مَن هو القاتلُ الحقيقي في السعودية؟

أبريل 25, 2019

د. وفيق إبراهيم

هذه دولةٌ قامت على الفتك بالمدنيين منذ تأسيسها في مطلع القرن الماضي بتغطية عسكرية مباشرة من البريطانيين الذين كانوا يحتلون شبه جزيرة العرب.

لقد توافرت لآل سعود بعد انتصارهم فرصة إنتاج مشروع دولة لديها وسائل إقناع اقتصادية النفط مع اسلام معتدل يرعى الحرمين الشريفين ومواسم الحج والعمرة المتواصلة.

لكنها آثرت التمسك بمنطلقات تأسيسها مجرد مجموعة قبلية مرتبطة بالمخابرات البريطانية فتكت بعشرات آلاف العرب من أبناء القبائل الأخرى من السنة والشيعة ومن دون تمييز، فكلّ من شعر آل سعود بخطره على مشروعهم أبادوه.

اسألوا القبائل من شمر وعنترة وطي وتميم وكلاب وغيرها، كيف هرب معظمها الى البلدان المجاورة هرباً من القتل السعودي البريطاني؟

لكن تحوّلهم دولة لم يؤدّ كما يُفترض الى تغيير في الممارسات.

التغيير الوحيد الذي حدث هو على مستوى تغطيتهم الدولية التي أصبحت أميركية منذ 1945، تنشر حماياتها السياسية والعسكرية على كامل جزيرة العرب، وخصوصاً مملكة آل سعود الأغنى نفطياً والأكثر تخلفاً من غيرها.

لذلك بنى آل سعود دولة منحوها اسم قبيلتهم مُقطعين مؤسّساتها السياسية الأساسية والوظائف الدبلوماسية والاقتصادية والإدارية الى أفراد عائلتهم أو من عائلات حليفة لهم، خصوصاً آل الشيخ أحفاد محمد بن عبد الوهاب مؤسّس المذهب الوهابي.

للإيضاح فقط فإنّ آل سعود على مستوى تأسيس مملكتهم هم نتاج تمازج الدور البريطاني الاستعماري وعشيرة آل سعود مع الحركة الوهابية المتطرفة التي بايعت آل سعود بشكل مطلق في السياسة وقيادة الدولة والاقتصاد.

منذ ذلك التاريخ أنتج السعوديون دولة ديكتاتورية تقوم على مفهوم «السمع والطاعة» مخترعين مجتمعاً غير قابل للتحرك بثلاث وسائل: القراءة الوهابية الداعية باسم الإسلام للانصياع لولي الأمر والقمع بالقتل وبتسميات ترقى الى العصور الأولى للإسلام التعزير والحرابة لكلّ من يطالب بحقوق الإنسان وإلغاء التمييز العنصري او ينتقد التسلط الديكتاتوري للدولة، أما الوسيلة الثالثة فهي الوفر الاقتصادي الهائل الناتج من ثروات نفطية خيالية، الذي يسمح حتى الآن بتوفير الحدّ الوسطي من المتطلبات الاقتصادية.

ولأنّ هذه العناصر غير كافية غطى الأميركيون هذه المعادلة السعودية مؤمّنين لها حماية من الخارج الإقليمي والدولي، وقواعد عسكرية في المنطقة لإجهاض أيّ تحرك داخلي.

فتحوّلت السعودية إلى «كهف مُكتفٍ» تسير أموره على نحو رتيب بتسليم قدري من المجتمع الداخلي الذي أصبح مُلِمّاً بعجزه عن إحداث أيّ تغيير لأنه قابل للإجهاض من قبل الأميركيين والجيش السعودي ذي الأصول الباكستانية والسودانية مع طبقة من قياديين من بريطانيا والولايات المتحدة.

هذا ما سمح لآل سعود باعتقال المجتمع، فمنعوه من التطوّر العلمي والصناعي جاعلين منه مثالاً على المجتمعات القرون أوسطية، فكرياً، فاستدام هذا الوضع على هذه القاعدة ولم يشُذ عنها، إلا بانتفاضة جهيمان العتيبي في السبعينيات الذي كان يحمل مشروع الوهابية القديمة التي ترفض ايّ اتصال بالأجنبي وتريد منع الأميركيين والغربيين ومجمل الأجانب من الإقامة في «الأرض الحرام»، كما كانوا يقولون.

واستلزم القضاء على هؤلاء مشاركة قوات أردنية وفرنسية وأميركية.

إلا أنّ نجاح الثورة في إيران في 1979 أصاب آل سعود بجنون الخوف على مملكتهم فخرجوا عن باطنيتهم مشاركين إلى جانب الاميركيين بمحاولة القضاء على ثورة الخميني مموّلين كلّ الحروب والحصار والمقاطعات التي تتعرّض لها حتى الآن.

بالتوازي واصلوا اعتقال المجتمع ممارسين قتلاً منهجياً بين المواطنين السنة والشيعة على السواء وسط تجاهل دولي لمجازرهم حتى أنّ أحداً لم يستنكر مذابحهم.

ومع تطوّر الصراع الأميركي الإيراني استعمل الحلف الأميركي السعودي الإسرائيلي أسلوب تأجيج الفتنة السنية الشيعية للمزيد من التضييق على الحركة الإيرانية في الإقليم مثيرين مناخاً مذهبياً على حساب تراجع الصراع مع «إسرائيل» ما منح السعوديين فرصة كافية لقمع دموي دائم ومتواصل استهدف المدنيين الشيعة في القطيف، ومن يعترض من السنة.

