Showing posts with label Saudi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Saudi. Show all posts

Wednesday, 3 February 2016

The Three Types of Sectarianism - Washington Institute

A recent article published by the Washington Institute interestingly separates sectarianism into three types.

1) Institutionalized Sectarianism
2) Incidental Sectarianism
3) Exploitative Sectarianism

Institutionalized Sectarianism
"Some groups and states have integrated sectarian themes into the very fabric of their political, cultural, and educational systems. Sectarianism, in other words, has been institutionalized. "
Institutionalized Sectarianism is by far the most dangerous and most difficult form of sectarianism to counter. Examples of this include the likes of Saudi Arabia's Wahhabism and Iran's 'Governance of the Jurists', meaning a regime overseen by scholars. The article goes on to say that this is something ISIS is also seeking to achieve.

Incidental Sectarianism
"...as its name implies, does not involve a deliberate effort to implement a sectarian agenda. Sectarianism does not play a central role in a state or group's objectives, even if there are overtones of it."
Incidental Sectarianism is a form of sectarianism that is evident in conflicts even if that was not the reason for the conflict. The Syrian civil war is an example of this whereby the struggle is not to eradicate the Alawite, but rather the Alawi regime from leadership - but at the same time the opposition uses sectarianism to bolster their ranks. 

Exploitative Sectarianism
"Finally, there is exploitative sectarianism, a category that characterizes the tactics and nature of many of the most violent actors in the region."
The article suggests that most of the larger Jihadi organisations today exploit sectarianism to recruit and to achieve political goals however one could argue that the West not only exploit sectarianism but help in institutionalizing it for their own gains in the Middle East. 


Wednesday, 19 August 2015

The US are joint perpetrators of the Yemen invasion

Source: http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/08/19/425356/US-expands-role-in-Saudi-war-on-Yemen

This article sums up the Saudi aggression on Yemen. It comes as no surprise to see that it is American intelligence that gives Saudi the locations in which to drop its bombs (that were also bought off America to aid in their economy).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The United States has more than doubled the number of its military staff “providing intelligence, munitions and midair refueling” for Saudi Arabia’s airstrikes on Yemen.
The number of so-called American advisors working at joint military operations centers in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain has risen from 20 to 45, The Los Angeles Times reports.
In addition, US warships have also helped enforce a naval blockade in the Gulf of Aden and southern Arabian Sea.
US officials stress the sea cordon is intended to prevent weapons shipments to Ansarullah fighters.
However, human rights groups say the blockade has hindered imports of basic commodities, including food and fuel, to the impoverished nation.
Saudi Arabia launched its military aggression against Yemen on March 26 – without a UN mandate – in an effort to undermine Yemen’s popular Houthi Ansarullah movement, whose fighters had forced the US-backed president, Abd Rabbuh Mansour Hadi, into exile.
A US special operations team was deployed at al-Anad, the country’s largest airbase, to collect intelligence and launch drone strikes in southern Yemen, until it was driven out in March as Ansarullah fighters advanced.
American officials said last week that they will not deploy the team back to Yemen until Hadi, the fugitive former president, is restored to power.
The humanitarian situation has become critical in Yemen, with many international aid organizations seeking a safe passage into the country to supply medical and humanitarian supplies to the most affected people.
Human rights group Amnesty International said in a report that the Saudi airstrikes have mostly pounded populated areas with no identifiable military targets nearby, leaving a "bloody trail of civilian death."
The onslaught has claimed more than 4,300 lives and forced more than 1.3 million others from their homes since March, according to United Nations agencies.

Monday, 15 June 2015

Saudi bombing Yemen on behalf of the U.S.

#Saudi bombing #Yemen on behalf of the #US #MuslimsSalvageYourselves

It has been proven that Saudi are now using cluster bombs to attack Muslims in Yemen. Note that it is not just the Houthi's being targeted as the attacks have not in any way, shape or form been targeting rebels but rather has been random attacks to destroy the infrastructure of Yemen including schools, roads, airports and industry as well as innocent Muslim lives. Human Rights Watch has reported the use of such weaponry with photo evidence as well as proof of the trade deals between Saudi and US to acquire such sophisticated and destructive bombs that should never be used in any type of war due to their uncoordinated use which will inevitably kill more civilians than it would strike actual targets.

