Leaked Pentagon Docs Expose US Hand in Yemen

Pentagon Inadvertently Reveals Secret Saudi Operation


Sanctions against Social Ethics

Hussein Samawarchi

The practice of social responsibility needs for all to be proactive, one way or another, in bringing equality for fellow community members. It is when the more able member of society assists the less fortunate for the purpose of maintaining a general social equilibrium of education and wealth. Everyone should be entitled to an equal opportunity to realize his or her ambitions and full potential; the tools that lead to improving one’s situation are availed by others knowing that the betterment of the individual member yields a healthier society for all.

Protecting the rights of every person is a main deterrent against the decline of moral standards which, in its turn and in so many cases, is a direct result of social frustration. Hence, the display of a sound sense of social responsibility by all would ultimately serve in eliminating, to a great degree, many factors that lead to corruption – a healthier social setup evolves.

This is a part of the teachings of Islam; justice has to be prioritized if we are to live in the comfort of safety. And, the application of justice goes beyond the classical judicial system. Islam dictates the founding of courts manned by wise and highly educated judges; it doesn’t stop there though. It also dictates that justice is practiced to a person’s best ability with family, neighbors, colleagues, friends, and anyone who is weaker. Justice is a part of social responsibility in Islam.

When the word “Hezbollah” is mentioned anywhere, the resistance is the first thing that comes to the mind of the majority of people. The image of a heroic patriot walking up a hill on a cold rainy night with his brothers, leaving the warmth of his family to ensure that his home and the homes of his neighbors are protected against the “Israeli” saboteur.

These brave men of the Lebanese resistance have relied, mostly, on simple weapons during the years extending from 1982 – nothing worth millions of dollars like tanks or fighter jets. They showed the world that a successful resistance relies more on the hearts of the people than on the class of armament. They showed that volunteers achieve more victories than professional highly paid soldiers and mercenaries.

The United States is talking about further sanctions against Hezbollah. They, allegedly, impose sanctions for the “noble” purpose of preventing a government or an organization from acquiring weapons. Knowing that the defense strategy of the resistance does not depend on tactical items that need great expenditures, it can be clearly seen that whatever the magnitude of the sanctions is, it will not affect the military aspect. The defense combat gear comprises rifles that are decades- old and even older rocket-propelled grenades. The maximum in cost might be night vision binoculars but those can be purchased over the counter globally under the commercial category of civilian and recreational gadgets.

As for some more sophisticated weapons like modern compact anti-tank and aircraft arms, plenty has been left behind in Iraq and Syria and in pristine condition by the dozen or more terrorist factions armed to the teeth with compliments of “Israel” and other terror-supporting countries. Stockpiles upon stockpiles have been seized.

So, what are the sanctions targeting?

One might argue that affecting the overall financial situation of Hezbollah would influence the salaries of its members negatively, resulting in their eventual dismay from a worsening personal financial situation leading to desertion. That would have been the case if they were fighting for financial gain. Nevertheless, the overwhelming majority of the men of Hezbollah are volunteers and they avail themselves for purely patriotic reasons; as poetic as it sounds, the truth is that their payment is the honor of fighting for their country.

As for those who serve on a full-time basis, their salaries are covered with donations from local businesses which are sufficient. At this point, it is worthy of mentioning that the salary of the highest paygrade in Hezbollah is that of the Secretary-General. The amount is USD 1,400.

Again. What are the sanctions targeting?

The answer is clear. The sanctions are against the fabric of the society that contains Hezbollah. They are against Social responsibility and justice. They target civil establishments linked to the general population falling directly and indirectly under the geographical region where Hezbollah and Muslims exist. These establishments include orphanages, educational institutions for the financially underprivileged, non-profit medical centers, charities, women empowerment centers, vocational training institutes for young adults with special needs, and more.