الملاحظة الأولى انّ الغطاء الاميركي الشامل حمى آل سعود من ايّ نقد دولي مع تلميع إعلامي بدا حريصاً على تقديمهم نموذجاً للدولة الإسلامية المروّجة للقيم الإنسانية وهي لا تعتقل إلا الإرهابيين المسيئين لتعاليم الدين او المجرمين.

الأميركيون سياسياً وإعلامياً ومعهم الأوروبيون غطوا هذا التلميع بشكل صارم وسط صمت صيني وروسي. ما عطل هذا المفهوم هي تلك الخلافات التي عصفت بالعلاقات بين الرئيس الاميركي الحالي ترامب والحزب الديمقراطي الأميركي المنافس له وبعض قوى أوروبا وتركيا، هؤلاء كمنوا لترامب عند حادثة اغتيال الإعلامي الخاشقجي من قبل مجموعة أمنية تابعة لولي العهد محمد بن سلمان، فشنّوا هجوماً مسعوراً على السعودية بهدف التصويب على ترامب وسياساته، أدّى هذا الوضع الى ولادة حذر سعودي في اقتراف مجازر داخلية لشعورهم بتراجع التغطية الأميركية.

وأخيراً عادت الحاجة الأميركية الماسّة إليهم في مسألة تعويض النقص المحتمل من النفط الإيراني بسبب الحصار الأميركي، فطرحت السعودية نفسها البديل المستعدّ للتعويض، وقامت فوراً بإعدام 37 سعودياً بينهم أربعة من داعش و33 مدنياً من الشيعة لم يفعلوا سوى المطالبة بالحقوق المدنية. ألا تدفع هذه الأمور الى السؤال عن هوية القاتل الفعلي لهؤلاء؟ السعودية هي اليد التي نفذت الإعدام، لكن صاحب الأمر هو الراعي الأميركي الذي يواصل ارتكاب المجازر في العالم والشرق الأوسط منذ 1945 مباشرة أو بواسطة أعوانه السعوديين و»الإسرائيليين».

Advertisements

US Journalist to Al-Ahed: Saudi, “Israel” So Much Alike…Trump Continues to Protect Saudis’ Tyrannical Rule

Al-Ahed Correspondent

Here is the perfect resemblance of the English proverb “Money Talks”: It means a kingdom that continues to slaughter Yemen’s children and turns its women and students into burned corpses, a monarchy whose rulers silenced a journo by turning him into pieces. Recently, it also means executing 27 Saudi citizen in a gruesome bloodbath for just opposing the rule of “their majesties” without being punished.

Washington – The American journalist, Janice Kortkamp, dismissed Saudi Arabia’s April 23 executions of 37 people convicted on “terrorism” charges recalling that Amnesty International slammed the Saudi regime’s escalation in the use of the death penalty.

However, she clarified: “I must add though that Amnesty International has no credibility with me personally as I’ve seen how they have fabricated reports during the war against Syria and proven themselves in that conflict to be completely biased in favor of western backed armed groups.”

“They seek to be considered a valid, neutral watchdog of human rights abuses by reporting on and condemning things like this, however just like western based mainstream media, they are now tainted and their true character exposed.”

In an exclusive interview with Al-Ahed news, Kortkamp said she has “no doubt those prisoners were tortured and suffered beyond anything I can imagine” before being executed.

Kortkamp further said: “According to Saudi authorities, ‘terrorism’ seems to consist of any and all political or religious dissent”.

In parallel, she lamented the fact that both the Saudi kingdom and “Israel” use this [terrorism] pretext.

“The “Israelis” try to legitimize their daily atrocities against Palestinians, by even calling babies ‘terrorists’.”

“With the Saudis openly supporting and declaring an alliance with “Israel”, it is very likely in my opinion that we will see greater persecution of the Shia minority and quite possibly actions to ‘religiously cleanse’ KSA as the Zionists have been ethnically cleansing Palestine,” said Kortkamp.

“MBS seems to be continuing and increasing the tradition of the Saud clan’s consistent punishment against any form of opposition to their tyrannical rule”.

Moreover, the US journalist further remarked that “the lack of freedoms for religious minorities, women, and political dissenters” are the most important violations of human rights in Saudi Arabia.

Stressing that she does not know if the US was notified by the KSA government in advance of the executions, Kortkamp said: “I am sure they knew about it…[US President Donald] Trump, as former US presidents and other western leaders have, continues to protect, defend, assist – and often control – the Saud “royal” absolute dictators.”

In addition, she downplayed Trump’s alleged concerns of human rights violations and the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi: “Trump didn’t care about Khashoggi and he has proven he has no concern about Yemen by vetoing the bipartisan bill finally passed through Congress to end our involvement.”

“The only hope I see for America is that enough people get angry over these policies and demand change,” she added.

Read the Q&A form of the interview here

US Politicians, Journos, Activists Condemn Saudi Arabia’s Mass Beheadings

By Staff, Agencies

Human rights groups have hit out at the most recent brutal wave of punishment, revealed by the Saudis on Wednesday, in which 37 people killed.

Critics say the majority of those executed were convicted after sham trials that violated international standards and relied on confessions extracted through torture.

They also say the grisly and public punishments are being used as tools to crush pro-democracy campaigners, human rights activists, intellectuals and the Shia minority — to which at least 33 of those executed belonged to.