"Bombs containing BLU-97 submunitions were transferred by the United States to Saudi Arabia as part of arms sales announced in the early 1990s". ~ Human Rights Watch

Dear Muslims, salvage yourselves. Account the rulers that disobey Allah (swt) when the Prophet ﷺ  said: "The wiping away of the World means less to Allah than a Believer to be killed unjustly" Ibn Maja 






Monday, 1 June 2015

Tension between #Cairo and #Riyadh escalates over #Brotherhood in #Syria and #Yemen - MidEastMonitor

Sources: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/middle-east/18963-tension-between-cairo-and-riyadh-escalates-over-brotherhood-in-syria-and-yemen


Official sources in Egypt have said that Cairo has conveyed to Riyadh its concern over what it describes as "an exaggeration" in opening up to the Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab world and "attempts to rely on the group in resolving the crisis" in Yemen and containing the situation in Syria. This, claims the Egyptian regime, will definitely lead to adverse consequences for regional stability; once the Brotherhood seizes the reins of government in certain Arab countries with the help of Saudi Arabia it will not stop there but will seek to seize control over all Arab capitals.
"Saudi Arabia itself," said one source, "despite its tight internal security policy, may find itself facing a new predicament associated with the Brotherhood, just like the other Gulf States. In this regard we have been talking to our brothers in the United Arab Emirates in an attempt to raise the issue quietly within the framework of the Gulf Cooperation Council."
There is widespread dismay within the folds of the Syrian opposition, he added, because of the enhanced communication between Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood there in parallel with Turkish military support for Syrian factions affiliated with the movement in one way or another. European diplomatic sources have told Al-Shorouk that the countries they represent have informed Cairo, directly or indirectly, that any vision of the political future of Syria after Assad cannot exclude the Brotherhood in the way that Egypt wants.
According to the same Europeans, it is not possible to expect Saudi Arabia to counter the increasing involvement of Lebanon's Hezbollah in support of Bashar Al-Assad in Syria without Riyadh taking action in order to mobilise what it considers to be the "likely Sunni" alternative. This is a reference to the Sunni forces that are not part of the ISIS umbrella; the Saudis consider the moves by Hezbollah to be a Shia dynamic supported by Iran, Riyadh's arch enemy.
In the meantime, officials in Cairo say that the Egyptian regime has received an unequivocal message about the rise in the level of discomfort among Yemeni factions opposed to the Houthi expansion as a result of the rise in Saudi support for the Brotherhood in the country. He added that leaders of the Yemeni factions have told Cairo of their displeasure with the political prescription that may come out of the ongoing communication between Saudi Arabia and the Islamic movement. "I think that they do not object to allocating a share for the Brotherhood but they can see that Saudi Arabia is heading towards offering the movement a majority and not just a share."
As for the Saudis themselves, according to Arab and Western diplomatic sources they do not intend to change their strategy or ideas regarding Yemen. "With regards to Yemen," said one European ambassador in the Egyptian capital, "we know very clearly that Riyadh is angry because of what it considers to be balking on the part of Cairo and a failure to provide support. The House of Saud does not intend to listen to what the Egyptians have to say. With Syria, the matter may be slightly different, whereby Riyadh will seek to ensure Egyptian support of some kind. It will proceed with formulating something and then will ask Cairo to support it, but it will not move in conjunction with Cairo."
The Egyptian government has told the Saudis that it understands their concern regarding the Iranian expansion "We share some of that concern," said a diplomatic source. "However, at the same time we do not want to confront religious forces with other religious forces."
He acknowledges that Riyadh is accusing Cairo of hindering its moves that are aimed at grouping together political formulations with a Brotherhood base in both Yemen and Syria. "We cannot support the ascension of the Brotherhood to power in any Arab state, however; for us this is a closed case."
Egyptian officials across various sectors keep reiterating the same phrases about the Turkey-Qatar concord intended to boost the ascension of the Muslim Brotherhood to power in as many Arab capitals as possible in what they insist is a move prompted from within some political circles in Washington which want to put Islamists in power. The talk in this regard is focused on the White House and not the State Department.