The American administration that still gives billions of dollars in the form of unconditional annual aid to “Israel” for the purpose of building more illegal settlements on Palestinian raped land and arming its terrorist army along with Daesh [the Arabic acronym for terrorist ‘ISIS/ISIL’ group] mercenaries wants to close down Lebanese charities that take care of society.

They aim to financially suffocate civilian institutions that direct the social compass towards higher human values. The concept of “education and justice for all” is the enemy in the scope of American sanctions. The recent move against the UNRWA is sufficient proof of that.

Contemptible acts like targeting the livelihoods and the future of the youth and the needy can only be described as animosity towards humanity. There’s no doubt that certain aspects will suffer here and there. Still, one must keep in mind that this is a social set up built by the people who excel in the culture of resilience and creativity. History has it written in its pages: The Lebanese will always prevail. How can they not when they have such leaders as Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah in their ranks.

Source: Al-Ahed News

Related Videos

Related Articles

New US Law Obliges Americans to Pay Unlimited Billions to israel (apartheid state)


Good news! You’ll be relieved to know that once again Israeli interests are trumping the interests of Heritage Americans. You and your children will be given the honor of paying for Israel’s security with no limits on how much can be stolen from you. From The New Observer.

In what has been described as an “unprecedented gift of executive power to Israel,” the US Congress has passed for the very first time a law that forces the American president to give Israel a minimum of $3.8 billion per year—without limitation and no matter what Israel does.

Passed by the House of Representatives on September 12, 2018, the “United States-Israel Security Assistance Authorization Act of 2018” rolls back any limitations that the US places on the amount of “aid” American taxpayers must hand over to Israel.

The bill states in “Sec. 102. Statement of Policy) that it “shall be the policy of the United States to provide assistance to the Government of Israel in order to support funding for cooperative programs to develop, produce, and procure missile, rocket, projectile, and other defense capabilities to help Israel meet its security needs and to help develop and enhance United States defense capabilities.”

According to a review of the law published by the If Americans Knew group,the AIPAC-lobbied law, introduced by Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Florida), whose maternal grandparents were Sephardic Jews, originally from the Ottoman Empire, who had been active in Cuba’s Jewish community, and Ted Deutch (D-Florida), whose grandparents were Jewish immigrants from Belarus, the bill is “even more generous to Israel than the Senate bill and the 2016 Memorandum of Understanding and “amounts to $7,230 per minute to Israel, or $120 per second.”

The If Americans Knew review adds that the bill “guarantees $38 billion to Israel over the next ten years” and “is a dramatic departure from the deal offered under President Obama’s 2016 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).

“Most dramatically, this new act would eviscerate the ability of President Trump and his successors for the next ten years to withhold United States aid to Israel,” the review continued.

“Historically, almost every president since Eisenhower has attempted to withhold such aid at one time or another in order to force Israel to the peace table or to stop Israel from committing human right abuses or illegal acts such as taking Palestinian land and giving it to Israeli settlers.

“President Eisenhower was the last American President who managed to use this threat effectively, when he forced Israel to withdraw from Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula in 1957.”

The review added that the “second most important effect of this act is in Section 103. While the MOU limits the amount of aid [the US] give[s] Israel to the amount agreed upon, in this case $38 billion over 10 years, Section 103 of the current bill removes all limitations on how much [the US] give[s] give Israel.

“Under the new act, instead of 38 billion being the cap, as Obama stipulated in his 2016 MOU, [the US] must now give Israel a minimum of $3.8 billion per year until 2028.

“Without a cap, and with incessant lobbying by Israel and her proxies in the United States, the amount we give could conceivably double over the next 10 years,” the review said.

“Section 106 will increase Israel’s access to a war-reserve stockpile by completely removing the limits on how many precision guided missiles [the US] can give Israel. The existing law set a maximum of $200 million worth of arms from the stockpile per year, to be charged against the agreed aid package.

