USS Persian Gulf

With Israel threatening to bomb Iran before the US presidential elections, and their silent partners Qatar and Saudi Arabia financing CIA arms flow to Syrian “rebels”; tensions in the Persian Gulf region are again on the rise. Since the overthrow of the US-puppet Shah in 1979, the international banksters have armed Iran’s Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) neighbors to the teeth.

(Excerpted from Big Oil & Their Bankers…Chapter 5: Persian Gulf Rent-a-Sheik)

By Dean Henderson, Left Hook

Following the Iranian Revolution the US more overtly displayed its willingness to lean on the Saudi monarchy.  During the 1979 border war between North and South Yemen US Secretary of Defense and Trilateralist Harold Brown pressured the Saudis to supply $390 million worth of US weapons to North Yemen where US advisers were running the show.  The conflict underscored the vulnerability of the oilfields of the Kingdom to the kind of nationalist rhetoric coming from the neighboring South Yemen government.

Brown also directed the Saudis finance the sale of twelve F-SE fighters by the US to Sudan.  With the Shah deposed, Brown busied himself selling surplus Iranian-bound weapons to the Saudis, as well as to Israel, Jordan, Oman and Egypt.  In the spring of 1980 the US signed a military pact with Turkey and sent the Turks $1 billion in weaponry. [206]

The Saudis immediately announced an oil production increase when the mullahs took Tehran.  Within two weeks of that announcement the US State Department unveiled a $1.2 billion program to shore up the Saudi National Guard.  The program would be supervised by Vinnell Corporation, a subsidiary of TRW, the San Francisco-based consumer credit reporting giant and leading supplier of NSA spy satellites.  By 1979 Saudi purchases of US weaponry surpassed even those of the Israelis.

Bendix, Raytheon, Grumman, Northrup, Lockheed, TWA and the US Army Corps of Engineers all flocked to Riyadh to exhibit their wares.  The US implemented American Peace Shield, through which tens of billions of dollars in defense contracts would be doled out.  Richard Secord swung an $8.5 billion contract for Boeing to provide AWACs to the Saudis.  An integrated Command and Control Center (C3) was established in Saudi Arabia. [207]

The US, Britain and France pushed for defense offset deals with the Kingdom, under which weapons were paid for in oil.  In 1990 the Saudis bought French Crotale missiles, with the French receiving discounted oil and promised to invest in Saudi industry.  A British program known as Al-Yamamah was spearheaded by British Aerospace (BAE) and run by a consortium of pan-European interests, whose governments established the Anglo-Saudi Committee.

Under Al-Yamamah the Euro governments, along with BP Amoco and Royal Dutch/Shell, receive free oil.  European arms dealers get contracts with the House of Saud and the Saudis receive help from the British in moving their oil operations downstream by investing in old Eastern European oil refineries. [208]

In 1989 BAE contracted to build Prince Sultan Air Base, while also selling Tornado fighters to the Saudis.  BAE bought Ballast Nedam, a Dutch heavy construction firm with Saudi ties, which built the massive bridge that now links the Saudi mainland to Bahrain. BAE netted $60 billion in the largest contract ever received from the Saudis by a Western company.

According to a June 27, 2007 Financial Times article, Al-Yamamah and BAE were being investigated by the US Justice Department.

The militarization of the Gulf Region went beyond the borders of Saudi Arabia.  In 1980 US arms sales and military aid to the GCC emirates were unprecedented.  The AWAC-monitored C3 defense system, now in place in Saudi Arabia, would be integrated with Hawk missile systems installed in all six GCC nations.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Is Muhammad Movie a Contrived Fraud?

Bizarre story behind film that supposedly sparked middle east unrest

“The bizarre circumstances behind The Innocence of Muslims, its shadowy creators and the deliberate attempt to manipulate the film to offend Muslims clearly suggests that the whole farce was a contrived set-up to inflame tensions in order to justify an acceleration of U.S., Israeli and NATO aggression across the Middle East and North Africa.”

By Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars

An anti-Muslim film that has been blamed for the attacks on U.S. embassies in Egypt, Libya and Yemen is likely a contrived fraud designed to stir up unrest in the Middle East while shielding the true reasons behind the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens.

A trailer for the film, entitled The Innocence of Muslims, has been on You Tube for over two months. Despite the alleged film maker’s claim that the movie was funded by rich Jewish donors to the tune of $5 million dollars, it has all the quality of a low budget film school project. The trailer has now been banned in several middle eastern countries, including Egypt and Afghanistan.