The mass execution was also denounced by a number of American politicians and journalists. Below are a few statements that went viral on social media:

Senator Dianne Feinstein: an American politician serving as the senior United States Senator from California.

I’m deeply troubled by the Saudi government’s mass execution of 37 prisoners, including 33 members of the kingdom’s Shiite minority. Human Rights Watch has reported that many of the confessions in two mass trials were obtained using torture and the prisoners later recanted.

I’ve called for the US to reconsider our relationship with Saudi Arabia and spoken out against the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the kingdom’s oppression of women’s rights activists and the numerous human rights violations committed by the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen.

These latest reports reinforce my concerns. We can’t look way from Saudi Arabia’s increased use of executions, particularly when so many questions surround the validity of the trials.

 

Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard: US Representative for Hawaii’s 2nd congressional district.

Trump/Pence continue to try to hide the truth from their Christian supporters–the terrorist attacks on Christians/Christian churches in Sri Lanka and elsewhere are inspired by the extremist Saudi ideology that Saudi Arabia spends billions propagating worldwide

The tweet also had a video pointing that the Saudis have been spending billions of dollars spreading an “intolerant form of Islam,” which she said inspires terrorist groups such as al Qaeda, the Wahhabi Daesh [Arabic acronym for “ISIS” / “ISIL”], and Boko Haram.

“It’s an ideology that preaches hatred and bias toward Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, and atheists, and Muslims who are not followers of that extremist ideology,” Gabbard said. “Yet President Trump and Pence, who pose as defenders of Christians and Christianity, have embraced the Saudis, the purveyors of this anti-Christian jihad.”

Gabbard concluded her video by saying people who believe “in the freedom of religion must demand that President Trump and Vice President Pence give up their unholy alliance with Saudi Arabia.”

 

Ilhan Omar: US Representative for Minnesota’s 5th congressional district.

This is appalling. We have to stop selling the Saudis weapons and supporting this brutality.

 

Rashida Tlaib: US Representative for Michigan’s 13th congressional district.

Saudi Arabia’s ruler MBS tortures & executes children. Already this year, he has killed 100 people. At least 3 today were arrested as teenagers & tortured into false confessions. He killed them for attending protests! Think about that.

 

Bernie Sanders: US politician and junior United States Senator from Vermont

Yesterday’s mass execution underscores how urgent it has become for the United States to redefine our relationship with the despotic regime in Saudi Arabia, and to show that the Saudis do not have a blank check to continue violating human rights and dictating our foreign policy.

 

Nicholas Kristof: American journalist and political commentator, New York Times Op-Ed Columnist.

Student slated to attend Western Michigan University beheaded in Saudi Arabia, after attending a pro-democracy protest. Remind me, @realDonaldTrump, why are we best buddies with Saudi Arabia?

 

Niraj Warikoo: an American journalist and the religion reporter for the Detroit Free Press.

Mujtaba al-Sweikat, a student slated to attend Western Michigan University, is beheaded in Saudi Arabia. He had been arrested when he was 17 by Saudis in 2012 after taking part in democracy rallies, and tortured while in custody.

 

Seth Abramson: an American professor, poet, attorney, and author.

Now MBS has beheaded a freshman acceptee to Western Michigan University.

 

Kenneth Roth: an American attorney who has been the executive director of Human Rights Watch since 1993.

Among the 37 men just executed by the Saudi government was Mujtaba al-Sweikat who at age 17 was detained at the airport on his way to attend Western Michigan University. His supposed offense was attending a pro-democracy rally during the Arab Spring.

 

Randi Weingarten: an American labor leader, attorney, and educator.

“.@AFTunion joins the international human rights community in condemning the government of #SaudiArabia for forced confessions, torture, beatings and now execution of young student protestor Mujtaba al-Sweikat. @Reprieve @amnesty @AFTIntlAffairs”

 

Lena Sun: the national reporter for The Washington Post.

One of the people executed on Tuesday was arrested at an airport in Saudi Arabia in 2012 as he was preparing to leave the country for a college visit to Western Michigan University, a human rights group said. He was 17 at the time.

 

Steven Metz: an American author and Senior Research Professor of National Security Affairs at the US Army War College Strategic Studies Institute

America needs to limit ties with that dark and backward despotism.

 

Jesse Singal: a Brooklyn-based journalist

This is an utterly horrific regime and in a world that made more sense no US president of any party would feel comfortable getting filmed gladhanding with its tyrants. Student slated to attend Western Michigan University beheaded in Saudi Arabia.

Related

Profile of MBS: Suspense, Games of Thrones and Fear of Democratic Win in the US Elections!

By Staff

In a paper entitled “Profile of a Prince: Promise and Peril in Mohammed bin Salman’s Vision 2030” submitted to the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Karen Elliott House wrote:

Relaxing with “Game of Thrones”

When the prince relaxes, he usually plays video games or watch television series like Game of Thrones or The Walking Dead. More recently, he has also taken to cardio workouts in his palace gym to control his weight and enhance his endurance.

Much of MBS’ energy continues to be devoted to marketing his vision of Saudi Arabia as a ‘strong world actor.’

He also evinces enormous confidence in his political instincts though they have been far from unerring. The risk inherent in change, he tells associates, is less than the risk of doing nothing. If he errs, he can correct it. If he dawdles, the country suffers.

Intrigue plays a large part in Saudi politics. So, too, does brutality. Western sensibilities are offended by the murder of Jamal Khashoggi and the Crown Prince’s insistence he played no role. Yet frightening opponents and cunningly avoiding entrapment are admired traditions in much of the Arab world.