“The House version of the bill differs from the Senate version, replacing the words ‘sell’ and ‘sale’ to ‘transfer,’ which appears to open the door for more gifts in excess of the $38 billion

“To put this in context, a Tomahawk Missile currently costs about $1 million. The media recently lambasted President Trump for using 60 such missiles in Syria because of the high cost.

“Section 107 calls on the President to prescribe procedures for the rapid acquisition and deployment of precision guided munitions. The House text differs from the Senate version in that it removes all the detailed requirements for Israel to have such rapid acquisition.

“In the version just passed by the House, there is only one, extremely broad requirement, that Israel is under direct threat of missiles (in Israel’s opinion).

“Section 108 of the Act authorizes Israel to export arms it receives from the U.S., even though this violates U.S. law. The Senate version included a provision calling on the President to make an assessment of Israel’s eligibility before adding Israel to the exemption list.

“The House version deleted that requirement, and simply orders the American President to grant Israel the privilege.

“In fact, Israel is ineligible, having repeatedly made unauthorized sales in violation of this Act. The Export Act further forbids granting such an exemption to any country that is in violation of International Nuclear Non-proliferation Agreement, which Israel has refused to sign.

“Israel is known to be in possession of nuclear weapons, and hence in violation and ineligible for the export exemption. Congress thus reiterates the message that it will force the President to continue funding Israel even when that violates [U.S.] laws,” the review continued.

“Section 201 orders NASA to work with the Israel Space Agency, even though an Israeli space official has been accused of illegally obtaining classified scientific technology from a NASA research project.

“U.S. agencies periodically name Israel as a top espionage threat against the United States.

“The section also states that United States Agency for International Development (USAID) must partner with Israel in ‘a wide variety of sectors, including energy, agriculture and food security, democracy, human rights and governance, economic growth and trade, education, environment, global health, and water and sanitation.’

“All countries except Israel are required to spend US military aid on American goods. This ensures that the American economy benefits to some degree from these massive gifts. (Of course, if Americans wished to subsidize these U.S. companies, money could be provided directly to them, and Israel and other countries left to buy their equipment with their own money.)

“In the past, Israel has spent 40 percent of U.S. aid on Israeli companies, at the expense of U.S. industry. Under Obama’s 2016 MOU, this percentage was to be decreased over the 10-year span, and eventually Israel’s unique right not to spend use U.S. military aid to purchase items from American companies was to be ended.

“The new Act eliminates this requirement, putting Israeli economic interests before [America’s].

“An Israeli spokesperson crowed: ‘The landmark deal was reached despite budget cuts, including defense cuts, in the U.S.’

The bill now will go back to the Senate for approval, and then to Trump to be signed into U.S. law.

Trump Regime’s Rage for Regime Change in Venezuela

by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org – Home – Stephen Lendman)

Beginning with the Clinton co-presidency, US regimes opposed Venezuela’s Bolivarian social democracy, wanting pro-Western puppet rule replacing it.

In 2001, after Hugo Chavez compared Bush/Cheney’s global war on terrorism with the 9/11 attacks, Washington’s ambassador Donna Hrinak was recalled for consultations.

Ahead of Bush/Cheney’s aborted two-day April 2002 coup against Chavez, State Department cables said it couldn’t be ruled out, the incident one of others to follow against him and Nicolas Maduro.

Days earlier, Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza tweeted:

“Venezuela reiterates its denouncement and condemns the continuing aggressions that the US government has directly promoted against the constitutional President @NicolasMaduro, democratically elected and re-elected by a wide electoral margin in May of this same year,” separately tweeting:

“We denounce the intervention plans and support for military conspirators by the government of the United States against Venezuela. Even in US media, the crass evidence is coming to light.”

Like their predecessors, Trump regime hardliners want Maduro removed. International law prohibits interfering in the affairs of other nations, except in self-defense if attacked.

The 1970 UN General Assembly Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (Resolution 2625) affirmed “the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples” in all nations.