Indeed, the full film itself may not even exist, a doubt that has also been shared about the existence of its shadowy director Sam Bacile, who told the Associated Press this week that he was a 56-year-old “Israeli Jew” who lives in California, despite telling actors on set that he is Egyptian, while others have claimed he is an American.

Bacile claims he made the film to illustrate how “Islam is a cancer, period.”

However, numerous authorities have failed in attempting to locate a ‘Sam Bacile’ residing in California. Bacile is likely a pseudonym for the only real person who has been positively connected with the movie – Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a 55-year-old Coptic Christian living in California who was convicted for federal bank fraud in 2010.

The movie itself – or the 14 minutes of it which have been released – is also highly suspect.Actors involved in filming were told “they were appearing in a film about the life of a generic Egyptian 2,000 years ago.” Following the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, all 80 cast members put out a joint statement stating that they were misled by the producer.

“The entire cast and crew are extremely upset and feel taken advantage of by the producer. We are 100% not behind this film and were grossly misled about its intent and purpose,” the statement says. “We are shocked by the drastic re-writes of the script and lies that were told to all involved. We are deeply saddened by the tragedies that have occurred.”

The film has been purposely dubbed and edited to elicit maximum outrage from Muslims. The Prophet Muhammad is depicted as a pedophile, a homosexual, a religious phony, a philanderer, a womanizer and a bloodthirsty dictator.

During dialogue, the actors words have been crudely dubbed to include references to Muhammad that were not in the original script.

As Cindy Lee Garcia, an actress involved in the movie, told Gawker, “In the script and during the shooting, nothing indicated the controversial nature of the final product. Muhammed wasn’t even called Muhammed; he was “Master George.”

“The words Muhammed were dubbed over in post-production, as were essentially all other offensive references to Islam and Muhammed,” writes Adrian Chen.

For example, at 9:03 in the trailer, the words “Is your Muhammed a child molester?” are heard, yet the actress’ voice has been dubbed as her lips do not form the word “Muhammed”.

As the Christian Science Monitor summarizes, the film looks like, “it could have been ginned up by someone sitting a basement with cheap dubbing software.”

Everything about the movie suggests it was a contrived fraud to artificially manufacture unrest in the middle east at a time where speculation that the U.S. and Israel are about to launch military interventions in Iran and Syria is rife.

The amateurish nature of the film may be a ruse to deflect suspicion away from its true purpose and the real identities of its creators.

“Those sniffing the air properly smell some sort of intelligence/influence operation in the whole situation,” writes Daniel McAdams, comparing the film to Kony 2012. “A purposely bad cover for what happened in Benghazi yesterday? A badly done attempted cover for what happened yesterday? Arabs — even Muslim Brotherhood — looking to score points by blaming “wealthy Jews” for making the film? A power struggle between Islamist factions in Egypt? Israelis attempting to make it look like Arabs made a crudely anti-Semitic cover story for a crude film?”

Continue reading

US Sponsored “Islamic Fundamentalism”: The Roots of the US-Wahhabi Alliance

By Benjamin Schett (thanks to Hajer Naili for sharing this post with us)

The alliance between the United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia helped spread the ideology of fundamentalist Sunni Islam all over the globe. The majority of its victims are not citizens of Western countries, but citizens of countries that U.S. elites consider a threat to their economic and geopolitical interests. Many victims of Sunni extremism (often called Wahhabism or Salafism[1]) are in fact Muslims (often with a secular leftist or nationalist political background), moderate Sunni or members of Shiʿite Islamic faith.

This article addresses the history of Wahhabi fundamentalism and the examples of Afghanistan in the 80s, as well as the current situation in Syria. Both cases illustrate America’s responsibility for the destruction of secular, socially progressive societies in the Islamic world and elsewhere.

The Origins of Wahhabism

Wahhabi ideology serves U.S. interests for several reasons. Its followers’ archaic perception of society makes them reject any kind of progressive social change. Therefore they are well equipped to push back socialist, secular or nationalist movements, whose independence-oriented policies are a threat to America’s geopolitical agenda. Although Wahhabism certainly is not representative of the majority of Sunni Muslims, Wahhabi Muslims are Sunni extremists, which causes them to maintain an extremely hostile stance towards Shi’te Islam. Continue reading

Obama Failed To Inform [or Bypassed] Congress On The Drone Wars in Yemen And Pakistan

White House, Citing Public’s Right to Know, Stonewalls on Yemen War

President Obama backstage at a May speech in Albany, New York. Photo: Pete Souza/ White House

By Noah Shachtman

The center of the US drone war has shifted to Yemen, where 23 American strikes have killed an estimated 155 people so far this year. But you wouldn’t know about it — or about the cruise missile attacks, or about the US commando teams in Yemen — by reading the report the White House sent to Congress about US military activities around the globe. Instead, there’s only the blandest acknowledgement of “direct action” in Yemen, “against a limited number of [al-Qaida] operatives and senior leaders.”

