Saudi Arabia Admits To John Kerry That It Created ISIS... But There Is A Twist
20
April, 2016
On
the day Barack Obama is kowtowing
to his Saudi allies,
and just days after a senior Obama administration finally made the
admission that has been a "conspiracy theory" for years
namely that "a
lot of the money, the seed money if you will, for what became Al
Qaeda, came out of Saudi Arabia,"
the FT is out with another stunning revelation.
The FT
has written an
article that supposedly focuses on the US sources of growing
diplomatic antipathy between the US and Saudi Arabia. The source of
disagreement: the treatment of Iran.
As US President Barack Obama arrives on a valedictory visit to Saudi Arabia this week, that 70-year-old bargain looks frayed by fractious relations with a ruling House of Saud that is coming under unpredictable new management. The shale-based energy revolution meanwhile shows the potential to liberate the US from dependence on Saudi and Gulf oil. Mr Obama’s main foreign policy achievement, the nuclear deal struck last year between international powers and Iran, is abhorrent to Saudi Arabia, whose virulently sectarian Wahhabi interpretation of Sunni Islam abominates the Shia Islam of Iran and its Arab network of co-religionists from Baghdad to Beirut.
But
it was not just Iran.
"Even
when the Iran deal was only at an interim and fragile stage in
2013, the
Saudis were so affronted they rejected a seat for which they had
vigorously lobbied on the UN Security Council. But
differences between Washington and Riyadh had been steadily
accumulating — starting
with the fact that it was mainly Saudi terrorists, on orders of the
Saudi Osama bin Laden, who struck America on 9/11."
However
the real reason for Iraqi fury at Obama goes further back. In fact,
it appears that all current events are shaped by the disastrous
foreign policy of Obama's early years, namely the US intervention
behind the Arab Spring:
The Saudis could never reconcile themselves to the US-led invasion of Iraq, not because it toppled Saddam Hussein but because it led to Shia majority rule in an Arab country. When Hosni Mubarak was toppled by Egypt’s popular revolt in 2011, Riyadh accused Mr Obama of betraying a US ally. Saudi perceptions of US complacency in the face of Iran’s advances in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen are a grievance far outweighing western perceptions of Isis jihadism as the main threat in and from the Middle East.
But
the punchline: Saudi's
admission that it itself crea
ted Daesh, or ISIS.
As for the twist: as
the late Saudi foreign minister says, the Saudis only created ISIS in
response to Obama's disastrous policy in the region.
To
wit:
After the Iraqi city of Mosul fell to a lightning Isis offensive in 2014, even the late Prince Saud al-Faisal, the respected Saudi foreign minister, remonstrated with John Kerry, US secretary of state, that “Daesh [Isis] is our [Sunni] response to your support for the Da’wa” — the Tehran-aligned Shia Islamist ruling party of Iraq.
And
there you have it, and as a reminder, the person who was in charge of
US foreign policy during this entire period was none other than...
But
that is just part of the story.
As
we revealed
last year courtesy of leaked CIA documents,
according to investigative reporter Nafeez Ahmed the "leaked
document reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and
Turkey, the
West intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize
Assad, despite anticipating that doing so could lead to the emergence
of an ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
"According to the newly declassified US document, the Pentagon foresaw the likely rise of the ‘Islamic State’ as a direct consequence of the strategy, but described this outcome as a strategic opportunity to “isolate the Syrian regime."
In
other words, the Saudis may have created ISIS in response to US
foreign policy, but this had been known all too well to the US from
the beginning, who not only were "in on it", but actively
groomed the terrorist organization, ostensibly through a clandestine
spy organization whose name is conveniently abbreviated to just three
letters.
Which
ultimately means that just like Al Qaeda was funded, i.e., created,
by Saudi Arabia, so its replacement on the global bogeyman scale, the
Islamic State terrorist are nothing more than conveniently puppets,
played from day one by the interplay of Saudi and US national
interests.
And
since the US clearly knew about the formation of ISIS, it is also
safe to assume that the US government may well have been aware of the
tactics and strategy used by Al Qaeda, especially on that fateful day
of September 11, 2001.
When
will this be confirmed? Hopefully just as soon as those "28
pages" of high confidential documents are finally declassified.
We are holding our breath...