Secretiveness and Surprise

Secretiveness is another political instinct of MBS. He is said to confide in no one and to make every effort to keep his aides guessing. In meetings with staff to discuss options, one aide says it does no good to focus on which proposal the prince seems to support. Often he selects one option simply to force his aides to provide even better arguments for one he will choose later. Certainly, his lightening-speed dawn arrests of his royal cousins and their incarceration in the Ritz Carlton in November 2017 was a well-kept secret.

Whether one man can single-handedly wrench a nation into modernity and transform his people into self-reliant citizens is a very open question. Daring decisiveness has been the hallmark of MBS’ brief tenure in power. First came subduing the religious police, then locking up his royal cousins for corruption. Soon followed the decision to let Saudi women drive. And most recently the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

King Salman does seem to be trying to at least put some guardrails around his son’s impulsive tendencies. Some close to MBS say that when he reaches a decision now he sometimes tells his team, “Let’s think on it.” Whether that is a genuine desire to check his thinking or a tactic to leave the appearance of doing so isn’t clear.

Political Crackdown

MBS has two broad responses to the dimming prospects of strong progress on economic reforms. The first is to distract Saudi citizens with a plethora of new entertainment from concerts, cinemas and sporting events described previously in this report. The second is to suppress any dissent.

Saudi Arabia, never an open society, is now the most repressive in at least the past 40 years.

With Vision 2030, MBS essentially proclaimed weaning the Kingdom off oil a national emergency with a strict deadline for success. As a result, he seems to view debate on any issue as potentially disruptive of the essential and urgent measures he is taking. If the Saudi house is on fire, citizens need to shut up and follow him to the prescribed exit seems to be his rationale. Given this mandate against any discussion, most Saudis no longer engage in even tepid tweets on social media, much less criticism.

US-Saudi Partnership under Duress

MBS’ penchant for political repression coupled with the Kingdom’s fumbled explanations for the death of Jamal Khashoggi have strained the US-Saudi alliance more than at any point since the September 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade Center. Only a year ago the Crown Prince was welcomed by the president in Washington, D.C., by New York’s business elite, by Hollywood’s biggest moguls and by Silicon Valley tech entrepreneurs as a young reformer eager to cooperate with America to transform his backward kingdom into a modern nation. A year later he dares not come to America. Hollywood moguls like Ariel Emmanuel have pulled out of plans to invest there. Emmanuel ended his company’s planned $400 million investment in the Kingdom in early March, though other Americans quietly continue to pursue the opportunity to make money in Saudi Arabia.

While Trump is sticking by MBS, accepting his denials of any involvement in the Khashoggi murder, the CIA concluded otherwise and many in Congress are determined to punish him for Khashoggi’s death. And Saudis during January visit there expressed deep concern about the future of the Kingdom’s relationship with the US if a Democrat wins the White House in 2020. “We are going to be singled out for retribution,” frets one Saudi who closely watches his country’s relations with Washington, D.C.

Undeniably, many of MBS’ foreign policy ventures have proved costly. The Saudi boycott of Qatar, which Riyadh accuses of spreading terrorism, has driven that small sheikdom closer to Iran and Turkey without precipitating any change in Qatar’s policies. More importantly to the US, it has undermined American efforts to build greater security cooperation among Saudi Arabia and other Gulf nations to reduce the security burden on Washington as the ultimate guarantor of stability in the Persian Gulf. Because the largest US Mideast airbase is in Qatar, the enmity between Qatar and Saudi Arabia has been especially trying for the Pentagon. MBS, who also is Saudi Defense Minister, seems completely unconcerned at his US ally’s discomfort. He continues to resist compromise with Qatar.

The stalemated war in Yemen is costing Saudi Arabia both financially and geopolitically. While Riyadh doesn’t disclose the cost of the war, those in a position to know estimate it consumes at least $25 billion annually. But beyond the financial costs, the growing international opprobrium over the rising number of civilian casualties there is robbing Saudi Arabia of valuable political support. Germany has ended arms sales to the Kingdom until September and made resumption conditional on progress to end the Yemen war. Pressure is growing in Britain and Canada to do likewise. Moreover, the US Congress is vowing to punish MBS for Khashoggi’s murder by blocking weapons sales to Riyadh for the war in Yemen. Trump has vetoed that congressional resolution but the damage to US-Saudi relations likely won’t end there.

Congress and the Trump Administration are also at odds over Saudi Arabia’s effort to purchase nuclear power plants to provide its domestic energy needs leaving its oil available for export. The Kingdom, considering buying nuclear technology from the US, South Korea, China or Russia, hasn’t yet agreed to safeguards that ensure it can’t enrich uranium to weapons grade. A bipartisan congressional resolution seeks to block any US nuclear technology sale without such safeguards leaving the Kingdom free to buy from Russia or China who don’t insist on such safeguards.

Beyond all the threats of tit for tat, what is going on in both Saudi Arabia and the US is a reassessment of the relationship. Since at least the presidency of George W. Bush, Saudi Arabia has been contemplating how to hedge its interests in a post-US Middle East.

Hyper-Hypocrisy of The West about ISIS

Hyper-Hypocrisy of The West about ISIS

ERIC ZUESSE | 19.03.2019 | WORLD / MIDDLE EAST

Hyper-Hypocrisy of The West about ISIS

During the period of 17 September to 11 December of 2016, the United States and its allies carried out a massive operation to move ISIS’s surviving jihadists who were in the oil-producing Iraqi region of Mosul, into the Syrian oil-producing region of Deir Ezzor and Palmyra. This was done so that those oil-stealing-and-selling jihadists in Iraq would now be stealing Syria’s oil and would thereby increase the likelihood of overthrowing Syria’s long-existing non-sectarian Government. The US and its allies would then replace that Government by one which would be controlled by the fundamentalist Sunni Saud family, who own Saudi Arabia, the long-time leading oil-power, and which family are America’s main foreign ally. The Sauds are crucial to maintaining the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency. The US aristocracy rely upon them.

Now that ISIS is being defeated by Syria’s Government (and by its allies Russia and Iran) in Syria, the United States and its allies are trying to find other governments that will take them in as refugees. It’s part of a deal the US regime reached with ISIS.

The issue of what to do with the thousands of surviving but (temporarily) defeated ISIS members — and with their spouses and children — has raised hypocrisy to perhaps the highest level in all of history. Its background needs to be understood if one wants to understand the sources of that enormous hypocrisy. Here’s this background:

When Russia started bombing ISIS in Syria on 30 September 2015, it greatly disturbed the US regime, which therefore started on 12 October 2015 to air-drop weapons into that area so as to help the jihadists to shoot down Russia’s jets, which were bombing ISIS. America’s Fox News Channel headlined “US military airdrops 50 tons of ammo for Syrian fighters, after training mission ends”. The US didn’t start bombing ISIS in Syria until 16 November 2015, and the US Government’s excuse for not having bombed them earlier was “This is our first strike against tanker trucks, and to minimize risks to civilians, we conducted a leaflet drop prior to the strike.” They pretended that it was done out of compassion — not in order to extend for as long as possible ISIS’s success in taking over territory in Syria.

And then on 26 February 2019, Syria’s government news-agency reported that the US had sent to the US Federal Reserve 40+ tons of gold that ISIS had accumulated from selling, on the international black markets, oil from Syria’s oil-producing region around Deir Ezzor — Syria’s oil stolen by ISIS and the proceeds now being stolen yet again by the US regime — and this gold now being sent to the US (On March 8th I reported the further background and context of that US theft from Syria.) The US regime had offered to ISIS-members who were in Syria’s oil-producing region a choice either to become captured and killed by Syria’s Government, or else for them to give to the US that gold, and the option which was selected by the jihadists was to give the gold to the US, which is therefore now trying to find other countries to send the jihadists to as ‘refugees’ (since Syria certainly doesn’t want them, and neither does the US regime). The US regime is honoring its commitments to those ‘former’ ISIS members and their families, to assist them to find countries which will accept those people as ‘refugees’. Sweden, being very liberal (meaning ideologically very confused), happens to be one of these countries, and is actually considering and debating whether to allow them in.

Zero Hedge is perhaps the keenest news-site for exposing The West’s rampant hypocrisies (and so all of The West’s propagandistic ’news’-sites hate it and call it ‘fake news’ even though it actually is more reliably accurate than the mainstream ones themselves are); and, on March 10th, it pointed out that Sweden was in a flurry over whether to accept, as refugees, ISIS jihadists who have escaped, and their spouses and children. Zero Hedge truthfully pointed out that,

Sweden’s new government, which was finally formed in January after months of delay, is introducing policies that will lead to more immigration into Sweden — despite the main governing party, the Social Democrats, having run for office on a promise to tighten immigration policies.
The right to family reunion for those people granted asylum in Sweden who do not have refugee status is being reintroduced — a measure that is estimated to bring at least 8,400 more immigrants to Sweden in the coming three years. According to the Minister of Migration, Morgan Johansson, this measure will “strengthen integration,” although he has not explained how.
“I think it is a very good humanitarian measure; 90 percent [of those expected to come] are women and children who have lived for a long time in refugee camps, [and] who can now be reunited with their father or husband in Sweden”, Johansson said.

This is supposed to be ‘democracy’?

However, that article, as noted at Zero Hedge, was written by Judith Bergman, of the Gatestone Institute. Sometimes, even such vicious propaganda-organizations, as that, produce authentic news, and here was such an instance. (It’s yet another reason why arguing ad-hominem, instead of strictly — that is, 100% — ad-rem, is essential to avoid, in order to determine truth and reject lies. That was a truthful article. Though Bergman wrote for a hate-mongering anti-Muslim site, the reporting in it was honest and factual. So, here’s some ad-hominem background to it, not as a part of the argument in this particular case — regarding Sweden’s debate over whether to accept former ISIS members as refugees — but instead as context explaining how this truth came to be published by the hate-mongering Gatestone:)

The Gatestone Institute is a rabidly pro-Israeli-Jews, and rabidly anti-Palestinian and anti-Muslim operation, which was founded and is run by the heir and grand-daughter, Nina Rosenwald, of the biggest early (1895) investor in Sears Roebuck & Co., Julius Rosenwald. He died in 1932. His heir and son was Nina’s father, and in 1939 he“was one of three founding members of the United Jewish Appeal (UJA).[12] [Nina] Rosenwald’s mother, a professional violinist, was a refugee from both the Russian Revolution and Nazi Germany.[9].” Nina, being not very bright, was never able to rid herself of the prejudices her parents felt against Palestinians and generally against Muslims (since Israel’s main supremacism is against Muslims, because Israel’s ruling ethnicity, Jews, have been stealing land from Muslims). Nina identifies herself as “a human rights activist”. (As was said at the start here, this issue “has raised hypocrisy to perhaps the highest level in all of history.”) She had, in fact, hired John Bolton as Gatestone’s Chairman; and, for his service as that, during June 2017 to March 2018 (when he became hired as Trump’s National Security Advisor), Bolton received $310,000. So, Bill Berkowitz headlined on 27 September 2018 “Meet Nina Rosenwald, the Sears Heiress Seeding Islamophobia at Home and Abroad”, and he brought together and linked to the great reporting by Max Blumenthal and by Lee Fang, documenting the Gatestone Institute’s rabid global hate-mongering for Israel.