The report, issued late Friday, is the first time the United States has publicly, officially acknowledged the operations in Yemen and in nearby Somalia that anyone with internet access could’ve told you about years ago. But the report doesn’t just fail to admit the extent of the shadow war that America is waging in the region. It’s borderline legal — at best. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 requires the president to inform Congress about any armed conflicts America is engaged in. Friday’s report isn’t just uninformative about Yemen. It doesn’t even mention the US campaign in Pakistan, even though the Defense Secretary says America is “at war” there.

[Editor’s Note: We Told you so, Obama is behaving as a complete Dictator, Bypassing Congress for WAR]

Continue reading

Panetta admits that US is at war in Pakistan

20120609-002221.jpg

RT USA

Hold the phone, anti-war activists. President Obama says that American troops are done with Operation Iraqi Freedom and their episode in Afghanistan is almost over. Now, though, it looks like the US is calling its operation in Pakistan an actual war.

Continue reading

Obama Uses Al-CIAda: CIA Funded al-Qaeda Attacks in Yemen to Declare National Emergency

20120524-091117.jpg

By Susanne Posel, Occupy Corporatism – Infowars.com

During a military parade rehearsal this week, more than 90 people were killed after a bomber wearing an army uniform self-exploded amidst a group of soldiers at al-Sabin Square.

The terrorist group al-Qaeda claimed the bombing, saying that one of their members carried out the attack.

Along with the estimated 90 killed, defense ministry officials said 222 people were injured in the attack.

The al-Qaeda plant was present moments before Defense Minister Nasser Ahmed and the army’s chief-of-staff were scheduled to greet the troops.

The majority of the dead were stationed from the Central Security Organization.

Yemen has been the stage for al-Qaeda’s attacks against the president Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, who recently took office. Hadi has declared war against al-Qaeda, saying it is a “religious duty’ of the state to do so.

US intelligence and military support have been covertly deployed to Yemen.

The Obama administration’s terrorism advisor, John Brennan called the attack “cowardly”.

While the violence in Yemen escalates, President Obama took the time to release a new executive order (EO) called Blocking Property of Persons Threatening the Peace, Security, or Stability of Yemen.

Continue reading

The Rise of the Killer Drones: How America Goes to War in Secret

An inside look at how killing by remote control has changed the way we fight

by Michael Hastings, GlobalResearch.ca

One day in late November, an unmanned aerial vehicle lifted off from Shindand Air Base in western Afghanistan, heading 75 miles toward the border with Iran. The drone’s mission: to spy on Tehran’s nuclear program, as well as any insurgent activities the Iranians might be supporting in Afghanistan. With an estimated price tag of $6 million, the drone was the product of more than 15 years of research and development, starting with a shadowy project called DarkStar overseen by Lockheed Martin. The first test flight for DarkStar took place in 1996, but after a crash and other mishaps, Lockheed announced that the program had been canceled. According to military experts, that was just a convenient excuse for “going dark,” meaning that DarkStar’s further development would take place under a veil of secrecy.

The drone that was headed toward Iran, the RQ-170 Sentinel, looks like a miniature version of the famous stealth fighter, the F-117 Nighthawk: sleek and sand-colored and vaguely ominous, with a single domed eye in place of a cockpit. With a wingspan of 65 feet, it has the ability to fly undetected by radar. Rather than blurting out its location with a constant stream of radio signals – the electronic equivalent of a trail of jet exhaust – it communicates intermittently with its home base, making it virtually impossible to detect. Once it reached its destination, 140 miles into Iranian airspace, it could hover silently in a wide radius for hours, at an altitude of up to 50,000 feet, providing an uninterrupted flow of detailed reconnaissance photos – a feat that no human pilot would be capable of pulling off.

Not long after takeoff – a maneuver handled by human drone operators in Afghanistan – the RQ-170 switched into a semiautonomous mode, following a preprogrammed route under the guidance of drone pilots sitting at computer screens some 7,500 miles away, at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada. But before the mission could be completed, something went wrong. One of the drone’s three data streams failed, and began sending inaccurate information back to the base. Then the signal vanished, and Creech lost all contact with the drone.

Today, even after a 10-week investigation by U.S. officials, it’s unclear exactly what happened. Had the Iranians, as they would later claim, hacked the drone and taken it down? Did the Chinese help them? If so, had they pulled off a sophisticated attack – breaking open the drone’s encrypted brain and remotely piloting it to the ground – or a cruder assault that jammed the drone’s signal, causing it to crash? Or did the drone operators back at Creech simply make a mistake, sparking a glitch that triggered the aircraft to land? “After a technical fuck-up, people panic and start trying to fix it, doing things they shouldn’t have done,” says Ty Rogoway, a drone expert who runs an industry website called Aviation Intel. “It was fishy from Day One.”

What we do know is that the government lied about who was responsible for the drone. Shortly after the crash on November 29th, the U.S.-led military command in Kabul put out a press release saying it had lost an “unarmed reconnaissance aircraft that had been flying a mission over western Afghanistan.” But the drone wasn’t under the command of the military – it was operated by the CIA, as the spy agency itself was later forced to admit.

Ten days after the crash, the missing drone turned up in a large gymnasium in Tehran. The Iranian military displayed the captured aircraft as a trophy; an American flag hung beneath the drone, its stars replaced with skulls. The drone looked nearly unscathed, as if it had landed on a runway. The Iranians declared that such surveillance flights represented an “act of war,” and threatened to retaliate by attacking U.S. military bases. President Obama demanded that Iran return the drone, but the damage was done. “It was like when someone from Apple left a prototype of the next iPhone at a bar,” says Peter Singer, a defense specialist at the Brookings Institute and the author of Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century. “It was a propaganda win for Iran.”

The incident also underscored the increasingly central role that drones now play in American foreign policy. During the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the military conducted only a handful of drone missions. Today, the Pentagon deploys a fleet of 19,000 drones, relying on them for classified missions that once belonged exclusively to Special Forces units or covert operatives on the ground. American drones have been sent to spy on or kill targets in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Syria, Somalia and Libya. Drones routinely patrol the Mexican border, and they provided aerial surveillance over Osama bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. In his first three years, Obama has unleashed 268 covert drone strikes, five times the total George W. Bush ordered during his eight years in office. All told, drones have been used to kill more than 3,000 people designated as terrorists, including at least four U.S. citizens. In the process, according to human rights groups, they have also claimed the lives of more than 800 civilians. Obama’s drone program, in fact, amounts to the largest unmanned aerial offensive ever conducted in military history; never have so few killed so many by remote control.

The use of drones is rapidly transforming the way we go to war. On the battlefield, a squad leader can receive real-time data from a drone that enables him to view the landscape for miles in every direction, dramatically expanding the capabilities of what would normally have been a small and isolated unit. “It’s democratized information on the battlefield,” says Daniel Goure, a national security expert who served in the Defense Department during both Bush administrations. “It’s like a reconnaissance version of Twitter.” Drones have also radically altered the CIA, turning a civilian intelligence-gathering agency into a full-fledged paramilitary operation – one that routinely racks up nearly as many scalps as any branch of the military.

But the implications of drones go far beyond a single combat unit or civilian agency. On a broader scale, the remote-control nature of unmanned missions enables politicians to wage war while claiming we’re not at war – as the United States is currently doing in Pakistan. What’s more, the Pentagon and the CIA can now launch military strikes or order assassinations without putting a single boot on the ground – and without worrying about a public backlash over U.S. soldiers coming home in body bags. The immediacy and secrecy of drones make it easier than ever for leaders to unleash America’s military might – and harder than ever to evaluate the consequences of such clandestine attacks.

“Drones have really become the counterterrorism weapon of choice for the Obama administration,” says Rosa Brooks, a Georgetown law professor who helped establish a new Pentagon office devoted to legal and humanitarian policy. “What I don’t think has happened enough is taking a big step back and asking, ‘Are we creating more terrorists than we’re killing? Are we fostering militarism and extremism in the very places we’re trying to attack it?’ A great deal about the drone strikes is still shrouded in secrecy. It’s very difficult to evaluate from the outside how serious of a threat the targeted people pose.”

Continue reading

NOBEL PEACE PRIZE PREZ’ OBAMA LIKES ASSASSINATION BY DRONES !