Wednesday, 20 May 2015

Reality of the #Yemen Civil War

Reality of the ‪#‎Yemen‬ Civil War
The Iranian Government have stopped financial assistance to Islamic Jihad, a Gaza-based militia because of its inability or reluctance to engage in the Yemen war between essentially the Sunni and Shia.
Islamic Jihad has asserted repeatedly that it is taking a neutral position regarding the Yemeni issue but this was not a valid excuse for Tehran to keep on funding this movement and therefore it has forced the group to look for donors elsewhere. It is facing a severe financial crisis and has closed the head office of its main satellite TV channel, Palestine Today.
It's interesting to see how easily these groups can disintegrate as soon as funding from the big Arab donors such as Saudi, Qatar, UAE and Iran suddenly stop. We all know these corrupt Arab rulers have been in the pockets of the West for a long time due to their policies and wars always benefiting the West.
In effect this is proof to show how many of these militias that are fighting the US' proxy wars are fragile and depend on the US via its allies in the region.
"One of its senior officials in Gaza, Hisham Salem, has established a new group called "Al-Saberoon", which is in full ideological and political agreement with Iran. Its members, apparently, get paid full salaries every month" Al Quds Newspaper reported.
It'll be more interesting to see how the new splinter group 'Al-Saberoon' plays a part in the Yemen civil war and directs its fighters into the heart of the battle to create more fitna in the already deteriorating region.

Thursday, 12 February 2015

Speculation: Did the West offer Russia economic incentives in return for Ukraine peace deal?

http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/hariri-forestalls-arming-lebanese-military


It's interesting to see how such major deals for arms shipment were previously stalled but now going through right after the peace deal agreement for Ukraine. Could this be one of the agreements between the West and Russia?


From Source:

Former Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri did not make good on his promises to make the appropriations necessary to finalize the arms deal signed by the Lebanese army and the Russian government. The United States and Saudi Arabia support Hariri’s delay, while the army is in the midst of an ongoing confrontation with takfiri terrorist groups on the eastern border with Syria.
The Lebanese army should not be supplied with Russian weapons, though it desperately needs them for its battle against takfiri terrorist groups. This is a logical deduction from the arms deal’s hiatus, brought about by a failure to make the proposed $500 million appropriations. These appropriations were supposed to come out of a $1 billion grant from Saudi Arabia to the Lebanese army and security forces, the spending of which is being supervised by former Prime Minister Saad Hariri.
During a visit to Moscow last January, a large delegation of the Lebanese army leadership headed by the chief of staff, Brigadier General Walid Salman, put the finishing touches on an order of Russian weapons. They carefully determined the types of weapons they needed and signed the contracts. The weapons are ready to be transferred to Lebanon as soon as Hariri makes the appropriations, something he promised to do “within 48 hours.”

This raises questions about the reason behind Hariri’s position. Do the Saudis not want this number of weapons reaching the Lebanese army in its confrontation with terrorist groups in the hills along the eastern border, so as to keep the area a bleeding wound for Hezbollah? Or is it pressure by the US, which is opposed to the idea of diversifying weapons sources for the Lebanese army, in order to keep it dependent on US weapons exclusively?

Lebanon has a prior experience with the US blocking a Russian arms shipment to the army in 2010. Wikileaks documents revealed that the US ambassador in Beirut at the time, Michele Sison, worked with then-assistant secretary of state (current US ambassador to Beirut) David Hill to block the gift. She informed then-Lebanese Defense Minister Elias al-Murr of her country’s objection to the Russian deal which included 10 MiG-29 fighter aircrafts. Murr promised her to do what is necessary to “dilute this” and guarantee that “Lebanon would not accept this delivery before 2040.”

Tuesday, 10 February 2015

Sisi securing funding on the wishes of the West

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/africa/16851-the-many-faces-of-abdel-fatah-al-sisi

Abdel Fatah Al-Sisi is an actor of some talent. To the revolutionary leaders in Tahrir Square, and to the youth leaders he met, he was the general who told them the army was on their side. To Egypt's first democratically elected president, he was the religiously observant officer, whose hands shook when told he would replace Mohammed Tantawi as commander-in-chief. To liberals like Mohammed elBaradei, Sisi was the man who would get rid of Morsi and hand over power to a civilian government. To America, Europe and Israel, he was a westerner. To Nasserites, an Arab nationalist.
But sometime, somewhere, Sisi would be caught without a script, off-mic, revealing his real thoughts and personality. This has now happened in a series of leaks of recorded conversations of his senior officials. In earlier leaks, they were allegedly recorded giving instructions on what Egyptian TV anchors should say about Sisi's candidacy for the presidency. They appeared to be tampering with a high profile court case of four police officers involved in the killing of 37 detainees en route to prison.
On Saturday night the most significant of the leaks was broadcast, as they concerned conversations about Egypt's Gulf donors. When the Turkey-based Egyptian satellite TV channel Mekameleen broadcast the audio recordings, the satellite link was jammed. The contents came out on YouTube.
In one excerpt allegedly recorded about a year ago, Sisi, Mahmoud Higazi, who was then head of military intelligence and now head of the army, and Brigadier General Abbas Kamil, the manager of Sisi's office, were talking about asking Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Kuwait for $10 billion each. They discussed how the money was to be transferred -- not into the coffers of the state, or the central bank, but surreptitiously in small amounts to bank accounts used by the Egyptian Army.
The translated excerpt reads:
Sisi: Look, you tell him that we need 10 to be deposited in the army's account. 10 what?
Kamil: Into the army's account.
Sisi: These 10, when we succeed will be worked for what? For the state. We want another ten like them from the UAE and we want from Kuwait another ten like them. That is in addition to the two pennies [Egyptian expression for small amounts of money] to be deposited in the Central Bank and to complement the account of 2014.
Kamil: (Laughter)
Sisi: What are you laughing at?
Kamil: (Still laughing) He'll pass out.
Sisi: What?
Kamil: He'll pass out. (laughs)
Sisi: They have money like rice [meaning too much].
Kamil: I know, Sir.
Sisi: The Americans [tell them] this figure is this ... like this.

These recordings have not yet been independently verified and they were leaked to a satellite station in Turkey that is pro-Morsi. The satellite channel is so confident that these voices are genuine that they having them tested by international voice recognition experts. Coming on top of what has already been published from Saudi sources about the links between Sisi's office and Tuwaijri, the weight of evidence leads one to conclude they are genuine.
Coming just weeks before an international donors conference in which the same Gulf States are expected to cough up billions of dollars more, the leaks are timely. They allegedly show Sisi diverting money meant for the reconstruction of the state into the Egyptian Army's coffers. And they beg the question: Where has all this money gone?

Wednesday, 4 February 2015

The Sanctions of Mass Destruction: How the US deal deadlier massacres without nuclear bombs using Petrodollars.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/02/03/the-sanctions-of-mass-destruction/

Fueled by Petrodollars

The Sanctions of Mass Destruction

by GARIKAI CHENGU
Under the late King Abdullah, Saudi Arabia played a role most treacherous in world affairs: its oil fueled U.S. militarism and its money funded Islamic extremists.
Saudi Arabia is perhaps the greatest inherent contradiction of U.S. foreign policy.
Prior to the 20th century, the value of money was tied to gold. When banks lent money they were constrained by the size of their gold reserves. But in 1971, U.S. President Richard Nixon took the country off the gold standard. Nixon and Saudi Arabia came to an agreement whereby the only currency that Saudi Arabia could sell its oil in was the US dollar and the Saudi Kingdom would in turn ensure that its oil profits flow back into U.S. government treasuries and American banks.
In exchange, America pledged to provide the Saudi Royal family’s regime with military protection and military hardware.
It was the start of something great for America. Access to oil defined 20th-century empires and the petrodollar agreement was the key to the ascendance of the United States as the world’s sole superpower.
The petrodollar system spread beyond oil and the U.S. dollar slowly but surely became the reserve currency for global trades in most commodities and goods. This system allows America to maintain its position of dominance as the world’s only superpower, despite being $18 trillion in debt.
Threats by any nation to undermine the petrodollar system are viewed by Washington as tantamount to a declaration of war against the United States of America.
Within the last decade Iraq, Iran and Libya have all threatened to sell their oil in other currencies. Consequently, they have all been subject to crippling U.S. sanctions.
At the height of World War Two, President Truman issued an order for American bombers to drop “Fat Man” and “Little Boy” on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing 140,000 people instantly. The gruesome images that emerged from the rubble were broadcasted through television sets across the world and caused unprecedented outrage, forcing U.S. policy makers to devise a more subtle weapon of mass destruction: sanctions.
Sanctions are often viewed as a less destructive alternative to military force. Nothing could be further from the truth. American sanctions have killed more innocent people than all of the nuclear, biological and chemical weapons ever used in the history of mankind.
The Financial Times newspaper quoted sanctions expert Geoff Simons who proved that “two-thirds of the world’s population is subject to some sort of U.S. sanctions.”
Sanctions are clearly the 21st century’s most potent weapon of mass destruction.
They told us that Iraq was a nuclear threat; Iraq was a terrorist state; Iraq was tied to Al Qaeda. It all amounted to nothing. What the U.S. administration did not tell us was that the main reason for toppling Saddam, and putting sanctions on the people of Iraq, was the fact that Iraq had ditched the dollar-for-oil sales.
The United Nations estimates that 1.7 million Iraqis died due to Bill Clinton’s sanctions; 500,000 of whom were children. In 1996, a journalist asked former U.S. Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, about these UN reports, specifically about the children. America’s top foreign policy official replied: “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price – we think the price is worth it.” Clearly, U.S. sanctions policy is nothing short of deliberate genocide and impoverishment.
In 1967 Colonel Gaddafi inherited one of the poorest nations in Africa; however, by the time he was assassinated, Gaddafi had turned Libya into Africa’s wealthiest nation. Perhaps, Gaddafi’s greatest crime, in the eyes of NATO, was his desire to put the interests of local labour above foreign capital and his quest for a strong and truly United States of Africa. Central to Gaddafi’s vision for a united Africa was a common African currency made from gold and Gaddafi planned to quit selling Libyan oilin U.S. dollars. In fact, in August 2011, President Obama confiscated $30 billion from Libya’s Central Bank, which Gaddafi had earmarked for the establishment of an African Central Bank and the African gold backed dinar currency.
Had Gaddafi sparked a gold-driven monetary revolution, the Colonel would certainly have done extremely well for his people, and for the world at large. But Africa has the fastest growing oil industry in the world and oil sales in a common African currency would have been especially devastating for the American dollar, the U.S. economy, and particularly the elite in charge of the system.
It is for this reason that President Clinton signed the now infamous Iran-Libya Sanctions Act. The Libyan people were unusually vulnerable to the effects of sanctions, because Libya imports 75 percent of its food, and oil exports make up 95 percent of its revenue. The United Nations Children’s Fund reported that these sanctions caused widespread suffering among civilians by “severely limiting supplies of fuel, access to cash, and the means of replenishing stocks of food and essential medications.” Clearly, U.S. sanctions are grievous crimes against humanity.
Not so long ago, Iraq and Libya were the two most modern and secular states in the Middle East and North Africa, with the highest regional standards of living. Nowadays, intervention and sanctions have turned Libya and Iraq into two of the world’s most troubled nations.
Iran is yet another nation increasingly troubled by American sanctions. An intelligence report published in 2012, endorsed by all sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies, confirms that Iran ended its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Truth is, any Iranian nuclear ambition, real or imagined, is as a result of American hostility towards Iran, and not the other way around. The last time Iran invaded another nation was in 1738. Since independence in 1776, the United States has engaged in over 50 military invasions and interventions.
Much like Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction”, the United States has used the imaginary nuclear threat to enforce sanctions upon the people of Iran.
In early 2007, during an OPEC meeting, the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for a “credible and good currency to take over the American dollar’s role and to serve oil trades”. By December 2007, Iran had stopped selling its oil in U.S. dollars. Three months later, the nation set up the Iranian Oil Bourse (IOB) on Kish Island, which allowed exchanges of oil, petrochemicals, and gas between countries in a basket of currencies other than U.S. dollar.
Iran’s petrodollar defiance resulted in America imposing a crippling set of sanctions on seventy-five million Iranian citizens. Sanctions of mass destruction have cost Iran $120 billion in lost revenue since 2010; and, they even include a ban on the importation of certain medicines and foodstuffs. Despite Iranian government subsidies intended to help the poor, prices for staples, such as milk, bread, rice, yogurt and vegetables, have at least doubled since the beginning of the sanctions regime, in some cases showing three and four fold increases. Senior U.S. politician, Brad Sherman, remarked, “critics of sanctions argue that these measures will hurt the Iranian people. Quite frankly, we need to do just that.”
Sanctions are as morally indefensible as they are counter-productive. The more America imposes sanctions on countries for non-dollar trading, the more those countries will respond to American sanctions with increased non-dollar trading. Therefore, imposing sanctions on nations for trading crude oil in other currencies is akin to crudely attempting to put out a fire by dousing it with petrol.
Ever since 1980, the United States has steadily devolved from the status of the world’s top creditor country to the world’s most indebted country. But thanks to the petrodollar system’s huge global artificial demand for U.S. dollars, America can continue exponential military expansion, record breaking deficits and unrestrained spending. Today, a global U.S. dollar reserve currency allows Americans to enjoy some of the best standards of living.
America’s largest export used to be manufactured goods made proudly in America. Today, America’s largest export is the U.S. dollar. Any nation that threatens that export is met with America’s second largest export: weapons, chief amongst which are sanctions of mass destruction.

Thursday, 29 January 2015

ISIS: Is Baghdadi fictional?

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/us-fightingterror-group-with-fictional.html


In 2007, the New York Times revealed that long-vilified "Islamic State" leader Abdullah Rashid al-Baghdadi did not exist, and that the creation of this fictional character was a ruse to obfuscate the role of foreigners in the creation and perpetuation of "Al Qaeda in Iraq." 

In an article titled, "Leader of Al Qaeda group in Iraq was fictional, U.S. military says," the NYT reports that: 
Brigadier General Kevin Bergner, the chief American military spokesman, said the elusive Baghdadi was actually a fictional character whose audio-taped declarations were provided by an elderly actor named Abu Adullah al-Naima.
The NYT would also reveal the purpose of the deception: 
The ruse, Bergner said, was devised by Abu Ayub al-Masri, the Egyptian-born leader of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, who was trying to mask the dominant role that foreigners play in that insurgent organization.  
The ploy was to invent Baghdadi, a figure whose very name establishes his Iraqi pedigree, install him as the head of a front organization called the Islamic State of Iraq and then arrange for Masri to swear allegiance to him. Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's deputy, sought to reinforce the deception by referring to Baghdadi in his video and Internet statements.
The admission by US military leaders, reported in the NYT, reveals that the so-called "Islamic State" was nothing more than an appendage of Al Qaeda - with Al Qaeda itself directly armed, funded, and backed by stalwart US allies, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Despite the NYT and the Pentagon's admissions, the entire ruse has continued, on an exponential scale.

US Intentionally Raised and Unleashed Al Qaeda Upon Iraq and Syria 

Al Qaeda's current presence in Iraq and Syria, and their leading role in the fight against the Iranian-leaning government's of Damascus and Baghdad, are the present-day manifestation of a Western criminal conspiracy exposed as early as 2007.  Revealed by two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his 2007 article,  "The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?" it was stated explicitly that (emphasis added): 

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda. 

The Daily Beast would report in an article literally titled, "America's Allies Are Funding ISIS," that: 
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), now threatening Baghdad, was funded for years by wealthy donors in Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, three U.S. allies that have dual agendas in the war on terror.
The extremist group that is threatening the existence of the Iraqi state was built and grown for years with the help of elite donors from American supposed allies in the Persian Gulf region. There, the threat of Iran, Assad, and the Sunni-Shiite sectarian war trumps the U.S. goal of stability and moderation in the region. 

Baghdadi Ruse Not Only to Hide "Foreign" role, but to Hide US-Saudi Involvement

Today, another "al-Baghdadi" allegedly leads the "Islamic State." His existence and leadership role is also unconfirmed and the likelihood that Al Qaeda's "Baghdadi ruse" is simply being repeated, amid feigned and complicit ignorance by the Pentagon, is all but confirmed.  Not only does the "Islamic State's" leader appear to be entirely fictional, but so is ISIS itself. It is nothing more than the rebranding of Al Qaeda, working seamlessly with other Western and Persian Gulf-backed militant fronts including Al Nusra, for the explicit goal of overthrowing the government of Syria and using the despoiled nation as a staging ground for a similar proxy war to be waged upon Iran.

The United States, bombing a fictional terrorist organization led by a non-existent, fictional character, is at the very heart of the ruse described by the NYT in 2007, a ruse that continues to present day. The goal is not to eliminate ISIS, but to use the fictional front as a pretext to further intervene on behalf of real militant extremists forming the core of the joint US-NATO-Saudi proxy front for the purpose of overthrowing the government in Damascus.

At face value, it would seem as if US policy has failed utterly, if in fact its goal was to truly neutralize ISIS. But with ISIS a fictional creation led by non-existent leaders, and the stated goal of the US being the overthrow of the Syrian government, the doubling of territory held by Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda's approach to cities like Aleppo on the brink of being liberated by Syrian troops, it is clear that America's presence in Syria - not to mention in neighboring Iraq - is to support, not stop these terrorist forces. 

Saturday, 24 January 2015

Servant of the British Empire: On the founding of Ibn Saud’s kingdom

The birth of the House of Al-Saud: 

The sultan of Najd, Abdelaziz al-Saud bowed his head before the British High Commissioner in Percy Cox's Iraq. His voice quavered, and then he started begging with humiliation: "Your grace are my father and you are my mother. I can never forget the debt I owe you. You made me and you held my hand, you elevated me and lifted me. I am prepared, at your beckoning, to give up for you now half of my kingdom…no, by Allah, I will give up all of my kingdom, if your grace commands me!"

"...as Turkey (Uthmani Khilafah) joined the axis of London's enemies in the war. In September 1914, Britain finally understood that the Saudi Bedouin leader, who for 12 years never stopped writing letters of flattery to the British, deserved some attention. Thus the British Foreign Office decided to send former political agent in Kuwait Captain William Henry Irvine Shakespear – the only British official who had previously met with Abdelaziz – to negotiate a treaty whereby London recognized him as the ruler of Najd, Ahsa, Qatif, and Jubail and its moorings on the Persian Gulf, and pledge to protect him and his possessions, in return for Ibn Saud pledging never to violate an order related to foreign or economic policy without Britain's consent, and to follow British guidance without reservation.

Britain's real goal was for Ibn Saud to harass its Ottoman enemy and their allies the House of Rashid in Ha'il, and for his forces to be a proxy army through which Britain would fight the Ottomans in southern Iraq until British forces arrive from India. 

The British also had another demand, which was for Wahhabi clerics to issue a fatwa prohibiting Arab soldiers from serving in the Ottoman army, and calling on them to defect. Recall that Arabs were a majority in the Ottoman army in Iraq and the Levant. And indeed, the Wahhabi mufti found a pretext for such a fatwa, saying that Turkey had forged an alliance with the German infidels in the war, which is prohibited in the Quran. The fatwa helped immensely in Britain's propaganda."

#WarOnIslam #SatanicCoalition


Friday, 23 January 2015

Saudi's King Abdullah dies and King Salman succeeds his throne vowing to continue all current relations



Sources:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-30945324

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/22/saudi-arabia-king-salman_n_6527914.html

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/01/22/middleeast/saudi-arabia-king-abdullah-dies/

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/01/22/king-abdullah-dies-disrupting-saudi-arabia-at-a-sensitive-time/




Key Points from BBC:




His 79-year-old half-brother, Salman, has been confirmed as the new king.

Within hours of his accession to the throne of the oil-rich kingdom, King Salman vowed to maintain the same policies as his predecessors.

"We will continue adhering to the correct policies which Saudi Arabia has followed since its establishment," he said in a speech broadcast on state television.

Saudi Arabia under King Salman faces a number of challenges. The first is ensuring the succession passes smoothly without any divisive jockeying for power within the ruling family. Then there is the ongoing threat from jihadists, both at home and across its borders.

King Salman called on the royal family's Allegiance Council to recognise Muqrin as his heir.

US President Barack Obama expressed his personal sympathies, and those of the American people, on Abdullah's death.

"As a leader, he was always candid and had the courage of his convictions. One of those convictions was his steadfast and passionate belief in the importance of the US-Saudi relationship as a force for stability and security in the Middle East and beyond," he said.

Key points from Huffington Post:

As king, Salman, 78, will have to navigate regional turmoil caused by wars in Iraq and Syria, as well as a bitter rivalry with Shi'ite Muslim power Iran and a lingering threat from an al Qaeda wing in neighboring Yemen.

The defense portfolio involved running the kingdom's top-spending ministry, which used massive arms purchases to bolster ties with allies such as the United States, Britain and France.

"He's intelligent, political, in touch with the conservative base but also quite modern-minded," said a former diplomat in Riyadh interviewed about the kingdom's succession process.

He also argued against the introduction of democracy in the kingdom, citing regional and tribal divisions, and told the ambassador that a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict was necessary for Middle East stability.

Jordan said Prince Salman had initially refused to believe Saudis participated in the Sept 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, but his attitude changed in the face of increasingly solid evidence that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis.

"He doesn't blindly accept everything the United States says, but at the same time he understands the importance of the relationship, which goes beyond oil," Jordan said.

Key Points from CNN:

"This is a sad day. The United States has lost a friend, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Middle East, and the world has lost a revered leader," U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said in a statement. "He was so proud of the Kingdom's journey, a brave partner in fighting violent extremism who proved just as important as a proponent of peace."

In the context of the kingdom's conservative circles, Abdullah was seen as reformer and often came up against the more hard-line clerics.

Key Points from FP:

The king’s death comes at a delicate time for the oil-rich kingdom, which is struggling with the impact of plunging oil prices domestically, the rise of the Islamic State, and an Iran’s whose influence is growing across the Mideast as its proxies take on increasingly powerful roles in Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria. Abdullah’s successor will also face an intensifying crisis in Yemen, whose Saudi-backed government has been effectively overthrown by Iranian-backed Houthi rebels. A Saudi official said in a recent interview that Riyadh sees the future of Yemen as “an existential threat.”

Falling oil prices will present a pair of challenges to Salman. First, the kingdom has for decades effectively bought itself internal stability by putting in place a highly generous social welfare system that offers citizens free health care, education, and other perks. That will be more difficult to maintain with oil trading at its lowest price in decades.

Second, Saudi Arabia has used its oil to build one of the Middle East’s most powerful militaries by buying reams of advanced American weaponry and hiring thousands of American and Western troops to train its own forces. The kingdom has in recent years also massively ramped up its financial commitments to the rebels working to unseat Assad and to the new Egyptian government, which it sees as a bulwark against a return of the Islamists who controlled the country during the short reign of former President Mohamed Morsi.

Thursday, 22 January 2015

Pakistan Minister: Saudis exporting Wahhabism

Source: http://www.voanews.com/content/pakistan-minister-says-saudis-destabilizing-muslim-world/2606474.html

Key Points:

A Pakistani Cabinet minister has accused the Saudi government of creating instability across the Muslim world, including Pakistan, through funding aimed at "promoting its ideology."

Pirzada is the highest level Pakistani official to accuse Saudi Arabia of interfering in other countries' affairs by giving loans and other assistance to promote the Wahhabi faith, a fundamentalist brand of Sunni Islam. The timing of his comments coincide with Pakistani efforts to rally the nation against terrorism after a devastating attack on a Peshawar school that left 150 people, most of them children, dead.

The amount of Saudi spending on religious training, schools, mosques and other religious undertakings in other countries has not been revealed by the Saudi government, but has been estimated to be as high as two to three billion dollars a year. Critics have long complained that the austere vision of Wahhabism has radicalized individuals in countries with traditions of more moderate Islam.


Friday, 16 January 2015

Saudi's drop in oil price didn't only harm Russia but also served the West to keep Turkeys economy going?

source: http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21639583-ailing-economy-has-staged-partial-recovery-thanks-cheap-oil-saved

Key Points:

The sharp rise in interest rates needed to keep the lira from plunging naturally took a toll on the economy. The wilting currency, meanwhile, contributed to rising inflation. A further blow came with the upsurge in violence in neighbouring Iraq and Syria. Turkish exports to Iraq, its second-largest market after Germany, tumbled by 40%. And Turkey’s fraught peace talks with its own Kurds nearly collapsed threatening, in turn, a resumption of a 30-year rebel insurgency. The economic stability that has been the hallmark of the past 12 years of AK party rule seemed at risk.

Then the oil price slumped. That immediately relieved the pressure on the current account and on inflation. Turkey’s huge energy imports had been costing 6% of GDP a year. Thanks largely to lower fuel costs, the current-account deficit is set to shrink to around 5 % of GDP this year. Largely for the same reason, inflation will fall to 6.8%. Most bankers say the economy will grow by around 3.5% this year; the government talks of more than 4%.

Indeed, with other big emerging markets such as Russia and Brazil beset by troubles of their own, investors are giving Turkey another look. “A large volume of funds has started to flow into Turkey,” boasts Mehmet Simsek, the finance minister. The wobbly Kurdish peace talks seem to have been salvaged. AK is likely to win parliamentary elections due in June. Ali Babacan, the respected economy minister, is expected to stay on in some capacity.

Education is another worry. Only 1% of Turkish students have advanced computer skills, compared with 33% of their Polish peers. High-tech gear makes up a measly 2% of manufacturing exports (see chart); R&D spending totals only 0.9% of GDP. Yet Turkey’s Islamist president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, seems interested chiefly in spreading the faith and reviving Ottoman Turkish influence.

Pentagon to deploy 400 troops to train Syrian rebels


Pentagon to deploy 400 troops to train Syrian rebels

WASHINGTON | 

Photo

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. military is planning to deploy more than 400 troops to help train Syrian rebels to fight the Islamic State, along with hundreds of U.S. support personnel, a Pentagon spokesman told Reuters on Thursday.

The U.S. military has not yet identified where it will draw its forces from for the training mission, expected to begin in the spring at sites outside Syria, Colonel Steve Warren said. Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have offered to host the training.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0KP0FO20150116?irpc=932