The Smoking Gun: "Document 17" Links Saudi Embassy In Washington To Sept 11
Zero Hedge,
20 April, 2016
With the topic of Saudi Arabia's involvement in the Sept 11 attack on everyone's lips, if certainly not those of president Obama who is currently in Riyadh where he is meeting with members of Saudi royalty in what may be his last trip to the Saudi nation as US president, many have been clamoring for the information in the suddenly notorious "28-pages" (following the recent
0 Minutes episode) to be released to the public so the US population can finally relegate all those "conspiracy theories" surrounding the real perpetrator behind the Sept 11 terrorist attack to the "conspiracy fact" pile.
It
won't have to wait that long.
As The
Times writes
today, new evidence has come to light of a definitive link between
Saudi Arabian officials and the 9/11 terrorist attacks "further
raising tensions as President Obama travels to the kingdom."
According
to the report, Ghassan Al-Sharbi, a Saudi who became an al-Qa’ida
bomb maker, is believed to have taken flying lessons with some of the
9/11 hijackers in Arizona but did not take part in the attacks on New
York and the Pentagon that killed 3,000 people in 2001.
He
was captured in Pakistan in 2002 and has since been held at
Guantanamo Bay. According to a US memo, known as document 17,
written in 2003 and quietly declassified last year, the FBI learnt
that he had buried a cache of papers shortly before he was captured
.
Think
of "Document 17" as a mini version of the "28 pages"
whose content has yet to be revealed. The document was written by two
US investigators examining the possible roles of foreign governments
in the attacks.
One
detail leapt out at the FBI agents from the papers that Sharbi had
tried to hide: his US flight certificate was in an envelope from
the Saudi embassy in Washington.
A
car pulls into the Saudi Arabian embassy in Washington, AP Photo
And
there is your smoking gun, which has been fully available to the
US government for the pat 13 years.It should have also been available
to the American public.
Understandably,
Brian McGlinchey, the activist who uncovered document 17, asked a
simple question: "The envelope points to the fundamental
question hanging over us today: to what extent was the 9/11 plot
facilitated by individuals at the highest levels of the Saudi
government?"
Here
is the problem. As the Times puts it, "president Obama is
expected to meet on Wednesday with King Salman, whose kingdom is
under pressure from low oil prices, an emboldened Iran and
Washington’s tougher stance. The Saudi government threatened last
week to dump $750 billion in US Treasury securities and other
American assets if congress passes a bill that would clear a path for
the families of 9/11 victims to file lawsuits against the kingdom."
In
other words, Obama will not ask any questions of King Salman, let
alone the "fundamental" one.
So
perhaps it is time to get a president who will ask the question:
Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, the Democratic presidential
candidates, backed the bill, which Mr Obama has signaled he will
veto. Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, the leading Republicans in the race,
have warned Saudi Arabia that its relationship with the US must
change. “Friends do not fund jihadists that are seeking to murder
us,” Mr Cruz said.
Sp
even as all of Obama's potential replacements have at least promised
to investigate further, we wonder:just why is Obama so terrified of
the US public getting access to the truth?
If
he is so worried about the Saudi liquidation threat, he shouldn't be:
after all the Fed would be deliriously happy at the opportunity to
monetize another $750 billion in assets and inject three-quarters of
a trillion in fresh "reserves" aka liquidity into the
system.
Meanwhile,
Obama has other problems: the US president also faces calls to
release a redacted 28-page portion of a joint congressional report on
the 9/11 attacks, produced in 2002 and thought to link senior Saudi
figures to the plot. He suggested on Monday that a decision was
imminent.
We
are confident his "decision" in this matter will be to
likewise prevent the truth from emerging, because as Congressman
Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, said: "I had to stop
every couple of pages ... to rearrange my understanding of
history." No further comment necessary.
Meanwhile
the lies go on.
Bob
Graham, a former chairman of the US senate intelligence committee,
has alleged that Saudi Arabia was the principal financier of 9/11.
“The effect of withholding [the pages] has been to embolden Saudi
Arabia to be a continuing source of financial and human terror
resources,” he said.
Document
17, written by Dana Lesemann and Michael Jacobson, will deepen
suspicions. Ms Lesemann is said to have been sacked from the
9/11 commission after she circumvented her boss to access the 28
pages.
Mr
Jacobson was the principal author of the 28 pages, and document 17
hints at his suspicions. "How aggressively has the US government
investigated possible ties between the Saudi government and/or royal
family and the September 11th attacks?" it asks.
The
answer: not at all. It's about time the American people asked why
not.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.