US drone strikes on Yemen escalate

The Telegraph

20120330-015953.jpg
The pace appears to be accelerating with nine attacks so far this year and at least five this month

Photo: ALAMY

By Damien McElroy, Chris Woods and Emma Slater

America has dramatically escalated its drone strikes war in Yemen with the tempo of attacks rising to parity with incidents in Pakistan since the installation of a new government this month.

President Barack Obama has authorised all but one of the estimated 44 drone strikes by the US in the troubled Arab state since 2002 and has overseen a rapid increase in attacks since last May with 26 incidents recorded.

The pace appears to be accelerating with nine attacks so far this year and at least five this month, including a strike last week near the terrorist hot bed of Zinjibar. Up to 30 militants were killed in three separate missile strikes on the town, eyewitnesses said.

Nationwide the figures are comparable to those in Pakistan where America has struck on ten occasions, even as it scales back activities in the face of a backlash from an angry public.

Research by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism at City University has found that as many as 516 people have been killed in the attacks – mostly suspected members of al-Qaeda’s local ally al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Up to 104 were civilians.

With the majority of the attacks carried out by the CIA or US special forces command from a base nearby Dijbouti, American officials refused to confirm or acknowledge the attacks.

President Obama has, however, made plain his determination to go after AQAP, which he has described as “a network of violence and terror” that has attracted a number of US citizens to its cause, including the radical cleric Anwar al Awlaki.

Awlaki was killed last September, along with Samir Khan, editor of AQAP’s English-language propaganda magazine Inspire, which had been blamed for recruiting Western-raised youths to Islamic radicalism.

Days later a follow-up attack killed other militants – but also Awlaki’s 16-year old son and 17-year old nephew. AQAP’s ability to speak to an English-language audience was finished.

Continue reading

Why Is President Obama Keeping a Journalist in Prison in Yemen?

By Jeremy Scahill at The Nation

20120316-040553.jpg
Abdulelah Haider Shaye, journalist is in prison at the request of Barack Obama.Credit: Iona Craig.

On February 2, 2011, President Obama called Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh. The two discussed counterterrorism cooperation and the battle against Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. At the end of the call, according to a White House read-out, Obama “expressed concern” over the release of a man named Abdulelah Haider Shaye, whom Obama said “had been sentenced to five years in prison for his association with AQAP.” It turned out that Shaye had not yet been released at the time of the call, but Saleh did have a pardon for him prepared and was ready to sign it. It would not have been unusual for the White House to express concern about Yemen’s allowing AQAP suspects to go free. Suspicious prison breaks of Islamist militants in Yemen had been a regular occurrence over the past decade, and Saleh has been known to exploit the threat of terrorism to leverage counterterrorism dollars from the United States. But this case was different. Abdulelah Haider Shaye is not an Islamist militant or an Al Qaeda operative. He is a journalist.

Unlike most journalists covering Al Qaeda, Shaye risked his life to travel to areas controlled by Al Qaeda and to interview its leaders. He also conducted several interviews with the radical cleric Anwar al Awlaki. Shaye did the last known interview with Awlaki just before it was revealed that Awlaki, a US citizen, was on a CIA/JSOC hit list. “We were only exposed to Western media and Arab media funded by the West, which depicts only one image of Al Qaeda,” recalls his best friend Kamal Sharaf, a well-known dissident Yemeni political cartoonist. “But Abdulelah brought a different viewpoint.”

Shaye had no reverence for Al Qaeda, but viewed the group as an important story, according to Sharaf. Shaye was able to get access to Al Qaeda figures in part due to his relationship, through marriage, to the radical Islamic cleric Abdul Majid al Zindani, the founder of Iman University and a US Treasury Department–designated terrorist. While Sharaf acknowledged that Shaye used his connections to gain access to Al Qaeda, he adds that Shaye also “boldly” criticized Zindani and his supporters: “He said the truth with no fear.” Continue reading

Well Known Journalist Rotting In Jail Because Obama PERSONALLY Requested It !

RT & The IntelHub

20120316-040220.jpg

Abdulelah Haider Shaye, journalist is in Prison in Yemen at the request of Barack Obama.Credit: Iona Craig.

Read Jeremy Scahill’s article at:
http://www.thenation.com/article/166757/why-president-obama-keeping-journalist-prison-yemen

Before Barack Obama was President Obama, he promised the most transparent administration ever.
But it seems transparency doesn’t seem to apply to recent US activities – from drone wars, torture and secret prisons, Americans have been left in the dark.

The White House’s approach seems to be staying silent and are making sure journalist follow their lead. Jeremy Scahill, author and journalist for The Nation, joins us with his take.