Houses of Finance now specialize in "Islamic Banking." While many Islamic scholars describe the very concept as fraudulent, many financial institutions are accommodating sultans, emirates, and princes who adhere to strict Wahabbi laws. Islam forbids lending money for interest, so many financial institutions have invented loopholes with hidden fees, investment returns, and other mechanisms that can accommodate strict adherents.
During the 1980s, the CIA worked with the heir of a wealthy Saudi construction dynasty to build a Wahabbi army. Osama bin Laden was sent to Afghanistan to build an army of "Mujihadeen" to topple the People's Democratic Party. The USA worked closely with the fanatical Wahabbi terrorists to battle the Marxist government of Afghanistan and their Soviet allies.
Currently, the United States works with Saudi Arabia to fund a Wahabbi insurgency against the secular Syrian Arab Republic. ISIS and Al-Nusra are known to be terrorists inspired by the Saudi ideology. The Saudis have been caught directly helping them out. Among the US backed "moderate rebels," many Wahabbis can also be found.
Most of the various US-aligned autocracies in the Middle East can be linked to Wahabbi forces in Syria. Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, and other regimes have made the goal of "regime change" in Syria a priority, and many ISIS fighters have emerged from their respective populations.
Is The Tide Turning?
While the past three presidencies of Bush, Obama, and Clinton have involved massive coddling of the Saudi regime, Donald Trump often spoke against Saudi Arabia during his Presidential campaign. Furthermore, in a recent move, the US Congress dramatically overrode Barack Obama's veto, and passed the controversial JASTA bill, allowing victims of terrorism to sue the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in US courts.
While Trump often appealed to ignorant and Islamophobic sentiments among Americans, he also appealed to an isolationist desire to stop meddling around the world. Trump made fighting ISIS, the Wahabbi extremist group unleashed amid US-Saudi regime change efforts, a key plank of his campaign.
Will Trump live up to his words? Will the USA end its alliance with Pro-Wahabbi autocratic regimes that are linked to terrorism?
Though Trump spoke against the Saudis and talked of fighting ISIS, his campaign included reckless denunciations of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Trump's speeches often seemed to lump Iran in with ISIS, ignoring the fact that Iranian Revolutionary Guards are on the battlefield each and every day, risking their lives to defeat ISIS.
Iran is greatly threatened by ISIS terrorism. ISIS and most Wahabbis consider the Islamic Republic of Iran to be led by "Shia Apostates." ISIS and other anti-government forces in Syria have recruited fighters from around the world on the basis of toppling Syrian President Bashar Assad because of his Alawi faith, which Wahabbis consider to be a variation of Shia apostasy.
Contradictory Middle East Positions
For too long, the USA has been targeting secular, nationalist governments like the Baathist regimes of Iraq and Syria, the Islamic Republic of Iran, or Gaddafi's Libya. In doing so they have been passively helping and strengthening the bloodthirsty Wahabbi fanatics who these regimes have held back, and whose ideological foundation is promoted by Saudi Arabia.
If Trump is serious about stopping ISIS and the surrounding wave of Wahabbi terrorism, he will immediately end the US financial and military relationship with the Saudi regime, as well as the nearby, pro-Wahabbi autocracies.
Furthermore, Trump will need to end his irresponsible demonization of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and join with the Iranians, the Russians, the Syrian government, and China in the fight against ISIS terrorism.
If Trump were to do this, it would be one of the most dramatic shifts ever seen in US foreign policy.
During his campaign, Trump has taken two somewhat contradictory positions in relation to the Middle East. While he has denounced Saudi Arabia and talked about how US "regime change" policies have strengthened terrorism, he has also repeated the anti-Iranian talking points of Netanyahu, and spoken with great admiration for Israel.
Israel has been the greatest direct beneficiary of the US policy in the Middle East. Each regime the US has targeted in the region–Syria, Iraq, and Iran–have been outspoken opponents of Israel who directly support Palestinian resistance. Meanwhile, the Wahabbi-linked autocrats denounce Israel in words, but do very little to threaten its existence or strength.
Israel's primary enemies, Iran and Syria, are also the primary target of the Wahabbi fanatics and the Saudi monarchy. Israeli and Saudi Arabia may denounce each other, but their foreign policies both center on hostility to what the Saudis call "the Shia crescent."
Regarding the Middle East, the new President will be forced to decide whether he seeks to continue aligning US and Israel foreign policies, and targeting Iran and Syria, or whether he wants to end Wahabbi terrorism, and stop cooperating with the regimes actively linked to it.
Trump is often perceived as quite unpredictable. Whichever choice he makes, it is likely to surprise many people.