But, in this particular case (the article by Judith Bergman), there was no deceit, because nothing in her reporting violated Nina Rosenwald’s biggest hatred, hatred of Muslims — so, these truths were acceptable to Rosenwald. Bergman’s article happened to be truthful Israeli propaganda. (After all: some propaganda is truthful.)

The Israeli regime won’t have any credibility whatsoever unless it condemns Sweden’s compassion for jihadists and for the wives and children of jihadists. Israel’s Minister of Justice had endorsed exterminating all Palestinians, but that rationale — sheer bigotry — for opposing them, isn’t suitable for foreign consumption, and so it was almost immediately disappeared from its public posting (shown there at that link). If Israel can’t pretend to be against Muslims on account of jihadists, then Israel’s barbaric treatment of its Palestinians won’t make any sense at all to the many fools (mainly in America, Israel’s chief patron) who support Israel (such as the Rosenwalds do). The US regime hides the barbarous reality of Israel, but that reality isn’t blacked-out quite as much in the rest of the world; so, Israel can’t afford to be publicly silent regarding jihadists, even in cases where the US regime would prefer such silence. Obviously, the US regime wants Sweden to accept those ‘former’ ISIS members (because the US regime aims to conquer Russia and all nations — such as Syria — that are allied with Russia, and uses ISIS, Al Qaeda, and nazis, as “boots-on-the-ground” mercenaries, in order to do that), and so this ISIS-as-refugees issue is one on which the American regime and the Israeli regime happen to disagree.

Bergman closed her article by describing the Swedish Government’s efforts to be compassionate toward jihadists while the Swedish Government also provides an appearance of caring for the safety of non-jihadist (the vast majority of) Swedes:

On a positive note, however, at the end of February, the Swedish government presented plans to introduce legislation that would criminalize membership of a terrorist organization. This new law would enable the prosecuting of returning ISIS fighters who cannot be connected to a specific crime, but who were proven to have been part of a terrorist organization. Critics have pointed out that it has taken years for the government to take steps to criminalize membership of terror organizations.

Sweden is hypocritically ‘neutral’, but actually a vassal nation of the United States. Sweden is being pushed by its master, the US regime, to accept some of the people the US Government had been protecting in order for the US to become enabled to take over Syria and to deliver it to the US aristocracy’s chief ally the Sauds; and, so, the Swedish Government is now trying to square this circle, in order to satisfy everyone at least somewhat. This split loyalty (between the imperial master, and the domestic public) is what’s called ‘democracy’, nowadays. The master pulls one way, the public are confused or undecided, and the US regime’s other main Middle Eastern ally, Israel, is pulling in the exact opposite direction, on this particular matter. This is how international affairs actually are being decided. The various aristocracies come to an agreement on how to proceed. The respective publics are virtually ignored, except as fronts for their PR. That’s today’s international order, just as has been the case for thousands of years: it is agreements that are reached between aristocracies.

Back in September of 2018, the US regime was backed by the United Nations in opposing Russia’s and Syria’s plan simply to slaughter all of the tens of thousands of Al Qaeda-affiliated jihadists (and their families), whom the Syrian Government had exiled to Idlib, Syria’s most pro-jihadist province, and who were being collected there with the intention to destroy them all at the very end of the war — finally to finish them off there. Both Syria’s Government and Russia’s Government wanted simply to destroy them en-masse, at the war’s end. However, because of the success of that US-based (and also U.N.-backed) international propaganda campaign arguing that bombing them would be ‘inhumane’, those jihadists survive, and will probably also be moved to other nations. Sweden could become one such nation, if they decide to take in not only ‘former’ ISIS but ‘former’ Al Qaeda, as ’refugees’. The US has protected both of those groups, against Syria’s Government.

Hypocrisy exists when people don’t care enough about their values so as to think carefully through to decide what values — if any — they actually hold, and what their actual priorities are. Fools like that are the meat upon which their aristocrats constantly feast, producing, as the aristocracy’s excrements, bigots (such as jihadists, and such as the majority of Israelis — and such as people who accept those bigots). Without those fools, aristocrats would need to actually earn a living, instead of merely to live off the fat (the fools) of the land and thereby producing this waste-matter, bigots, who make things difficult for everybody else, including for any decent people who might happen to exist in the given receiving nation (such as in Sweden).

The origin of The West’s hypocrisies that claim to be supporting “human rights” and “democracy” around the world, while actually invading or overthrowing target-governments, go back at least as far as Cecil Rhodes in the late 1800s, and the rationale that’s given of it is entirely fraudulent. It is the difference between, on the one hand, an authentic revolution, which can sometimes produce a democracy, versus, on the other hand, a coup or else an invasion, neither of which can, nor is actually designed to, produce a democracy. But the PR has to say the reason for an invasion or coup or sanctions (such as against Venezuela or Iran or Syria or Libya or Iraq or Ukraine) is to promote ‘human rights’ or ‘democracy’ or ‘oppose corruption’ in the given target-country that’s to be, basically, destroyed. Suckers are necessary, in order for this fraud — the actual aristocratic control of international relations — to succeed. And that’s how the system works. It works by that combination, of liars and fools.

فجور وليس فجراً

13-01-2019

علي البداح 

إن من يعتقدون أن الصهاينة يمكن أن يشكلوا دعما لدول الخليج العربية واهمون إلى أقصى درجات الوهم، فاليهود لم يتخلوا لحظة واحدة عن حلمهم في إنشاء إسرائيل الكبرى، وإن تقريبهم وتسليمهم أغنى بقع العالم سيمكنهم من السيطرة على العالم، وسيقضون على شعوب المنطقة، وفي مقدمتهم الفجرة الذين يدعون إلى التصالح معهم.

الأصوات النشاز التي تدعو إلى التطبيع مع الكيان الصهيوني وبيع فلسطين وأهلها أصوات فاجرة لا تنتمي إلى هذه الأمة ولا تقيم وزنا لها، وللأسف فإن هذه الأصوات تمنح الكيان الصهيوني طوق نجاة بعد أن بدأ العالم ينحسر عن دعم هذا الكيان، ويستنكر ما يقوم به الصهاينة من انتهاكات وقتل وتدمير لشعبنا العربي الفلسطيني واستباحة لأراضينا العربية.

في الوقت الذي اتضح للدنيا الدور القذر للصهاينة في شق الصف العربي وتخريب كياناته وتجنيد المرتزقة لتغذية الطائفية وتدمير وطننا العربي يأتي الفجرة بإعلان الخضوع لهذا الكيان والدعوة للتعاون والتطبيع معه، تماما كما فعل أحد الاستراتيجيين الكويتيين بدعوة الصهاينة لخلق مظلة لحماية دول الخليج، وكأن ما يحدث في وطننا العربي من صنع شياطين آخرين، وليس لنا من يصدهم عنا إلا عدونا الأول ومنتهك عرض بلادنا.

الأصوات النشاز ما كان لها أن تخرج بهذا الفجور لو لم يكن لها من يساعدها من الطامعين بالوصول والمنبطحين للأميركيين والذين يجدون أن الدعم الأميركي لن يكون الا بالانبطاح للكيان الصهيوني، ومرمغة شرفهم وشرف أوطانهم تحت أقدام المغتصبين والمخربين لوطننا العربي. هذا الفجور قد يكون قنبلة اختبار لمعرفة رد فعل الشعب الكويتي من هذا الطرح السخيف المتعارض أصلا مع موقف الدولة الرسمي الحالي، ولا بد أن يسمع الجميع صوت الشعب الكويتي واستنكاره لهذا الفجور، ورفضه أي تقارب مع العدو الصهيوني.

في الولايات المتحدة وبريطانيا وهما من أكبر الدول الداعمة للكيان الصهيوني نسمع الآن أصواتا تتكلم ولأول مرة بوضوح وصراحة عن رفض سيطرة اليهود على مجريات السياسة في بلادهم، بل إننا بدأنا نسمع عن خطر اليهود على كل قرار في أوطانهم، وبدأ الشعبان الأميركي والبريطاني يريان في اليهود خطراً على العالم، وبدأت قوى كثيرة تستنكر ما يقوم به الصهاينة من قتل وتدمير في فلسطين، بل بدأت تظهر قوى تدعو للاعتراف بالشعب الفلسطيني سيداً على أرضه.

إن ما يحدث من بعض الفجرة العرب هو عملية إنقاذ للكيان الصهيوني، وكنا نعتقد أن الكويت ستكون أبعد عن هذه المواقف، لكن بعض المرتزقة الفجرة يريدون زج الكويت في عملية الإنقاذ.

إن الذين يعتقدون أن الصهاينة يمكن أن يشكلوا دعما لدول الخليج العربية واهمون إلى أقصى درجات الوهم، فاليهود لم يتخلوا لحظة واحدة عن حلمهم في إنشاء إسرائيل الكبرى، وتقريبهم وتسليمهم أغنى بقع العالم سيمكنهم من السيطرة على العالم، وسيقضون على شعوب المنطقة، وفي مقدمتهم الفجرة الذين يدعون إلى التصالح معهم.

Imagine If Saudi Arabia Was Not a US Ally

Imagine If Saudi Arabia Was Not a US Ally

EDITOR’S CHOICE | 15.12.2018

Imagine If Saudi Arabia Was Not a US Ally

Caitlin JOHNSTONE

The US Senate has voted 56 to 41 to sorta-kinda eventually end America’s part in the Saudi-led war in Yemen, one step out of a great many that will need to happen in order to end the worst humanitarian crisis on the face of the earth.

The joint resolution still allows US drones to patrol Yemeni airspace and rain death from above in its “war on terror” against Al Qaeda, and it is unable to pass in the House this year due to an unbelievably sleazy rider that House Republicans attached to the unrelated Farm Bill. The resolution isn’t expected to change much in terms of actual US participation in the war besides some intelligence and reconnaissance assistance to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates against the Houthi rebels, since the US has already ended its assistance in refueling Saudi jets on their bombing campaigns as of last month. Trump is expected to veto any Yemen resolutions, and the Senate resolution was not passed with a veto-proof supermajority.

Still, it’s a step. A step in the right direction, both toward congress imposing some checks and balances on the Executive Branch’s heretofore obscenely unchallenged war powers, and toward the US government moving into opposition to the brazen war crimes being inflicted upon the Yemeni people by America’s close ally Saudi Arabia. And I think that last bit is worth taking a moment to think about.

Research from the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project indicates that up to 80,000 people have been killed in this war, which would be eight times more than the 10,000 figure we’ve been hearing from the mainstream media for years on those rare occasions they’ve felt like mentioning Yemen. And it is important to note that this number applies to deaths by military violence only, not to the other untold tens of thousands who have died of starvation and cholera as a result of Saudi Arabia’s inhuman blockades on imports and its deliberate targeting of farms, fishing boats, marketplaces, food storage sites and cholera treatment centers with airstrikes. Just for children under the age of five, the death toll due to starvation alone is believed to be around 85,000.

So that’s what’s going on while the bureaucrats on Capitol Hill are slowly pushing their pencils and the diplomats are making nicey nicey with theocratic Gulf state tyrants. If Saudi Arabia were not an ally of the United States, this matter would be treated very, very differently.

In May of last year, then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was given a memo by his assistant, virulent Iran hawk Brian Hook. The memo, intended to educate the struggling political neophyte Tillerson on the finer points of State Department manipulation, laid out the beltway’s standard protocol for dealing with Washington’s allies and its enemies. Hook said human rights issues are something the US government presses its enemies on but not its allies, naming China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran as examples of US enemies who violate human rights, and naming Egypt, the Philippines, and Saudi Arabia as examples of US allies who violate human rights.

“In the case of US allies such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the Philippines, the Administration is fully justified in emphasizing good relations for a variety of important reasons, including counter-terrorism, and in honestly facing up to the difficult tradeoffs with regard to human rights,” Hook wrote. “One useful guideline for a realistic and successful foreign policy is that allies should be treated differently — and better — than adversaries. Otherwise, we end up with more adversaries, and fewer allies. The classic dilemma of balancing ideals and interests is with regard to America’s allies. In relation to our competitors, there is far less of a dilemma. We do not look to bolster America’s adversaries overseas; we look to pressure, compete with, and outmaneuver them. For this reason, we should consider human rights as an important issue in regard to US relations with China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. And this is not only because of moral concern for practices inside those countries. It is also because pressing those regimes on human rights is one way to impose costs, apply counter-pressure, and regain the initiative from them strategically.”

And indeed this is exactly the sort of behavior we see from the US government, not just from its official branches like the State Department but from its unofficial ones as well, including the mainstream media. Just look at the France protests, which have seen mass arrests and protesters getting eyes shot out and hands blown off by brutal police responses while receiving nary a whisper of commentary from the plutocrat-owned talking heads, yet if this were happening in Russia we all know it would be forced into viral trends and pushed into public consciousness at every opportunity.

If Saudi Arabia existed in the “enemies” column instead of the “allies”, we’d have been seeing constant mass media coverage of its butchery in Yemen for almost four years now. MSNBC, which recently went more than a year without mentioning Yemen even a single time, would be tearfully depicting the dying children with the same urgency it covered the “uniquely horrific” sarin gas attack alleged to have taken place in Syria last year, and doing so regularly. The starving children of Yemen would be on the forefront of western consciousness instead of the back burner, and demands to make it stop would be screaming from coast to coast.

That’s seriously it. That one stupid, silly shift from the “allies” column to the “enemies” column would make the difference between night and day in the western world’s response to the slaughter in Yemen. The Saudi royals would be vilified, and that vilification would be used to manufacture support for sanctions and strategies to shove the KSA off the world stage. CIA covert ops would be implemented to sow discord, and starvation sanctions would target Saudi civilians to help stoke the flames of discontent. Regime change would take place via invasion or staged coup, and then a puppet regime would be installed which would quietly make the shift to selling all Saudi oil in US dollars.

And in the meantime, God help Trump if he was stupid enough to stay cozied up with the Saudis, because guess what? There’s a lot more evidence for Saudi collusion than there is for Russia collusion. The all-you-can-eat nothingburger of Russiagate would have been replaced by far more concrete and straightforward stories about direct financial ties to the Saudi government, an emissary for a Saudi prince who wanted to help Trump win the 2016 election, and remarks by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman that Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner is “in his pocket”. Trump’s creepy glowing orb picture alone would have mainstream Saudi-gate conspiracy theorists in intractable hysterics.

Of course none of this would ever have had a chance to happen, because if Saudi Arabia were not a US ally, it would have been invaded and forcibly regime changed immediately after 9/11.

But Saudi Arabia is a US ally, and a very close one indeed. Its petrodollar deal, its prime strategic location and its ability to move vast amounts of wealth around behind a veil of total government opacity in the facilitation of sociopathic agendas has made it a priceless asset in the US-centralized empire’s relentless quest for global domination. This remains true in spite of whatever particular quibbles that empire might happen to have with MBS, and in spite of any journalists’ unfortunate encounters with any bone saws.

The struggle to dominate the Middle East remains one of the foremost priorities of elite power in this world, and they’re going to do everything they can not to let a few piles of dead children interfere with an important alliance. The butchery in Yemen is the single worst thing that is happening in the world today, and because of the power dynamics that are at play, we’re going to need a whole lot more than a feel-good Senate vote to heal it. It’s a step. We must keep stepping.

medium.com

%d bloggers like this: