HSBC: The World’s Dirtiest Bank

img-15

1992-china-13

By Dean HENDERSON, LEFT HOOK

In late July 2012, First Niagara Financial Group announced that it would buy 195 retail bank branches in New York and Connecticut from HSBC for around $1 billion. [1] HSBC acquired the branches when it bought the spooky Marine Midland in 1980.

According to Global Finance, the UK-headquartered HSBC Holdings is the world’s 3rd largest bank with $2.36 trillion in assets. [2]

(Excerpted from Chapter 2: Hong Kong Shanghaied: Big Oil & Their Bankers)

Formerly known as Hong Kong Shanghai Bank Corporation, HSBC has served as the world’s #1 drug money laundry since its inception as a repository for British Crown opium proceeds accrued during the Chinese Opium Wars. During the Vietnam War HSBC laundered CIA heroin proceeds.

In Saigon the opium junta which Lucien Conein and Ed Lansdale had installed instructed the South Vietnamese military to dole out heroin to Chinese Triad syndicates who moved it to Hong Kong.  The CIA’s Thai Generals used the same Chui Chao Triads as mafia kingpin Santos Trafficante.  The Thais often sent morphine to Hong Kong, which was refined into heroin by the Hong Kong police. [3]

Deak & Company was the major gold dealer in Hong Kong and its operations were crucial to the CIA guns for heroin trade.  Founded by OSS operative Nicholas Deak, it became the largest currency and gold trader in the US after WWII.  Deak financed CIA adventures in Vietnam, the Mossadegh coup in Iran and the CIA’s assassination of nationalist Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba in the Congo.  Deak used a Swiss subsidiary, Foreign Commerce Bank of Zurich, and its US Deak Perera branch to lure flight capital from wealthy Third World elites, mainly cocaine money from Argentina.  When Deak suddenly went bankrupt in 1985, its Hong Kong depositors were left in the lurch. [4]

Long before the Vietnam War, the British elite had made a healthy living smuggling opium from the region.  Lord Shelbourne launched the Chinese opium trade in 1783 with Scottish merchants from the East India Company and members of the House of Windsor-allied Knights of St. John Jerusalem.

Shelbourne’s chief propagandist was Adam Smith who worked for East India, which emerged from the slave-trading Levant Company and later became known as Chatham House, home to the powerful Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA).  East India worked with members of two secret societies – the Muslim Assassins and the Christian Knights Templar – in organizing the global drug trade.  In 1776 the high seas pirate Adam Smith wrote Wealth of Nations, which became the bible of international capitalism.

In the Far East the British organized the Triad Society, also known as the Society of Heaven and Earth, to smuggle their opium.  Beginning in 1788 the Freemason Grand Lodge of England established lodges in China, one of which was the Triad Society.  Another was known as the Order of the Swastika.

The Triads were so named due to the significance of the pyramid to the global elite.  The apex of a pyramid represents a king’s power to the ancient Freemasons, who promote monarchy as a form of government.  The base of a pyramid represents the masses of workers who are the king’s subjects.  Superimposed with an inverted pyramid representing godly powers, the two pyramids form the Star of David, an ancient symbol used by the Freemason predecessor Knights Templar and now associated with the occult, Zionism and the state of Israel. [5]

In 1839 William Jardine- a Canton-based opium trafficker- steered Britain into the first Opium War after Chinese officials confiscated his stash. The second Opium War lasted from 1858-1860.  Lord Palmerston commanded both expeditions for the Brits.  He was also the High Priest of Scottish Rite Freemasonry in the British Empire. [6]

Throughout the 19th century the British families of Matheson, Keswick, Swire, Dent, Inchcape, Baring and Rothschild controlled the Chinese heroin traffic.  The Inchcape’s and Baring’s Peninsular & Orient Steam Navigation Company (PONC) transported the dope around the world.  When a British subject named Mohandas Ghandi spoke out against the opium trade in 1921, he was jailed by India’s British rulers for “undermining the revenue”.

To the US West Coast, the families brought Chinese coolies to build JP Morgan’s railroads, slave laborers who were kidnapped (shanghaied) by the Triads.  The Triads came along too, setting up opium dens in San Francisco and Vancouver and using a network of Chinatowns as a channel for heroin.  This network exists today.  To the US East Coast the families brought African slaves and cotton.  These same families built plantations and became kings of southern cotton on the backs of shanghaied Africans.

The Sutherland family, first cousins to the Mathesons, was the most powerful of these cotton families.  The Barings owned the clipper ships, which brought cotton to the Old World, while shipping opium and slaves back to the New World.  The Rothschild and Lehman families both entered the US via the pre-Civil War cotton trade. [7]  The Lehman’s made their fortune smuggling cotton to the Union and guns to the Confederacy.  The southern cotton barons were the channel through which the British fomented the US Civil War.

The American families Perkins, Astor and Forbes made millions off the opium trade.  The Perkins’ founded Bank of Boston, which is today known as Credit Suisse First Boston.  The Perkins and Morgan families endowed Harvard University.  William Hathaway Forbes was a director at Hong Kong Shanghai Bank shortly after it was founded in 1866.  John Murray Forbes was the US agent for the Barings banking family, which financed most of the early drug trade.  The Forbes family heirs later launched Forbes magazine. Steve Forbes ran for President in 1996.  John Jacob Astor invested his opium proceeds in Manhattan real estate and worked for British intelligence.  The Astor family home in London sits opposite Chatham House.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Classified Information on Malaysia Airlines MH370 Case Stolen

image

The Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200 flight MH370 traveling from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing vanished on March 8 with 239 people on board, of which there were 227 passengers and 12 crew members.

RIA NOVOSTI

MOSCOW, August 20 (RIA Novosti) – Classified information from the computers of officials involved in the investigation into the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines MH370 has been stolen, The Star Online reported Wednesday.

The computers of the high-ranking officials are said to have been hacked and the stolen information was allegedly being sent to a computer in China before the Malaysian Science, Technology and Innovation Ministry blocked the transmissions, the website reported.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: The people that hacked into these computers could well have it done as it appears to originate from China.]

The national cyber security specialist agency CyberSecurity Malaysia said that the malware that led to the information leak was sent to the officials via email on March 9, one day after the aircraft disappeared en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, according to The Star Online.

According to the security agency’s estimates, about 30 computers were infected by the malware. The agency is said to be working with Interpol on the incident at the moment. CyberSecurity Malaysia suspects that the motivation for the attack was the accusations of the Malaysian government made by some people of concealing crucial information about the investigation.

The Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200 flight MH370 traveling from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing vanished on March 8 with 239 people on board, of which there were 227 passengers and 12 crew members. On March 24, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak said that, according to the satellite data [provided by British Firm Inmarsat, emphasised] , MH370 crashed in the southern part of the Indian Ocean.

Bilderberg’s silent takeover of Britain’s $60bn defense budget

image

A British Lynx 2 helicopter.(AFP Photo)

By Tony GOSLING, RT OP-ED

Democracy had another near-fatal stroke, and the military industrial complex further tightened UK defense spending with the appointment of ex-army officer and Tory hothead Rory Stewart MP as the new chairman of Westminster’s Defence Select Committee.

Last week the Home Affairs Select Committee delivered a damning verdict on Britain’s defense and secret service oversight, on taxpayer accountability. It said the refusal of the director general of MI5, Andrew Parker, to appear before them and lack of any effective supervision was “undermining the credibility of the intelligence agencies and parliament itself.”

Surely nothing could surpass the ‘Dodgy Dossier’, the criminal conspiracy that led to the US and Britain, as the Arab League put it in 2003, to ‘Opening the Gates of Hell in Iraq’? But with Stuart’s appointment to oversee public scrutiny of UK military spending just two weeks before NATO’s political cabal of which he’s a member, the Bilderberg conference, meets in Copenhagen later this month, it is clear to those who still have eyes to see that those bloody lessons have not been learned and the worse could be yet to come.

The most powerful private club in the world

In their Christmas 1987 edition, The Economist described Bilderberg as ‘Ne Plus Ultra’ the most powerful private club in the world. Its power has certainly not diminished as the decades have rolled by and neither has its secrecy. Although it began with trades unionists and powerful people it wanted to persuade, in its final days Bilderberg has boiled down to a rotten core of bankers, royalty, arms industry, oil and media barons and Rory Stuart MP, in the tradition of Kissinger, Blair, Cameron, Osborne and Balls, has thrown his lot in with them.

In 1943, half way through the war, the US power elite saw that, barring any big surprises, Hitler was going to lose World War Two, so their ‘War And Peace Studies Group’ of the Council On Foreign Relations (CFR) quietly began to prepare the Marshall Plan for the post-war world. Alongside the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), a sizable budget was set aside to fund a range of activities which would ensure Europeans didn’t vote communist and were welded economically, culturally and politically to the US for the foreseeable future.

image

British soldier Lieutenant-Colonel Nick Lock (C) checks his equipment before conducting a patrol with soldiers of the 1st Batallion of the Royal Welsh in streets of Showal in Nad-e-Ali district, Southern Afghanistan, in Helmand Province.(AFP Photo / Thomas Coex )

Born in a Nazi ‘witches cauldron’ of British blood

Bilderberg’s first chairman, Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, was born into the German aristocracy. He joined the Nazi party at university, then the SS but he married into the Dutch royal family, dropping the silver deaths-head and black SS uniform before the war. His newly adopted Holland was invaded by his old Nazi friends in 1941, so he fled to Britain with Dutch Queen Wilhelmina and his wife, Princess Juliana.

As a former SS officer he was scrutinized by the Admiralty’s wartime spymaster, Ian Fleming who, after a year of watching Bernhard, signed him to the British army as a trusted Dutch liaison officer.

With 1944 came one of Bernhard’s most important jobs: to supervise the Dutch underground in the run-up to September’s liberation of large parts of Holland. Field Marshall Montgomery’s audacious airborne operation, the biggest in history, depicted in Cornelius Ryan’s 1977 film A Bridge Too Far, was codenamed ‘Market Garden’ and intended to end the war by Christmas.

As liaison officer for the coming Arnhem deliverance, Bernhard sent in Dutch spy, Christiaan Lindemans, codename ‘King Kong’, ten days beforehand to prepare resistance fighters for the allies lunge through Eindhoven, Nijmegen and over the Rhein into Arnhem.

But instead of making contact with the Dutch underground, Bernhard’s ‘King Kong’ found some German soldiers and demanded to be taken straight to the Abwehr, German military intelligence. The allies’ plans for the airborne assault were in enemy hands because Bernhard’s precious Lindemans was a double agent. He had wrecked the allies’ all-important element of surprise.

‘King Kong’ was arrested and quizzed after the war by the British but never got a chance to tell his story because, under Dutch orders, he was whisked off to Germany and died in suspicious circumstances.

Operation Market Garden went ahead on Sunday September 17, 1944, but the British paratroopers at Arnhem were quickly split and surrounded by forces containing self-propelled guns, tanks and crack SS troops, who happened to be resting nearby. Frost’s 2nd battalion held on to the bridge leaving the rest of the 1st Airborne Division surrounded in what the Nazis called the Hexenkessel or ‘witches cauldron’, pinned down in the suburb of Oosterbeek.

On Wednesday 20 September, 1944, as British airborne Colonel John Frost’s remaining paratroopers were being mauled by SS Panzers at Arnhem Bridge, the tanks of the Grenadier Guards, along with US paratroopers, were tantalizingly close, destroying the last German defenses down the road in Nijmegen. Ironically, it was a young captain, who was also to chair the Bilderberg meetings in later life, Lord Peter Carrington, who was leading the Grenadier battle group of Sherman tanks as they took the penultimate bridge. At 8 o’clock that evening, he was just a 20-minute drive from reinforcing Frost at the Arnhem Bridge, and victory.

But although they still had eight hours or so before Arnhem Bridge would finally fall into German hands, Carrington’s force, along with the Irish guards, of a hundred or so tanks inexplicably stopped, just over the Nijmegen Bridge in the village of Lent, for an eighteen hour rest. After the war, 10 SS Panzer Division General Heinz Harmel mocked Carrington saying, “The British tanks made a mistake when they stayed in Lent. If they had carried on it would have been all over for us.”

‘Colonel Frost later put the blame,’ as Stuart Hills reports in ‘By Tank To Normandy’, ‘firmly on the lack of drive by Guards Armoured,’ of which Carrington’s Grenadiers were the spearhead. ‘Comparing their relatively light casualties with those suffered by the British 1st Airborne and US 82nd. Forty years later,’ in 1984, ‘he stood on the bridge at a reunion, shook his fist and roared a question into the air for the guards. ‘Do you call that fighting!’

So Bilderberg’s first 1954 venue in Oosterbeek, Holland, was highly significant, being the same spot where a decade before the British army had suffered nearly 10,000 casualties in of one of the last Nazi bloodbaths of World War II. Bernhard had given the game away and when it looked like, despite his treachery, the brave allied soldiers might pull it off, Carrington and his corps of tanks ground to a halt for an eighteen hour tea break.

image

AFP Photo / Dan Chung

Psychos always return to the scene of the crime

Like the psychopath, who feels compelled to return to the scene of the crime, Prince Bernhard returned to Oosterbeek to chair the inaugural Bilderberg meeting in 1954. The conferences led to the signing of the Treaty of Rome, which started the European Economic Community (EEC) three years later.

Surrounded by the great and good of the post war world, the prince hoped nobody would examine his reasons for choosing Oosterbeek. At the best it was an in-joke – at the worst the battle was thrown. Whatever way you look at it sixty years on, the coded message from that first Bilderberg meeting should be clear to us now. Ten years after the war, the Nazis were back.

The seventy year Bilderberg project is almost complete

So seventy years since the Arnhem slaughter and sixty years since the first Bilderberg conference, the EEC has become the EU. NATO’s new feudal oligarchy of Western banksters and multinationals own and control all the big political parties as well as almost everything that moves both sides of the Atlantic.

Some saw it coming: former SS general Paul Hausser, who became chief of HIAG, the German SS veterans group after the war, claimed that “the foreign units of the SS were really the precursors of the NATO army.” Others detailed the Nazis’ transformation from military to financial empire including former CBS News correspondent Paul Manning in his 1981 book ‘Martin Bormann Nazi in Exile’.

Bilderberg’s latest wheeze is the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). This treaty makes voting pointless by letting multinationals sue governments and will leave only the thinnest veneer of democracy for the mainstream media to chew on both in Europe and America. The ‘nation states’ will become mere prefectures and the European Commission will be the unelected government of the United States of Europe.

As ordinary people across Europe and America cry out for decent basic standards such as fresh water, food, shelter, healthcare, heating and full employment, the mainstream media barely hear them because this is not the Bilderberg way. Instead, these pinstriped fascists bury us in debt, steal our leisure time, erode quality time with children, friends and family, and then blame us for demanding a fair share of the rewards of human progress.

Qui est derrière le coup d’État en Ukraine

Par Nicolas BOURGOIN

image

Acte 1

On se souvient sans doute de la « Révolution orange », largement médiatisée à l’Ouest. Viktor Ianoukovitch, le candidat proche de Vladimir Poutine, est élu président de l’Ukraine le 21 novembre 2004. Une série de manifestations suivent la proclamation des résultats. Organisées par le candidat malheureux, Viktor Iouchtchenko, financées par des milliardaires ukrainiens et des organisations américaines (voir ici), soutenues par de nombreux pays occidentaux dont les Etats-Unis (elles ont été financées à hauteur de 65 millions de dollars par l’administration Bush), elles prennent rapidement de l’ampleur et forcent le gouvernement à organiser un nouveau scrutin un mois plus tard. Entaché de nombreuses fraudes, il verra la victoire de Viktor Iouchtchenko et ouvre une période marquée par un rapprochement avec le camps occidental et l’OTAN mais aussi par une gouvernance calamiteuse gangrenée par la corruption. Les multiples malversations du « clan orange » (délits financiers, détournements de fonds, évasion fiscale, favoritisme) conduiront notamment Ioulia Timochenko, l’ex-Première ministre ukrainienne, derrière les barreaux. Le président sortant ne recueillera que 5,45 % des voix lors du scrutin de 2010. Rideau sur le premier acte de la « Révolution orange ».

Acte 2

Des milliers d’opposants pro-européens manifestent violemment suite au refus du président ukrainien en novembre dernier de signer un accord d’intégration avec l’UE, décision motivée par la lourdeur des “réformes structurelles” exigées en retour par les européens (privatisations massives, réduction drastique des dépenses de l’État et de l’emploi public, remise en cause de la protection sociale et du droit du travail) alors que le pays est économiquement affaibli, ainsi que par le souhait de donner la priorité aux relations économiques avec la Russie. Rappelons que c’est aussi sur la base de ce rapprochement avec la Russie que le président ukrainien a été élu. Loin d’être pacifiques, ces manifestations apparaissent comme des tentatives de déstabiliser le gouvernement, voire de le renverser (voir ici), des snipers israéliens sont même présents (voir ici). Elles sont soutenues par Ioulia Timochenko, égérie de la révolution orange, et par la quasi-totalité des classes politiques occidentales.

Certains manifestants sont affiliés à l’organisation d’extrême-droite Svoboda, violemment anti-russe, dont la plupart des membres sont armés (voir ici). Des saccages, de nombreuses déprédations sont commis dont la destruction d’une statue de Lénine (voir ici la déclaration à ce sujet du Parti Communiste d’Ukraine).

Des catapultes géantes sont même montées pour l’occasion et utilisées contre les forces de l’ordre qui comptent déjà de nombreuses victimes dans leurs rangs (voir ici).

L’opposition, qui n’a pas la majorité au parlement, ne peut en effet compter que sur la « pression » de la rue, autrement dit la violence, pour faire plier le gouvernement et tenter remettre sur les rails l’accord avec l’UE, d’autant plus que les ukrainiens dans leur majorité ne soutiennent pas les pro-européens, comme le montre un récent sondage (voir ici).

Cette stratégie de la tension semble être jusqu’ici payante puisque Viktor Ianoukovitch s’est entretenu une nouvelle fois avec les chefs de file des opposants et a demandé que le Parlement se réunisse en urgence pour discuter de la démission du gouvernement réclamée par l’opposition, et tenter de mettre un terme à la crise politique… sans succès toutefois, l’opposition exigeant purement et simplement la démission du Président, pourtant légitimement élu. Après cet échec de l’ultimatum fixé au Président (voir ici), les violences on repris de plus belle : nouvelles barricades, Ministère de l’Agriculture pris d’assaut par les manifestants en armes … (voir ici).

Ce 19 février, les forces de sécurité ukrainiennes ont repris une partie de la place de l’Indépendance à Kiev après une nuit d’affrontements avec les manifestants antigouvernementaux (voir ici). 

Les États-Unis et l’Union Européenne, qui appuient les revendications de l’opposition, continuent de maintenir la pression et envisagent des sanctions contre Kiev en réponse à la répression des manifestations. Le ministre allemand des Affaires étrangères, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, a brandi la menace de représailles contre les dirigeants ukrainiens, pourtant totalement légitimes. Le vice-président Joe Biden, pour sa part, a eu un entretien téléphonique avec le Président ukrainien et l’a averti que si les autorités ne calmaient pas la situation, cela aurait des “conséquences”.

Dans les coulisses

Comme au temps de la Révolution orange, les médias occidentaux présentent unanimement les manifestations anti-russes comme un mouvement spontané regroupant des « combattants de la liberté » épris d’Europe, en butte à un pouvoir autocratique (voir par exemple ici).

L’inénarable Bernard-Henri Lévy, de tous les mauvais coups contre les pouvoirs hostiles à l’atlantisme, n’a évidemment pas fait défection en appelant même l’UE à suspendre sa participation aux jeux de Sotchi (voir ici).

En réalité, il s’agit d’une manipulation bien rodée et qui a déjà fait ses preuves lors de la Révolution orange dont la logistique avait été assurée par les organisations pro-occidentales Pora et Znayuliées au mouvement Otpor. Celui-ci avait déjà joué un rôle actif dans la chute de l’ex-président Slobodan Milosevic en juillet 2000, dans la « Révolution des roses » georgienne de décembre 2002 ainsi que dans les tentatives de putsch contre le président biélorusse en 2001 et 2004.

Toutes ces organisations sont généreusement financées par des officines occidentales : le Konrad Adenauer Institute, proche de la CDU, l’Open Society Institute de Georges Soros, le National Democratic Institute et la Freedom House, proches du gouvernement américain, entre autres.

Les manifestants actuels semblent bénéficier à nouveau des mêmes largesses dans le financement de mouvements dont l’objectif est in fine de déstabiliser des pays souverains afin de les soumettre aux intérêts occidentaux (voir ici).

En réalité, cela fait déjà longtemps que les USA s’intéressent à l’Ukraine (voir ici). La volonté des américains de renverser le gouvernement ukrainien, pourtant totalement légitime, répond à trois objectifs, de nature économique et géostratégique : renforcer l’OTAN par l’intégration d’un nouveau pays (le plus grand d’Europe), affaiblir la Russie en l’isolant diplomatiquement et s’approprier un marché jugé trop protectionniste en créant un « climat d’investissement favorable aux entreprises étrangères» – en clair : en privatisant ce qui ne l’est pas encore et en faisant prévaloir les intérêts des investisseurs étrangers sur ceux de la population nationale. Ils justifient les financements faramineux investis dans l’aide logistique aux groupes anti-russes ainsi que l’effort déployé par les media occidentaux pour tenter de faire passer pour une révolution populaire et pacifique ce qui n’est ni plus ni moins qu’un coup d’État.

Source: Qui est derrière le coup d’État en Ukraine ? | Nicolas Bourgoin
http://bourgoinblog.wordpress.com/2014/02/19/qui-est-derriere-le-coup-detat-en-ukraine/

Israel: The missing link in Syria puzzle

20130902-073453.jpg
A picture taken on July 31, 2013 shows a devastated street in the Khalidiyah district of Syria’s central city of Homs. The Syrian government announced the capture of Khalidiyah, a key rebel district in Homs, Syria’s third city and a symbol of the revolt against President Bashar al-Assad. (AFP Photo / Joseph Eid)

By Adrian SALBUCHI for RT

As the world holds its breath, wondering when the US and its allies will attack Syria, Western governments and its well-oiled mainstream media seem to be ignoring a key player that has kept strangely quiet during this crisis: Israel.

Today, US power rests heavily on its terrifying military, its industrial-financial complex, and its global media clout. But that power is fast eroding because, in the age of the Internet, power is increasingly much more about prestige, credibility and trust, an area where the US is falling to pieces.

US interventionism has become all too blatant over the past 20 years. The Balkans War in the late 1990s, with the bombing of Belgrade, triggered initial alarms especially amongst non-ally countries because, coupled with Bush Sr.’s 1991 Gulf War, it became clear that the American global hegemon was out to get the whole world, especially with the former Soviet Union out of the way.

But what got red lights blinking really strongly was Iraq. Baby Bush’s false accusations of “weapons of mass destruction” as an excuse to take out an entire country just so he could “smoke out” an uncomfortable former associate, Saddam Hussein, were blatantly obscene and proved to many that the American global hegemon was officially out of control.

Back then, America still had the excuse of the horrendous 9/11 terror attacks in New York and Washington to justify its mass war-mongering. But American credibility took a sharp fall when George W himself ended up admitting that: (a) there was no connection whatsoever between nasty Saddam and nasty Osama who allegedly did 9/11 (Alas! We’ll never know because Obama later threw Osama into the ocean…) and (b) there most definitely, assuredly and unequivocally were NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq… Add to that the burden of growing proof that 9/11 may have been a false flag…

So, America had to design a new system of war or, rather a new system of getting itself into war against its selected “rogue state” targets. It’s no longer enough to go on TV and accuse such and such a country of being a “danger to world peace” or that it “does not have the kind of democracy that we want to see” as Hillary Clinton said when visiting Egypt only last year…

No. Something new had to be invented: “The Arab Spring”, which is the code for instigating, triggering and engineering civil strife in target countries which can then be escalated, as necessary, to veritable social war. And if the ongoing leadership still don’t get the message and insist on clinging to power, then US, UK, Israeli and other intel agencies can escalate the engineered nationwide mischief all the way up to fully–fledged civil war. Libya, Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq…

20130902-073513.jpg
A member of the Islamist Syrian opposition group Ahrar al-Sham fires against a position of the Committees for the Protection of the Kurdish People (YPG), a militia set up to protect Kurdish areas in Syria from opposing forces, during clashes in the countryside of the northern Syrian Raqqa province on August 25, 2013. (AFP Photo / Alice Martins)

Engineering such wars throughout the Middle East basically required:

(a) Identifying who the “freedom fighters” would be – mostly thugs, terrorists, guerrillas, soldiers of fortune and a wide assortment of violent mercenaries;

(b) Then arming them with lethal high (though not too “high”)-tech weaponry, financing them to ensure they can do as they please inside the target country, and

(c) Unleashing them onto the cities of Egypt, Libya, Syria and elsewhere, just as they did (and still do) inside Iraq.

And if all of that doesn’t work, then just order several NATO fighter squadrons to bomb the damn place to smithereens and provide satellite Intel to local “freedom fighters” so they can execute Hollywood-like operations such as the live-TV assassination of Muammar Gaddafi and his family, accompanied by Hillary Clinton’s chuckles on CBS TV.

But the case of Syria is different.

The world will no longer have America pulling the wool over its eyes. Growing sectors in the international community are coming to understand that those gangs of violent assassins, rapists and criminals – aka Syrian Freedom Fighters – have been armed, trained, financed and given the fullest media support by the US and its allies.

America’s dirty tricks department is raving full-blast right now trying to pin recent chemical weapons attacks on Bashar al-Assad’s government, but this is getting very low credibility ratings. Common sense dictates that it would be suicide for President Bashar Assad to kill his own civilians – including children – in a Damascus neighborhood, when his real enemies are the Western-backed terrorists and delinquents trying to take over his country.

Why would Assad give his enemies the “perfect excuse” for an armed attack against Syria? Common sense tells us that Assad is surely telling the truth when he accuses those very same terrorists for that “false flag” attack as a way of bringing NATO in on their side, with its jets, cluster bombs and napalm.

Every time we hear of such dreadful terror attacks we need to understand two fundamental issues: (1) who benefits from such attacks, and (2) follow the money trail…

Today, America’s credibility, trust and prestige have fallen so low that even the British Parliament finally disavowed any armed intervention by the UK, at least until such time as the UN or some truly trustworthy independent entity churns up irrefutable proof regarding who perpetrated those heinous chemical weapons atrocities in Syrian last week.

20130902-073531.jpg
British Prime Minister David Cameron (R) speaking at the dispatch box delivering his statement to the Houses of Parliament next to British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg (L) in central London on August 29, 2013. (AFP Photo)

So David Cameron cannot just yet go into “puppy poodle mode” behind Obama, as his predecessor Tony Blair did so obediently behind George W. a decade ago over Iraq.

But let’s look at three factors that are missing in the ongoing analysis of the Syrian crisis:

1) Israel

Ever since the two Gulf wars, America has been fighting Israelis’ wars for them. In the case of the 2003 invasion and destruction of Iraq, this was so obvious that the very same NeoCons who in 1996-7 planned war against Iraq in their “Project for a New American Century (PNAC)” think-tank – Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Bush, Douglas Feith, David Wormser and others – would later execute that war in 2003 as top officers in the George W. Bush regime. The prime reason: Saddam Hussein was then the greatest threat to “democratic and favored ally” Israel.

Several of those NeoCons – Douglas Feith, David Wormser, Richard Perle and other Bushites – had already gone so far as to prepare a strategy report for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996 called “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” which, again, targeted Iraq as Israel’s key foe at the time.

So, the Iraq War was to a great extent a proxy war that only benefitted Israel, becoming a huge headache for America, which lost thousands of its sons.

As the former prime minister of Malaysia, Mahathir Bin Mohammed, once famously pointed out: “The Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.”

2) Israel

The excessive and overpowering role that Zionism plays in American politics, American finance, American universities, American mainstream media including it Hollywood “entertainment industry,” and over American foreign policy, has been all but proven. This vital issue today lies at the heart of an increasingly far-reaching debate among America’s intelligentsia, which is, of course, being hushed up by the mainstream media.

One of its milestones was played out by two of its prestigious academics – Stephen Walt, former Dean of the John F Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, and his colleague John Mearsheimer, professor of Political Science at Chicago University – who published their groundbreaking book: “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy” in 2007.

In it, they show in a very convincing and well-documented manner the long reach and powerful clout that the “Israel First” lobby exercises over the US media, the banks, the Congress, the State Department and the Pentagon, whereby they are able to systematically tip the scales in favor of Israel, no matter what the cost. No matter if right or wrong.
And the cost to America has been extremely detrimental to its National Interest. Here lies one of the roots of much of the disrespect, mistrust and even hate that growing sections of global public opinion feel towards the US and its key allies.

3) Israel

President Barack Obama’s problem right now is that America’s military establishment is very much aware of the stakes involved in any “preventive attack” against Syria and, much more importantly, against Iran. Intervention against either or both countries will undoubtedly lead to massive war in the Middle East.

Look at a map: Syria and Iran lie squarely inside Russia’s vital geopolitical sphere of interest, which is already under heavy Western encroachment. Read their lips: Russia is saying, “not one step further!”

America would do very well to think twice or thrice before doing anything rash…

But here comes the problem: ever since Israel was kicked out of Southern Lebanon in July 2006 by the well-armed and trained (by Iran and Russia) forces of Hezbollah commanded by Nasrallah, Israel has been licking its wounds; dark furor and revenge burns in Zionism’s heart.

Since Bibi Netanyahu came back to power in 2011, Israel has gone into preventive war mode, using Iran’s inexistent nuclear program as a pretext. For that past four or five years, Israel has been threatening Iran with military attack almost every other day, with Washington, London and Paris nervously obliging…

20130902-073550.jpg
Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, uses a diagram of a bomb to describe Iran’s nuclear program while delivering his address to the 67th United Nations General Assembly meeting September 27, 2012 at the United Nations in New York. (AFP Photo / Don Emmert)

The American military, however, are painfully aware that there’s some truth to former Prime Minister Mahathir’s words. They don’t want to fight yet another Israeli war this time in Iran. So, they have been acting as a brake which is reflected in Obama’s increasing “caution” regarding Iran, going so far as to dispatching his military top brass to Israel to calm Netanyahu down, trying to make sure Israel does not launch a unilateral “preventive attack” on Iran that will drag the US into a massive conflict in the Middle East, the results of which are far from clear.

Actually a US-UK defeat in the Middle East could very well spell the beginning of the end of America as a global superpower. Russia (and China) are staring very sharply at the Middle East… They are not blinking…

The ongoing US military strategy says that if the White House must take on Iran, it should first take out Syria. At least that seems to be America’s promise of sorts to keep Netanyahu’s dogs of war at bay.

But the weeks have turned into months, the months into years and Zionists in Israel, the US, Britain , France and elsewhere are getting awfully impatient.

They want their D-Day now!

If the road to Tehran must go through Damascus, then, America: take out Damascus now!

For three years the US has been engineering “Arab Spring” civil war in Syria but Bashar Assad’s still there. Russia stands behind him.

A UN Security Council unanimous vote against Syria is no longer an option. Britain’s Parliament just said no to David Cameron, and French President Hollande’s support of the US lacks clout: sadly for the French it’s been many decades since France was last able to decide the outcome of any war, anywhere… Now, many in the US Congress are grumbling…

So, Mr. “CEO” of the United States of America Barack Obama: it’s your call now!

20130902-073605.jpg
US President Barack Obama (AFP Photo / Saul Loeb)

You either strike against Syria now – today, even – to the unanimous applause of Zionists in Israel, Congress, the global banks and markets, the mainstream media and throughout the world, or you stand down and your prestige, “Mr. President,” goes down the drain.

Your bluff will have been called. And a bluffing president is no president at all.

Mr. Putin knows this only too well, which is why he maintains Russia’s powerful fleet roaming the waters of the Mediterranean off the coast of Syria…

Once again, it’s shame on you, America!

Another fine mess the Israeli Trojan Horse has gotten you into…!

Adrian Salbuchi is a political analyst, author, speaker and radio/TV commentator in Argentina. www.asalbuchi.com.ar

Only ‘diplomatic support’: UK Foreign Secretary says Syria military action ruled out

20130902-073121.jpg
Protesters shout slogans and wave the Syrian flag as they demonstrate against military intervention in Syria in central London on August 31, 2013 (AFP Photo / Carl Court)

William Hague, the UK’s foreign secretary, has ruled out military intervention in Syria stating Britain will only be offering diplomatic support in the light of PM Cameron’s defeat on the parliament vote. The UK Chancellor slammed Labour “opportunists.”

“Parliament has spoken. I don’t think it is realistic to think that we can go back to parliament every week with the same question having received no for an answer,” Hague said on the Murnaghan Show on Sky News on Sunday. It was his first major interview since the House of Commons defeat late on Thursday.

Hague said that Labour would need to be “less partisan” in order to reverse the Commons vote, and even in the event that more chemical strikes were alleged within Syria, UK intervention would still be unlikely.

“Anybody looking objectively at this would see that, in order for parliament in any circumstances to come to a different conclusion, people would have to be more persuaded by the evidence. There is a great deal of evidence there but I’m not sure that the extra evidence that the United States presented would have made a difference to those doubting the evidence in the House of Commons,” said Hague.

“We will have another discussion with Russia to see if we can find a diplomatic and peaceful solution to the crisis in Syria,” Hague also commented.

FULL ARTICLE at RT.COM

Gulf Cooperation Council Exposed

20130630-094028.jpg

The image of Boston Brahmin Secretary of State John Kerry huddled amongst monarchs and despots to announce that the US would openly arm the Syrian al Qaeda MI6 creation reminds one of the phrase ”filthy rich” – coined to describe the early excesses of the Knights Templar wing of the City of London/Rothschild banksters. With allies like these unelected Muslim Brotherhood stooges, Kerry needs no enemies.

(What follows is excerpted from Chapter 5: Persian Gulf Rent-a-Sheik: Big Oil & Their Bankers…)

In 1776 the British East India Company set up a headquarters at what is now Kuwait. When Kuwaiti members of the Hashemite al-Sabah clan, who share their surname with Assassin founder Hasan bin Sabah, helped the Ottoman Turks quell uprisings in southern Iraq, the Shiek of the Muntafiq tribe gave the al-Sabahs date groves near Fao and Sufiyeh in southern Iraq.

Kuwait was seen as highly strategic by the British in its role as protector of Indian Ocean sea lanes. By 1900 the British cut a deal with Mubarek al-Sabah which carved Kuwait out of Iraq and made it a British protectorate. The vast majority of people who lived in what was now declared Kuwait opposed the British plan and wanted to remain part of Iraq.

In 1914, in the midst of WWI, the British resident in the Gulf promised Sheik Mubarek al-Sabah Crown recognition of his new country in exchange for al-Sabah’s turning on and attacking Ottoman Empire troops at Safwan, Mesopotamia in what is now Iraq. The al-Sabah clan earned their Union Jack stripes. The Hashemite monarchy single-handedly rules Kuwait to this day.

In 1917 the British made a client out of Ibn Saud, who was also told to encourage Arab tribesman to repel the Ottoman Turks from the Gulf Region at the onset of WWI. That same year the British House of Rothschild pushed through the Balfour Declaration, lending Crown support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Rothschild was less concerned about the Jewish people than he was about establishing a Middle East outpost from where he and his lackeys could keep watch over the center of their global oil monopoly. A year later the Ottomans were defeated.

Iraq, Jordan and Saudi Arabia were carved out of the Ottoman Empire and fell under British rule, with Ibn Saud taking control of his namesake Saudi Arabia. His progeny form the modern-day House of Saud. Palestine became part of Transjordania and was run by an emir hand-picked by the British. The Trucial States of Oman (now United Arab Emirates) and the Oman Coast (now Oman) were also given British protectorate status. As Winston Churchill commented three decades later, “The emir is in Transjordania, where I put him one Sunday afternoon in Jerusalem”.

In 1922 the Treaty of Jeddah gave Saudi Arabia independence from Britain, though the Crown still exerted considerable influence. During the 1920’s, with help from British troops, Ibn Saud grabbed more territory from the Ottomans when he annexed Riyadh. He also seized the holy cities of Mecca and Medina from the Hashemites.

Britain and France signed the San Remo Agreement which split Middle East oil concessions between the two countries. Within two weeks the US responded with the Open Door Policy, which cut the US Horsemen into the Middle East oil game. Small US independent producers like Sinclair opposed the policy, complaining that it favored the Rockefeller oil interests. US oil majors Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, Texaco and Gulf- the first three progeny of the John D. Rockefeller Standard Oil Trust- joined with British Petroleum, Royal Dutch/Shell- owned largely by Holland’s royal House of Orange and the Rothschild family- and the French Compaignie de Petroles in dividing up the Middle East oil patch.

The Iraqi Petroleum Company (IPC) and the Iranian Consortium would be dominated by the European companies, while Saudi ARAMCO would be owned by the American Horsemen. The British protectorates would be exploited through various combinations of the Four Horsemen.

An IPC subsidiary, Petroleum Development Trucial Coast, began drilling in what is now the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in 1935. Today in the UAE oil industry ADCO is 24%-owned by BP Amoco, 9.5% by Royal Dutch/Shell and 9.5% by Exxon Mobil. ADMA is owned 14.67% by BP Amoco and 13.33% by the old French Compaignie de Petroles, which has now consolidated into Total. Esso Trading Company/Abu Dhabi is 100% owned by Exxon Mobil. Dubai Petroleum is 55% owned by Conoco, which also owns 35% of Dubai Marine Areas, of which BP Amoco holds a 33.33% share. The majority of the UAE’s oil goes to Japan. BP and Total hold long-term shipping contracts with the UAE.

Chevron and Texaco, already joined through ARAMCO and their Caltex marketing arm, formed the Bahrain Petroleum Company (BPC) in that protectorate. The new Chevron Texaco now runs BPC. In Qatar, Exxon Mobil dominates the rich natural gas sector. It owns a large chunk of Qatargas, which currently provides Japan with 6 million tons of natural gas per year. It is also a 30% partner in the giant Ras Luffan gas field which produces 10 million tons of natural gas per year.

BP joined with Gulf in starting the Kuwait Oil Company, which today sells discount crude to ex-proprietors BP Amoco and Chevron Texaco (Chevron bought Gulf in 1981). By 1949 the US Horsemen controlled 42% of Middle Eastern oil reserves, while the Anglo-Dutch Horsemen had 52%. The remaining 8% was owned by Elf Total Fina and other smaller companies.

The British began granting independence to its Gulf State protectorates beginning in 1961 with Kuwait and ending in 1971 when the United Arab Emirates were formed out of seven sheikdoms, the most important of which are Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Sharjah. British influence did not wane. Oman remains particularly close to the Crown. British mercenaries constitute the royal guards which protect the ruling families in all six GCC states.

These emirates are ruled by single family monarchies selected by British colonialists to carry out their plan for dominating Middle East oil and shipping lanes in the late 18th century. The six GCC ruling families are inter-related with one another, just as are the royal families of Europe.

Convenient Monarchy

Kuwait was officially formed in the mid 1920’s under the Sykes-Picot Agreement. The al-Sabah family has ruled ever since. On advice from Saudi King Fahd, the al-Sabah clique dissolved Kuwait’s Parliament in both 1975 and 1986 when opposition to the emir grew too loud. Kuwait’s parliament is window dressing, since no opposition leaders are allowed to serve in the Kuwaiti Cabinet. Currently 25% of the cabinet ministers are al-Sabah family members. Women are not allowed to vote. Political decisions can be overridden by decree from the emir.

The wealthy bloodline elite who rule Kuwait rely on imported serf labor to carry out such unseemly tasks as making breakfast or going to the store. A full 80% of Kuwaiti labor is done by imported workers from poor Asian countries like Bangladesh, the Philippines and India. These workers, who make up 63% of the country’s population, are often not paid. Rape of domestic female servants is commonplace.

The economy of Kuwait is tightly controlled by less than twenty families. Ruling Sheik Jaber Ahmed al-Sabah, who died in 2006, was worth $4.8 billion. Like the Saudi Sudeiris, the al-Sabah’s dip into Kuwaiti government coffers whenever they feel the need. The al-Sabah clan is infamous for its opulent lifestyle. It is reported that most of Kuwait’s $6-10 billion in annual oil revenue is spent on luxury items. Many of the al-Sabah youth have been involved in embarrassing incidents involving prostitutes, gambling, alcohol and drugs. On one occasion a nephew of the emir was caught smuggling heroin in France. The New York Times once called Kuwait, “less a country than a family-owned oil company with a seat at the U.N.”

Another powerful Kuwaiti family is the al-Ghanims, who gained their great wealth by helping BP and Gulf form the Kuwait Oil Company. In 1945 the al-Ghanims employed half of all Kuwaitis and frequently lent money to the al-Sabah family. They own Yusuf Ahmed Alghanim & Sons which in the late 1970’s became the largest overseas distributor for General Motors. The Al-Ghanims are agents for Isuzu, Holden, Phillips, Frigidaire, Link Belt Cranes, BP Lubricants, Learjet, Kirby, Hitachi, Qantas, British Airways, Gulf Air and Air India. By 1990 the al-Ghanim family was knocking down $400 million a year. In 1975 Kutayba Alghanim bought Houston-based Kirby Industries. Other powerful Kuwaiti families are the Behbehanis and the al-Kharafis.

In Qatar the ruling al-Thani family has intermarried throughout the population to consolidate its power. In June 1995 King Sheikh Khalifa bin Hamad al-Thani was vacationing in Switzerland when his Cambridge-educated son Hamad seized the reins of power. Despite junior’s moves towards democracy, such as the launching of Al Jazeera television and a decree allowing women to vote, many in the Gulf saw the takeover as a CIA palace coup, since the elder al-Thani was a corrupt alcoholic and had become an embarrassment to Washington.

Qatar sits atop the second largest natural gas reserves (900 trillion cubic feet) in the world after Russia. Soon the US established Camp Snoopy on the outskirts of Doha and was positioning fighter jets at two Qatari air bases — As Sayliyah and Al Udeid. In November 2001 Qatar played host to the annual meeting of the World Trade Organization amidst a Doha building spree that included a Starbucks, a McDonalds and a Kentucky Fried Chicken.

The al-Thani monarchs rule by decree and serve as sales agents for many multinational corporations, including BMW and International Harvester. They run several Western franchise operations in Qatar including Ramada Hotels. Another family close to the al-Thanis which wields considerable power in Qatar is the Darwish family. They represent Austin, Pirelli, Union Carbide, Phillips, Dunlop, GE, Hobart, Volkswagon, Audi and Fiat. The Almana family is also influential, representing Peugeot and other multinationals.

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is a conglomeration of seven different emirates which the British granted independence in 1971. UAE Prime Minister Sheik Rasid bin Said al-Maktoum is a member of the ruling al-Maktoum monarchy. His estimated net worth is $4 billion. His four sons hold the offices of Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Finance & Industry, Minister of Defense and Commander of Dubai Defense Forces. Two of them are also billionaires.

The al-Nahiyan family rules the UAE emirate of Abu Dhabi. Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahiyan became the biggest shareholder in BCCI, which served as paymaster for CIA operations around the world during the 1980’s. Later al-Nahiyan launched Flying Dolphin Airlines, cited by the UN as having ferried “contraband” from Afghanistan, while smuggling weapons in defiance of a UN arms embargo to African hot spots like Sierre Leone.

In Bahrain, long an important British outpost and home to the Chevron Texaco-owned Bahrain Petroleum Company, Sheik Isa bin Salman al-Khalifa and his clan preside over the oil kitty. Al-Khalifa was an investor in George W. Bush’s Harken Energy, which was awarded an unprecedented offshore oil concession in Bahrain waters just before the Gulf War broke out. Saudi Arabian merchant families hold sway over much of the remainder of the Bahrain economy. The Dhahran-based Kanoo family is especially prominent.

The Kanoos represent Exxon Mobil, BP Amoco, Norwich Union Insurance, Holland Persian Gulf Lines and Royal Nedlloyd Lines. Their forte is shipping so they ship crude for all of the Four Horsemen, calling mainly at the Port of Bahrain and the giant Saudi Ras Tanura refinery, which was built by Bechtel in the mid-1940’s. The Kanoos recently added the Kuwaiti Shipping Company to their empire. Another important family in Bahrain is the Almoayyeds. Bahrain is home to the US 5th Fleet and serves as an important offshore banking center for J.P. Morgan Chase, Citigroup and other global mega-banks who specialize in recycling petrodollars. Not coincidentally, a large percentage of Saudi crude is refined in Bahrain under the watchful eye of the US 5th Fleet and the international bankers.

Oman is ruled by the al-Qaboos family. The country enjoys particularly close relations with Britain and the US, hosting major US military bases and frequent joint US/British military exercises. The National Bank of Oman was owned by BCCI and it, in turn, owned a big chunk of BCCI stock. The bank served as a conduit through which GCC sheiks funded CIA covert operations. Sheik al-Qaboos, Oman’s monarch, was given a valuable piece of property near the Port of Karachi in Pakistan as payback for his support of the CIA’s decade-long war in Afghanistan, then handed it over to the US Navy. Exxon Mobil has a huge presence in Oman. In 1990, 28% of the company’s US-bound crude came from Oman.

But Saudi Arabia remains the biggest powder keg in the region due to its 255 billion barrels in oil reserves. ARAMCO, Bechtel and other Western multinationals had learned early on of the need to elevate a few Saudi nationals like Sulaiman Olayan into positions of power in order to gain access to the Saudi throne. This process, which follows a pattern practiced by multinational corporations worldwide, created a huge disparity of wealth in the Kingdom.

On the one hand you have the House of Saud and less than twenty elite families tied to the throne that became rich as joint venture partners and sales agents for Western multinationals. These jet set billionaires spend their time flying to Monte Carlo on gambling junkets, throwing lavish parties for Western diplomats, consuming copious amounts of alcohol and living in opulent palaces. King Fahd, the current patriarch of the House of Saud, is alone worth some $18 billion.

On the other hand you have 99% of Saudi citizens, mostly devout Shi’ite Muslims, who struggle daily to eke out a meager existence and who have absolutely no say in their country’s undemocratic government-by-bloodline monarchy. This disparity of wealth has often proven explosive, most recently in the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US, where 15 of the 19 patsy hijackers of the airplanes that hit the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon were Saudi nationals. A big reason why the US now imports Saudi terrorism along with ARAMCO oil is that is was US corporations who helped create the huge disparity of wealth in Saudi Arabia by elevating certain families into financial dynasties and through their unconditional support for House of Saud cronies.

In the 1950’s, the Alireza family got its break selling jewelry for Cartier, Arples and van Cleef. Today they own Haji Abdullah Alireza & Company (HAACO). HAACO teamed up with Mobil to form the Arabian Petroleum Supply Company, which started out marketing jet fuel at the Jeddah Airport and has since expanded operations. Another HAACO/Mobil joint venture is Saudi Maritime Company. HAACO is Saudi sales agent for Goodyear, Ford, KLM Airlines, Air Algerie, Pepsi, Dunlop and Westinghouse.

The Alireza’s company joined ITT as subcontractors to Lockheed on an air-traffic control project in the Kingdom. Another Alireza-controlled company, the Rezayat Group, has two joint ventures with the Tulsa-based energy company Williams International., one called Saudi Arabian Fabricated Metals Industry and the other known as Rezayat & Williams Construction Company. A third Alireza enterprise is Saudi Arabian Engineering Company- a joint venture with the Dutch multinational Amindha NV. Still another Alireza endeavor is Crescent Transportation, a joint venture with Sea-Land Corporation which operates the container terminal at the port of Damman.

The Jeddah firm of Haji Hussein Alireza is the world’s #1 importer of Mazda vehicles. The Alireza’s linked up with Brown & Root, the Houston-based subsidiary of Halliburton which merged with M.W. Kellogg to become KBR. Alireza and Brown & Root operate an offshore pipeline construction firm in Saudi called Root-Alireza. The Alireza family owns huge chunks of real estate in the Kingdom and large blocks of stock in many of Saudi’s biggest companies including National Pipe, majority-owned by Japan’s Sumitomo.

The Juffali family is also from Jeddah. They are worth over $1 billion. Their main company, E. A. Juffali & Brothers, owns the world’s largest Mercedes Benz dealership and serves as sales agent for over 60 foreign multinationals including IBM, Siemens, Massey Ferguson, FMC, Borg-Warner, Kelvinator and Michelin. They formed a joint venture with Siemens called Arabia Electric, one with Dow Chemical called Arabian Chemical Company, one with Borg-Warner known as Saudi Air Conditioning Manufacturing Company and another with Massey Ferguson named Saudi Tractor Manufacturing Company

Sheik Ahmed Juffali is a member of the prestigious International Advisory Board at Chase Manhattan Bank. The families’ overseas investments are handled through Enpro International in New York. The Juffali family’s most important relationship is with Fluor Daniel, the world’s second largest engineering firm after Bechtel. The two teamed up in a venture known as Fluor Arabia which provides engineering services to the Four Horsemen’s numerous ongoing oil, gas and petrochemical projects. Fluor Arabia built two entire petrochemical complexes at the sprawling Jubail Industrial City and is currently engaged in a $20 billion natural gas collection project in Saudi.

The Algosaibi family of Dhahran is the richest family in Eastern Province. They have joint construction projects with Japanese firms Mitsubishi Electric, Mitsui Harbor, Sanki Engineering and Nippon Benkan through their family firm Khalif Abdel-Rahman Algosaibi Contracting. The family also has a joint venture with Fiat, owns the American Express money exchange franchise for Saudi Arabia and runs fast food and hotel ventures for Grand Metropolitan, which until recently owned Burger King, Olive Garden, Red Lobster and Godfather’s Pizza. Saudi United Insurance Company is an Algosaibi joint venture with three Swiss companies: Swiss Reinsurance, Commercial Union and Baloise Insurance. Oil Field Chemical Company is an Algosaibi partnership with Exxon’s Essochem Belgium subsidiary. Through their National Bottling Company the family owns the Eastern Province Pepsi-Cola franchise.

The Kanoo family is also based in Dhahran, home to ARAMCO headquarters. The Kanoo’s have interests throughout Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman and the United Arab Emirates. The Kanoos are shipping agents for the Four Horsemen, as well as sales agents for numerous major airlines. They have a joint venture with Otis Elevators called Otis Saudi and own a bus line with Greyhound called Greyhound Services Saudi Arabia. The family is a major shareholder in Investcorp- Bahrain’s largest petrodollar recycling firm. Kanoos have an interest in Ocean Inchcape Ltd., an offshore drilling maintenance services company controlled by the British Inchcape family of PONC/HSBC fame. The Kanoos hold a joint venture with another US construction giant, Foster Wheeler.

Other prominent Saudi families include the Bugshans, the Sulimans, the Abdul-Latif Jameels, the Zahids, the Rajhjis, the Kaakis, the bin Mahfouz and the bin Ladens. Abdul Latif Jameel is worth over $2 billion and has been Toyota’s agent in the Kingdom since 1955. His overseas investments are handled through Jaymont Properties of New York. The Al-Rajhi family owns Al-Rajhi Banking & Investment Corporation and is worth over $4 billion.

Sheik Khalid bin Mahfouz is worth over $2 billion. He owns National Commercial Bank, the largest in the Arab world, and was one of the biggest shareholders in BCCI.

The now-infamous bin Laden family earned its fortune in the construction business, building the Saudi Royal Palace and refurbishing the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Salem bin Laden was a close business associate of George W. Bush friend James Bath. The bin Laden’s funded an Islamic Studies Chair at Harvard. George Bush Sr. works at Carlyle Group, which managed the bin Laden family fortune until November 2001. Both Mohammed (Osama’s father) and Salem bin Laden died in plane crashes.

The most important of the Saudi families are the Olayans, whose patriarch Sulaiman is the ARAMCO dispatcher turned billionaire Morgan Guaranty insider. His Olayan Group was set up with help from Bechtel near ARAMCO headquarters at Dhahran. Soon the Saudi Arabia Bechtel Corporation was launched, with Olayan as partner. Saudi Arabian Bechtel built the huge Ghazlan I and II power stations in Eastern Province, which supply most of the Kingdom’s electricity. It also built most of the countries oil and natural gas pipelines and a sea-water injection plant for the world’s largest offshore oilfield at Ghawar.

Arabian Bechtel Company is a more recent Olayan/Bechtel venture in which Crown Prince Mohammed Fahd has an interest. It built and manages the huge Jubail Industrial City and built the new international airport at Riyadh. Another joint venture, Saudi Arabian Bechtel Equipment Company, leases heavy equipment in the Kingdom. But Olayan’s dealings with Bechtel are just the tip of the family iceberg.

The Olayan clan owns General Contracting Company which often subcontracts for ARAMCO projects and serves as sales agent for International Harvester, FMC, United Technologies, Chrysler, Crane, Freuhauf, ITT, Grinnell, Cummins, British Leyland and Kenworth among others. In the consumer products realm, the Olayan’s General Trading Company is sales agent for American Tobacco, Armour, Nescafe, Dial, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Campbell’s Soup, Hunt-Wesson, 3M, Swisher, Sterling Drug and Kimberly-Clark. Through still other companies, the Olayan’s represent Kawasaki Steel, Hughes Tool, Mitsubishi and Owens-Corning.

Their Industrial Converting Company manufactures Kimberly-Clark paper products. Arabian Commercial Enterprises (ACE) is the family’s insurance arm. Its clients include ARAMCO, Bechtel, BP Amoco, Mobil and Getty Oil. ACE owns Al Nisr Insurance Company in Lebanon and Saudi Arabian Insurance of Bermuda. Olayan’s have two chemical joint ventures with the Swedish firm Nitro Nobel and one with Houston-based Champion Chemicals. Olayan Group owns half of United Technologies Saudi Arabia, through which it sells Pratt & Whitney engines and Otis elevators. A joint venture with Texaco is Sappco-Texaco Insulation Products. Olayan’s Saudi Security Services works with Burns International Security and Freeport Security in protecting multinational operations in the Kingdom.

Some of Olayan’s business connections are less mundane. His partner in joint venture Evergreen Saudi Arabian Aviation is Evergreen Aviation, the airline which arms dealer/pilot Richard Brenneke worked for in flying arms to the Nicaraguan contras. The Oregon firm has a long history as a CIA contract airline. Olayan Finance Company is tied up with Barclays Bank, a key player in the Caribbean Silver Triangle drug money laundering process, and with Hong Kong’s Jardine Matheson conglomerate, owner of the Hong Kong Jockey Club and much of HSBC. This “triad” joint venture is known as Barclays Jardine Olayan and is incorporated in the Cayman Islands. The Olayan’s are also close to American Express (AMEX), where family scion Sulaiman was once a board member alongside Henry Kissinger. AMEX has ties to the global drug trade through its links with Edmund Safra’s Republic Bank, purchased in 1999 by HSBC.

As the Olayan’s have amassed their wealth, they have invested heavily in Western banks and corporations, epitomizing the recycling of petrodollars which has become the norm of the Saudi elite. In 1981 the Olayan’s bought big chunks of stock in Chevron, Texaco, Amoco and Conoco. Sulaiman Olayan and Crown Prince Khaled bin Abdullah bin Abdel Rahman al Saud own Competrol, which holds a 1% stake of J.P. Morgan Chase. Competrol owns similar stakes in Mellon Bank, Southeast Bancorp, Valley National First Bank Systems of Phoenix, First Interstate Bank and Hawaii Bancorp. Competrol owns 19% of private equity firm Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette and 8% of First Chicago Corporation, a long-time CIA money laundry. The Olayans own big chunks of Occidental Petroleum, Westinghouse, Thermo Electron, Whittaker and United Technologies.

Sulaiman Olayan has served on the boards of Morgan Guaranty, Exxon Mobil and American Express. He is chairman of the Saudi-Spanish Bank in Madrid and member of Morgan Guaranty Trust’s International Council.

Billionaire Sulaiman Olayan is a fine metaphor for US/Saudi relations. His immense wealth and influence are a direct result of his willingness to aid in the neo-colonization of his country’s oil reserves. Further, his decision to invest this ill-gotten wealth in the West, rather than in the development of the Arab world, has contributed to poverty and unrest in the region.

Should Assad retain the upper hand in Syria, Olayan and his boot-licking brethren will begin to sleep less well. Payback can be a bitch.

Brzezinski: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, their western allies orchestrated Syria crisis

20130630-041049.jpg

PressTV

The former US national security adviser says the ongoing crisis in Syria has been orchestrated by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and their western allies.

“In late 2011 there are outbreaks in Syria produced by a drought and abetted by two well-known autocracies in the Middle East: Qatar and Saudi Arabia,” Zbigniew Brzezinski said in an interview with The National Interest on June 24.

He added that US President Barack Obama also supported the unrest in Syria and suddenly announced that President Bashar al-Assad “has to go — without, apparently, any real preparation for making that happen.”

“Then in the spring of 2012, the election year here, the CIA under General Petraeus, according to The New York Times of March 24th of this year, a very revealing article, mounts a large-scale effort to assist the Qataris and the Saudis and link them somehow with the Turks in that effort,” said Brzezinski, who was former White House national security adviser under Jimmy Carter and now a counselor and trustee at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a senior research professor at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University.

Criticizing the Obama administration’s policies regarding Syria, he questioned, “Was this a strategic position? Why did we all of a sudden decide that Syria had to be destabilized and its government overthrown? Had it ever been explained to the American people? Then in the latter part of 2012, especially after the elections, the tide of conflict turns somewhat against the rebels. And it becomes clear that not all of those rebels are all that ‘democratic.’ And so the whole policy begins to be reconsidered.”

“I think these things need to be clarified so that one can have a more insightful understanding of what exactly US policy was aiming at,” Brzezinski added.

He also called on US officials to push much more urgently to draw in China, Russia and other regional powers to reach some kind of peaceful end to the Syrian crisis.

“I think if we tackle the issue alone with the Russians, which I think has to be done because they’re involved partially, and if we do it relying primarily on the former colonial powers in the region-France and Great Britain, who are really hated in the region-the chances of success are not as high as if we do engage in it, somehow, with China, India and Japan, which have a stake in a more stable Middle East,” Brzezinski said.

Brzezinski also warned again any US-led military intervention in Syria or arming the militants fighting government forces there.

“I’m afraid that we’re headed toward an ineffective American intervention, which is even worse. There are circumstances in which intervention is not the best but also not the worst of all outcomes. But what you are talking about means increasing our aid to the least effective of the forces opposing Assad. So at best, it’s simply damaging to our credibility. At worst, it hastens the victory of groups that are much more hostile to us than Assad ever was. I still do not understand why — and that refers to my first answer — why we concluded somewhere back in 2011 or 2012 — an election year, incidentally that Assad should go.”

Foreign-sponsored militancy in Syria, which erupted in March 2011, has claimed the lives of many people, including large numbers of Syrian soldiers and security personnel.

the New York Times said in a recent report the CIA was cooperating with Turkey and a number of other regional governments to supply arms to militants fighting the government in Syria.

The report comes as the US has repeatedly voiced concern over weapons falling into the hands of al-Qaeda-linked terrorist groups.

Al-Nusra Front was named a terrorist organization by Washington last December, even though it has been fighting with the US-backed so-called Free Syrian Army in its battle against Damascus.

DB / HN