It proclaimed their right to “freely determine, without external interference, their political status and to pursue their economic, social and cultural development” – requiring compliance by all member states.

It prohibited the “threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state,” calling for resolving disputes “by peaceful means.”

International, constitutional and US statute laws never impede Washington’s aim to topple ruling authorities in nations it opposes – Venezuela a prime target because of its world’s largest oil reserves Republicans and undemocratic Dems want control over.

Rex Tillerson when secretary of state and Mike Pompeo when CIA director openly called for toppling Maduro.

At the time, Pompeo accused the Venezuelan president of usurping power and inflicting pain on the Venezuelan people – a bald-faced lie, ignoring US political and economic war on the country still raging.

As CIA director, Pompeo orchestrated months of street violence, falsely calling Bolivarian social democracy a threat to US security, supported by Trump instead of denouncing and preventing what’s going on.

Straightaway after replacing Tillerson as secretary of state last March, Pompeo warned about toughening Trump regime policies against US security threats in Latin America – despite none existing, aiming his remarks mainly at Venezuela.

Illegal sanctions were increased, political and economic war escalated. At the time, Trump said he wouldn’t rule out a “military option” to remove Maduro. Added toughness against Cuba was signaled.

Former Reagan administration assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs Roger Noreiga accused then-under secretary of state for political affairs Thomas Shannon of failing to pursue enough toughness against Maduro.

When Pompeo replaced Tillerson at State, he said Trump regime policies can reverse what he called “shortcomings” in Latin America by “get(ting) tough on (regional) hot spots.”

On Friday, Pompeo warned of unspecified “actions” the Trump regime intends pursuing against Venezuela, saying:

“You’ll see in the coming days a series of actions that continue to increase the pressure level against the Venezuelan leadership…who are working directly against the best interest of the Venezuelan people.”

“We’re determined to ensure that the Venezuelan people get their say.” Maybe he has another coup d’etat, political assassination, or war of aggression in mind.

The Trump regime’s notion of what National Security Council spokesman Garrett Marquis called “a peaceful, orderly return to democracy” is all about eliminating it wherever it exists and preventing its emergence elsewhere.

Venezuelan Bolivarian social democracy is a prime Trump regime target for elimination. Another attempt to remove Maduro could come any time.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.


My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”


Stephen Lendman

Stephen Lendman was born in 1934 in Boston, MA. In 1956, he received a BA from Harvard University. Two years of US Army service followed, then an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in 1960. After working seven years as a marketing research analyst, he joined the Lendman Group family business in 1967. He remained there until retiring at year end 1999. Writing on major world and national issues began in summer 2005. In early 2007, radio hosting followed. Lendman now hosts the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network three times weekly. Distinguished guests are featured. Listen live or archived. Major world and national issues are discussed. Lendman is a 2008 Project Censored winner and 2011 Mexican Journalists Club international journalism award recipient.

Who Conflates Zionism and Judaism?

September 17, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

Every Sabbath the good people of Ann Arbor protest against their local synagogue. They have been doing it for 15 years.

إدلب: النهاية الفعلية لـ «تامبر سيكامور»

سبتمبر 11, 2018

ناصر قنديل

– مصطلح «تامبر سيكامور» أي «خشب الجميز» ليس غريباً على المعلقين والمحللين والمتابعين في أميركا والغرب، وهو الرمز الذي منحته المخابرات الأميركية عام 2012 للعملية التي تهدف لأوسع خطة أميركية لتعبئة الأفراد والسلاح والأعمال الاستخبارية والعمليات الخاصة، منذ حرب أفغانستان. والهدف هذه المرة هو إسقاط سورية ورئيسها وتدمير جيشها، وتحويلها ساحة تشبه ما انتهت إليه العملية التي سبقتها في أفغانستان، وكما الأداة هي نفسها أي تنظيم القاعدة ومتفرّعاته ومنتجاته، الشريك في التعبئة والتمويل والإدارة والتشغيل هو نفسه، المملكة العربية السعودية. وهنا لا نزال في استعراض المعلومات الأميركية الرسمية التي يسهل الحصول عليها من مواقع وزارة الخارجية ووزارة الدفاع الأميركيتين، ومن التقارير التي قدّمها مايك بومبيو بصفته رئيساً للمخابرات الأميركية عام 2017 أمام الكونغرس ولجانه في سياق الإعلان عن تصفية المشروع، الذي تقول التقارير الرسمية إنه كلف الخزانة الأميركية مليار دولار، وأنه تسبب بوقوع أسلحة نوعية بيد تنظيم القاعدة.

– ما يجب أن ننتبه إليه هو أن ما تقوله واشنطن عن البرنامج هو بعض الحقيقة، وما تقوله عن أسباب الإعلان عن الإنهاء هو عكس الحقيقة. ففي المنشور عن البرنامج أنه تمويل ميليشيات وتسليحها وتدريبها، كذب واختزال للمشروع ببعض بنوده. فالمشروع يتضمن إنشاء غرفة عمليات سميت بالـ»موك» وهي اختصار لعمليات خاصة تنفذها القوات الخاصة الأميركية، التابعة للمخابرات الأميركية ووكالتها الأهم صاحبة البرنامج سي آي أي. وقد بات معلناً أن الهدف الحقيقي هو إسقاط الدولة السورية ورئيسها وجيشها، وبات معلوماً أن ضمن الخطة عمليات خاصة تنفذها السي آي اي، على الأرجح أن بينها وأولها كانت عملية استهداف مقر الأمن القومي في دمشق الذي استشهد فيه كبار الضباط السوريين العسكريين والأمنيين يومها، وبات معلوماً أيضاً أن كذبة تسليح ميليشيات مثل كذبة اكتشاف أن السلاح وصل لجبهة النصرة، مثل كذبة أن الحرب على داعش استدعت وقف البرنامج، فتسليح وتمويل واستجلاب تنظيم القاعدة اصل البرنامج، كما صمّمه الجنرال ديفيد بتريوس المؤسس الحقيقي لجبهة النصرة كفرع سوري عراقي لتنظيم القاعدة، وابتكار تنظيم داعش كان الحلقة الثانية من البرنامج. وكل الوقائع قائمة لإثبات إدارة واشنطن لداعش. وبالمقابل إدارة الحرب المبرمجة والمدروسة عليها، لخدمة التموضع في سورية بحجة الحرب، ومنع قيام حرب جدية تنهي وجود التنظيم الذي رعت ولادته واشنطن، كما قال الرئيس دونالد ترامب يوم كان مرشحاً.

– من الأكاذيب التي يجب الانتباه لها في الرواية الرسمية الأميركية أن موازنة المشروع هي مليار دولار فقط. بينما تقول الوقائع المنشورة عن إنشاء تنظيم القاعدة برعاية مستشار الأمن القومي الأميركي في عهد الرئيس رونالد ريغان زبيغينيو بريجنسكي، أن مليار دولار مشابه أنفقتها واشنطن عام 1980، كان مقابلها قرابة مئة مليار دولار أنفقتها السعودية على تنظيم القاعدة، لإسقاط الحكم الحليف لروسيا السوفياتية آنذاك تمهيداً لإسقاط الاتحاد السوفياتي، وها هي تكرر المحاولة هذه المرة مع روسيا وإيران انطلاقاً من سورية، لكنها تفشل. فالذي حصل حتى تاريخه ليس الاكتشاف المتأخر لوصول الأسلحة ليد متطرفين وإرهابيين، بل العجز عن تحقيق الهدف، وانتقال زمام المبادرة إلى يد الحلف المواجه أي سورية وإيران وروسيا، ليصير الواقع وفقاً لوصف بعض الخبراء الأميركيين، انتقاماً روسياً من تجربة أفغانستان.

– من الأكاذيب أيضاً الحديث عن إنهاء البرنامج، وقد كانت ركيزته غرفة الـ»موك» ولم تقفل بإعلان تصفية البرنامج رسمياً، ما يعني تغيير المهام لا إنهاءها. والمتوقع أن التغيير يهدف لاستبدال المهمة من إسقاط سورية ورئيسها وجيشها إلى منع انتصار سورية ورئيسها وجيشها، وعرقلة هذا الانتصار لفرض واشنطن شريكاً إلزامياً في أي تسوية مستقبلية في سورية. والتهديدات كما التصريحات الرئاسية والوزارية الأميركية، كما التفاهمات والخلافات، بوجود برنامج تعتمده المخابرات، تخضع لمقتضيات هذا البرنامج، «تامبر سيكامور» في معركته السرية الأخيرة في إدلب، حيث الضباط الأميركيون الذين تولوا مهام القيادة خلال سنوات مضت، وحيث الهزيمة وحدَها ستنهي البرنامج وتضيع معه مئات مليارات الدولارات التي تحدّث عنها ذات يوم نائب الرئيس الأميركي جو بايدن أمام جامعة هارفرد.

– «خشب الجمير» الذي استوحى منه بتريوس اسم البرنامج هو الخشب الذي استخدمه الفراعنة في صناعة توابيت الرجال العظام، والواضح أن القصد كان الإشارة إلى هدف البرنامج بصناعة تابوت لسورية ودولتها ومكانتها، وربما لإيران وروسيا معها. لكن التاريخ يدور دورته، وفي إدلب اليوم يستعدّ صانع التابوت لتجربته.

Related Videos

Related Articles

America’s War on Yemen Exposed

August 14, 2018 (Tony Cartalucci – NEO) – As atrocities and scandal begin to mount regarding the US-backed Saudi-led war on the impoverished nation of Yemen, the involvement and hypocrisy of the United States and other Western backers is coming to full light.

Global condemnation of Saudi airstrikes on civilian targets has brought public attention to Washington’s role in the conflict – a role the Western media has attempted to downplay for years. It is ironic, or perhaps telling, that alternative media outlets targeted as “Russian influence” are leading coverage of Yemen’s growing humanitarian catastrophe.

US Denies Role in Proxy War That Couldn’t be Fought Without It 
In a recent press conference, US Secretary of Defense James Mattis – when asked about the US role in the Yemeni conflict in regards to Saudi atrocities – would claim:

We are not engaged in the civil war. We will help to prevent, you know, the killing of innocent people.

Yet nothing could be further from the truth.

Mattis himself would lobby US Congress earlier this year to continue US support for Saudi-led operations in Yemen.

A March 2018 Washington Post article titled, “Mattis asks Congress not to restrict U.S. support for Saudi bombing in Yemen,” would admit:

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis made a personal appeal to Congress on Wednesday not to restrict the United States’ support for the Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen, as the sponsors of a privileged resolution to end Washington’s involvement announced that the Senate would vote on the matter next week.

Support includes US intelligence gathering for Saudi operations, the sale of of US weapons to the Saudi regime, and even US aerial refueling for US-made Saudi warplanes dropping US-made munitions on Yemeni targets selected with the aid of US planners.

In essence, the US is all but directly fighting the “civil war” itself.

Abetting War Crimes, Sponsoring Terrorists to What End? 

As to why the US believes it must continue supporting a proxy war Saudi Arabia is fighting on its behalf – beginning under US President Barack Obama and continuing in earnest under current US President Donald Trump – the Washington Post could conclude (emphasis added):

The war in Yemen has inspired much controversy in Congress, as lawmakers have questioned why the United States has involved itself so closely on the Saudi-backed side of a civil war against the Iranian-backed Houthi rebel forces. Successive presidential administrations have presented the campaign as a necessary component of the fight against terrorism and to preserve stability in the region. As Mattis put it in his letter to congressional leaders Wednesday, “withdrawing U.S. support would embolden Iran to increase its support to the Houthis, enabling further ballistic missile strikes on Saudi Arabia and threatening vital shipping lanes in the Red Sea, thereby raising the risk of a regional conflict.”

However, Mattis, his colleagues, and his predecessors have categorically failed to explain how Iran constitutes a greater threat to either US or global security than Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is a nation admittedly sponsoring Al Qaeda worldwide, including in Yemen as revealed by a recent Associated Press investigation, and the nation which both radicalized the supposed perpetrators of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on New York City and Washington D.C. and from which most of the supposed hijackers originated from.

If Iran is indeed waging war against Saudi Arabia and its terrorist proxies in Yemen, Iraq, and Syria, the real question is – why isn’t the United States backing Tehran instead?

The obvious answer to this question reveals the crumbling moral authority of the United States as the principled facade it has used for decades falls away from its hegemony-driven agenda worldwide.

The US and its allies created the “War on Terror” and intentionally perpetuated it as a pretext to expand militarily around the globe in an attempt to preserve its post-Cold War primacy and prevent the rise of a multipolar alternative to its unipolar “international order.” It has done this not only at the cost of hundreds of thousands of human lives across the Middle East, North Africa, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia, it has done it at the cost of trillions of taxpayers’ dollars and the lives of thousands of America’s own soldiers, sailors, aviators, and Marines.

Canada Too 

A recent row between Canada and Saudi Arabia over supposed “human rights” concerns appears to be a vain attempt to salvage the credibility of at least some nations involved in the now 7 year long war – the last 3 years of which has seen direct military intervention by Saudi Arabia, its partners, and its backers – including Canada.

The Guardian in an article titled, “‘We don’t have a single friend’: Canada’s Saudi spat reveals country is alone,” attempts to portray Canada as taking a lone, principled stance against human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia – abandoned even by Washington.

The article would claim:

The spat appeared to have been sparked last week when Canada’s foreign ministry expressed its concern over the arrest of Saudi civil society and women’s rights activists, in a tweet that echoed concerns previously voiced by the United Nations. 

Saudi Arabia swiftly shot back, making plans to remove thousands of Saudi students and medical patients from Canada, and suspending the state airline’s flights to and from Canada, among other actions.

The Guardian would also claim:

…the US said it would remain on the sidelines while Saudi officials lashed out at Canada over its call to release jailed civil rights activists.

Canada’s feigned concern for “human rights” in Saudi Arabia comes at a time when the Canadian government continues approving of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of arms sales to Riyadh. This includes small arms and armored personnel carriers Saudi forces are using in their ongoing invasion and occupation of neighboring Yemen.

The feigned divide between Ottawa and Washington over Saudi human rights violations is overshadowed by years of commitment by both North American nations in propping up the Saudi regime, and aiding and abetting the very worst of Riyadh’s human rights abuses unfolding amid the Yemeni conflict.

Canada’s apparent role is to help compartmentalize the worst of the West’s decaying moral authority, containing it with the US, and taking up a more prominent role in the West’s industrialized “human rights” and “democracy” leveraging racket.

While Canadian armaments help fuel genocide in Yemen – Canadian diplomats around the world fund agitators and directly meddle in the internal political affairs of foreign nations predicated on promoting “human rights” and “democracy.”

In Thailand for example, the US has receded into the shadows, allowing Canada, the UK, and other European nations to openly engage in political meddling on their behalf. US funding and support continues, but the public face of Western “outrage” is increasingly becoming Canadian, British, and Northern European.

However, Canada faces the same problem that has permanently eroded American credibility. And as its role in perpetuating real human rights abuses worldwide continues to be exposed, its feigned concern over token or even manufactured human rights concerns will increasingly appear hypocritical and hollow, undermining the West’s collective ability to leverage and hide behind human rights and democracy to advance their self-serving agendas.

%d bloggers like this: