Oil Profits for Protection: US Extorts Saudi Arabia

April 18, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Legislation circulating in the US Congress threatens to withdraw military support from Saudi Arabia.

This is not because Saudi Arabia is an absolute dictatorship which still severs heads off in public. It is not because Saudi Arabia arms and funds some of the worst terrorist organizations on Earth - including Al Qaeda, its Syrian franchise Tahrir al-Sham - previously known as Jabhat Al Nusra, and the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

And it's not even because of Saudi Arabia's years of committing war crimes in neighboring Yemen.

These are all aspects of modern Saudi Arabia the US has in fact aided and abetted.

Instead, US representatives are threatening to withdraw US military support from Saudi Arabia for allegedly lowering energy prices by flooding markets with Saudi oil. 

Reuters in its article, "Bill would remove U.S. troops from Saudi Arabia in 30 days," would claim:

A Republican U.S. senator introduced legislation on Thursday to remove American troops from Saudi Arabia, adding pressure on the kingdom to tighten its oil taps to reverse the crude price drop that has hurt domestic energy companies.

The threat of yanking out military support from Saudi Arabia undermines decades of propaganda attempting to justify US military support for the Saudi regime.

According to the US State Department's own website under a section titled, "U.S. Relations With Saudi Arabia," the US supports Saudi Arabia because (emphasis added):

The United States and Saudi Arabia have a common interest in preserving the stability, security, and prosperity of the Gulf region and consult closely on a wide range of regional and global issues.  Saudi Arabia plays an important role in working toward a peaceful and prosperous future for the region and is a strong partner in security and counterterrorism efforts and in military, diplomatic, and financial cooperation.  Its forces works closely with U.S. military and law enforcement bodies to safeguard both countries’ national security interests.

If anything the US State Department says about US-Saudi relations is true - "preserving the stability, security, and prosperity of the Gulf region" must surely come first and foremost - especially ahead of something as trivial as oil profits for America's domestic shale industry.

Of course, very little the US State Department says is ever true. US ties with Saudi Arabia have helped drive precisely the opposite of stability, security, and prosperity for both the Persian Gulf region as well as the wider Middle East and even as far as North Africa and Central Asia - with both nations playing leading roles in destabilizing and destroying nations, fueling extremism, separatism, and terrorism, and even engaging in direct military aggression.

Because of the dubious nature of US-Saudi ties and the true agenda of money and power that defines them - there should be little surprise that at moments of opportunity, these two "allies" draw geopolitical and economic daggers against one another.


The US threatening to withdraw military support from Saudi Arabia would leave Riyadh particularly vulnerable in the many proxy wars it wages on Washington's behalf against Iran, Syria, Yemen, and beyond. Of course - the ultimate loser would be Washington itself - which would be further isolating itself in a region increasingly slipping out from under its control.

The US finds itself trying to prioritize its various rackets - its domestic shale gas industry versus its protection rackets abroad, versus its profitable and endless wars, versus maintaining a collection of obedient client regimes around the globe.

But by threatening Saudi Arabia - whether the threat is empty or not - Washington once again reveals to the world that it maintains an international order exclusively serving special interests - using platitudes like "preserving the stability, security, and prosperity of the Gulf region" as an increasingly tenuous facade behind which it advances its self-serving agenda.

Saudi Arabia - despite its many, many sins and from a realist point of view - must begin seriously thinking about a major overhaul of its economic, political, diplomatic, and military alignment within the region and world. As multipolarism moves forward and the tired unipolar order Riyadh belongs to - subordinated to Washington - continues to fade, the threats Riyadh faces will increase as will the cost of being an American "ally."

When Washington begins turning the screws on Riyadh, it does however open a window of opportunity for nations like Russia and China who are looking to improve and expand ties with Saudi Arabia and lead it toward a more constructive role upon the international stage.

It also opens a window of opportunity for nations like Iran - who are perceived as enemies of Saudi Arabia - but who would benefit greatly from a Saudi Arabia that no longer serves US interests and instead truly seeks to preserve "the stability, security, and prosperity" of the region - side-by-side with other nations that actually are located there - not a nation located oceans and continents away.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Declassified 9/11 Report Portrays US-Saudis as Partners in Crime

July 25, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The recently released, previously classified report titled, "Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001" (.pdf), reveals that indeed long-time US ally, Saudi Arabia, had connections to the alleged hijackers who purportedly carried out the 9/11 attacks.

While the US would go on to invade Afghanistan and Iraq predicated on the 9/11 attacks, it should be noted that all of the alleged hijackers were either Saudis or Persian Gulf citizens, or connected to terrorist organizations supported by Persian Gulf states.

The Western media has attempted to downplay the impact of the document's release, claiming that subsequent investigations found the "many" of the allegations in the document "without basis" - even as the US and Saudi Arabia today openly arm and fund terrorists in Syria.

To Whose Benefit? 

Many mistakenly believe on one hand terrorism is simply an inevitable clash of civilizations between "Islam" and the West, while others maintain it is the predictable backlash to flawed or unjust Western foreign policy.

In reality, it is neither.

It is meticulously engineered violence used as a tool for achieving geopolitical objectives around the world - from overthrowing governments and justifying military interventions, to creating paralyzing fear and hysteria at home to garner support for a growing domestic police state and a large military footprint overseas.

In essence, it is a highly conductive medium through which modern day empire can spread.

This can clearly be seen through the use of terrorism today. Some 14 years after the September 11, 2001 attacks, and as memories begin to fade, the US finds itself partnered with Saudi Arabia once again, arming and funding terrorists to fight their proxy wars in Libya, Syria, Iraq, and beyond, just as they did in the 1980s when they jointly created Al Qaeda to begin with.

As the pendulum of geopolitical necessity swings from needing heavily armed, fanatical proxy forces to fight abroad, to needing a pretext at home to initiate large-scale military interventions overseas, these terrorist organizations are characterized by Western politicians and the media in a similarly shifting manner. During the 1980s Al Qaeda was portrayed as "freedom fighters." In 2001 when the United States sought to use full-scale military force to rearrange the Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia, Al Qaeda was transformed into a villain.

The 2001 terrorist attacks allowed the US to justify over a decade of global-spanning war that it otherwise would have been unable to wage.

The Hijackers Had Ties to Saudi Intelligence 

The 28 pages now declassified depicts a tangled web of connections between the Saudi government, Saudi intelligence agencies, the Bin Laden family, and the hijackers - most of whom were Saudi citizens themselves.

The report states:

While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support or assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government. There is information, primarily from FBI sources, that at least two of those individuals were alleged by some to be Saudi intelligence officers. 

The report also reveals that the suspected Saudi intelligence officers worked for companies that had ties to both the Saudi government, and Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden (spelled: Usama Bin Ladin throughout the report).

And not only did various Saudi intelligence officers have connections to the alleged hijackers, several are revealed to have known each other as well.

Mentioned also is Osama Bin Laden's half-brother, Abdullah Bin Ladin, claimed to have worked for the Saudi Embassy in Washington D.C. as an "administration officer," revealing once again the incestuous ties between the Bin Ladin family, the Saudi government, and through equity firm - the Carlyle Group - the Bush family and other political and business leaders in the United States.

The report also mentions that despite the many apparent links, and attempts by the FBI to investigate them further, many suspects were inexplicably able to "leave" the United States and return to Saudi Arabia.

Image: Fake mosques like this one in Denmark, openly recruit Europeans to fight Western proxy wars in the Middle East. Instead of being immediately shut down and those involved for providing material support for terrorism, often European governments and security agencies work with them to manage terrorists as they come home - again - not to imprison them, but use them to manipulate public perception and shape domestic policy. Such "mosques" are often Saudi-funded. 

The report also referred to "mosques" either directly funded by the Saudi government in which various aspects of terrorism were thought to be coordinated, or mosques in which associates of the hijackers met frequently or operated out of.

This illustrates precisely how the US-Saudi terror enterprise keeps its ranks full - through a global network of centers masquerading as mosques, protected by law enforcement and intelligence organizations linked to the West, allowing for both the recruitment and radicalization of terrorists, as well as the planning and financing of terrorism itself.

US Intelligence Community Before 9/11: Incompetence or Collusion? Or Both?  

The US and Saudi Arabia helped create Al Qaeda and for years used the organization to wage proxy war around the world. It's actions on 9/11 then helped set the stage for a decade of war in which the US toppled governments, occupied nations, while conducting covert warfare against others, expanding US hegemony across the globe, and dividing and destroying nations allied to its rivals in Beijing and Moscow.

It is very clear that Saudi Arabia played a role in the 9/11 attacks, as well as in terrorism of all kinds around the world before and after the attacks.

Clearly the FBI and the CIA both were aware of Saudi Arabia's role. It is also clear that efforts were made to protect valuable Saudi assets by spiriting them out of the country as dutiful agents attempted to do their jobs by investigating them further. Those who spirited Saudi agents and officials out of the country, protecting them from further investigation regarding their role in 9/11, are likely linked to those Americans who helped their Saudi counterparts organize and carry out the attacks.

And while some FBI and CIA agents attempted to do their job, one comment toward the end of the 28 pages reveals that perhaps agents were not as aware as they should have been regarding the nature of Al Qaeda and its relationship to Saudi Arabia.

The report quotes a former FBI Assistant Special Agent in Charge, saying:

Basically [redacted]. They were not a country identified by the State Department as a state sponsor of terrorism. And the theme or the common modus operandi that we saw in San Diego was that if there were [redacted] there, their primary objective was to monitor dissidents in the interest of protecting the royal family. So they were not viewed as an inimical threat to national security.  

The agent's conclusion is based entirely on the assumption that the State Department's terrorist designations are meaningful and accurate. If such designations are not accurate, then the FBI would have neglected to fully investigate suspects who were indeed very much an inimical threat to national security.

Today, Al Qaeda and the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" (ISIS) are likewise portrayed as enemies of Saudi Arabia. This is despite clear evidence showing both terrorist organizations and their affiliates in Iraq and Syria, are armed and funded by, as well as working in the direct interests of Riyadh - as well as Washington. When terrorist attacks do unfold in Saudi Arabia, despite being portrayed as attacks aimed at Riyadh itself, they are often instead aimed at Shia'a targets throughout the country.

Shia'a in Saudi Arabia, unlike Al Qaeda and ISIS, do represent a threat to Riyadh - not predicated on fanatical extremism - but instead upon self-defense against the brutality and injustice of the Saudi political system which specifically targets Shia'a.

It appears that some agents, despite laboring under faulty assumptions, did attempt to do their jobs, while others appear to have been protecting suspects very likely tied to the 9/11 attacks, and possibly even tied to the attacks themselves. Together, through incompetence and collusion, the attacks unfolded, and the rest - as they say - is history.

Protecting Saudi Terrorism Then and Now 

While the Western media now claims that many of the declassified report's allegations have been found to be "without basis," the heavy redaction throughout the report leads one to believe that Saudi Arabia and the various tentacles of its security apparatus reaching into the United States are still being covered up by complicit American agents and interests.

Image: At some points, redaction of the 9/11 document becomes almost comically obstructive, defeating the purpose of declassifying it and making it public in the first place. 

Additionally, despite the very troubling implications of the report's contents, it should be noted that in the aftermath of 9/11 the US, along with Europe, continued supplying Saudi Arabia with billions of dollars worth of military weapons while politically supporting Riyadh during its own brush with the "Arab Spring" in 2011. Today, despite evidence of Saudi Arabia's arming and funding of designated terrorist organizations including Al Nusra, the US and Europe continue lending military and political support to Riyadh nonetheless.

Saudi Arabia didn't victimize the United States on 9/11, nor trick Washington. Riyadh and Washington are partners in crime, at times in lockstep, at other times posing as adversaries when maximum plausible deniability is desired.

Despite attempts to claim Saudi Arabia is blameless in the 9/11 attacks, the hijackers were undoubtedly Saudis, inspired by indoctrination that originated in Saudi-funded networks, allegedly approached and assisted by Saudi intelligence agents, and representative of terrorist organizations Riyadh to this day still arms, funds, and uses to wage it and America's proxy wars with.

The report is not really a revelation, but instead another piece of evidence that affirms the US and Saudi Arabia are collaborators in terrorism, not partners fighting it. Those who depend on either in a true fight against global terrorism, should be prepared for perpetual failure.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.     

US NED Ignores Saudi Barbarism

The Arabian Peninsula has been trapped in a time warp for nearly a century, thanks to the House of Saud and indomitable Western support.

July 15, 2015 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) -  Some may find it curious, browsing the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy (NED) website, reviewing the unending lists of faux-NGOs special interests in the West have propped up across the planet to project influence and political meddling into every corner of the planet under the pretense of supporting "freedom and democracy," to discover this meddling extends to nearly all nations except a select few.

Image: Saudi troops move into Bahrain to crackdown on demonstrations there against the also-autocratic regime in power. While the West actively supported and even intervened on behalf of militant mobs across the MENA region seeking regime change, it not only failed to condemn the Saudis in their bid to crush dissent, but actively assisted.

One of these blind spots includes Saudi Arabia. In fact, under the category "Middle East and North Africa" (MENA), Saudi Arabia isn't even listed. NED-funded NGOs attempt to leverage every noble cause conceived by human empathy, from representative governance, to the rights of women and children, from behind which to hide their true agenda of political meddling, undermining local institutions, and the overwriting of a nation's sociocultural landscape. Yet, it would seem, even this farce has its limits, which begin at the borders of favored client-states including Saudi Arabia.

It would seem, were NED a genuine sponsor of such causes, Saudi Arabia would have attracted special attention. It is literally a nation where women do not exist as human beings legally or socially, unable to even drive, and were Saudi Arabia to have anything resembling actual elections, unable to vote as well. The lack of any semblance of representative governance is another aspect one might expect the National Endowment for Democracy to find issue with. Yet it doesn't.

This transparent, obvious hypocrisy exposes the entirety of NED's work for what it is - meddling behind an elaborate facade of defending freedom, democracy, and human rights.

But beyond this intentional blind spot the self-proclaimed arbiters of global freedom and democracy have created for the autocratic, brutal regime of Saudi Arabia to hide within, we find more than just silent approval, we find also active, even eager complicity.

The entirety of Saudi Arabia's security apparatus, both internal and military, has been created and propped up by the West through billions upon billions of dollars in aid, weapon sales, and direct military cooperation and support. This includes the immense 60 billion USD arms deal signed between Riyadh and Washington, the largest arms deal in US history.

This says nothing of covert operations the West, including the United States and United Kingdom, have been carrying out throughout the MENA region with Saudi Arabia as the chief proxy and local facilitator.

Saudi Barbaria 

Saudi Arabia is ruled by an unelected, hereditary dictatorship. In fact, so autocratic is Saudi Arabia, the nation is literally named after the single family that has ruled it since it was created - the House of Saud - or "Saud's Arabia."

While Western NGOs fund to the tune of millions per year activists around the world agitating political instability in nations like Thailand, claiming that the constitutional monarchy there is some sort of impediment to "democracy," the fact that a single family has ruled Saudi Arabia uninterrupted for decades, even naming the country after the family who rules it unopposed without even the semblance of elections or representative governance, seems to be more than acceptable.

To remain in power for decades, the House of Saud has instituted an extensive and barbaric punitive system which includes public beheadings for everyone from "witches and heretics" to enemies of the state. What is considered as intolerable barbarity in Syria or Iraq when Al Qaeda beheads prisoners of war or local civilians to impose their rule on seized territory, is just another day at "Chop-Chop Square" in Riyadh.

The International Business Tribune would report in its article, "Execution Central: Saudi Arabia's Bloody Chop-Chop Square," that: 

In the capital Riyadh, public executions take place in the central Deera square, usually at 9am. The wide ochre square has been grimly dubbed "chop chop square" has seen dozens of condemned men and women put to death in recent years.

"When they [death row prisoners] get to the execution square, their strength drains away. Then I read the execution order, and at a signal I cut the prisoner's head off," al-Beshi said.

According to Human Rights Watch, from January to September 2012, at least 69 people were executed in Saudi Arabia. Another 10 beheadings have been reported in just the first six weeks of 2013.

Beheadings are imposed mainly for murder or drug offences, but cases of apostasy (renunciation of one's faith), sorcery and witchcraft can also end up in Chop Chop square. Indeed a man named Muri' al-'Asiri was executed last year in the southern town of Najran, as punishment for being a sorcerer.

The parallels between Al Qaeda and Saudi Arabia are no coincidence. Al Qaeda and the subsequent "Islamic State" (ISIS) it has created, straddling Syria and Iraq and spreading across the rest of the MENA region in fact finds its genesis and chief patrons in Riyadh. The West props up Riyadh, and Riyadh props up a regional army of mercenaries waging relentless war on Washington and Wall Street's enemies throughout MENA. A torrent of supplies brought in by literal convoys of trucks even streams into the war zone via NATO territory.

ISIS can in fact be considered a "colony" of Riyadh, and a reflection of the depravity actively encouraged by the West on the Arabian Peninsula for decades. 

Saudi Barbarism Actively, Intentionally Enabled by West

A barbaric autocracy lopping the heads off its own citizens while creating colonies of terrorism across the globe through direct support of marching terrorist armies and a global network of madrases promoting the state-cult of Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism, under the guise of Sunni Islam would seem like one of the West's greatest threats. 

Yet in most cases, particularly when these Saudi-sponsored madrases are established in Europe or North America, national intelligence and law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, the CIA, MI5, and MI6 actively participate in the cultivating, exploitation, and entrapment of radicals created within. Never is it attempted to expose and dismantle these networks, and instead, an intentional strategy of tension is created around these rat nests of extremism to promote hysteria, division, and further fan the flames of fear at home, while justifying perpetual war abroad.

Considering this, it is clear why Saudi Arabia is not only pardoned for its inhumanity and criminality, but encouraged and enabled by special interests in the West. These interests are able to manipulate and terrorize their population at home, justify the creation and enlargement of domestic surveillance networks, and justify the use of military force abroad in campaigns of hegemonic conquest predicated on "national defense" against "terrorism" they and their allies have themselves created to begin with.

Image: Saudi Arabia wages relentless war against Yemen with absolute impunity - even complicity and support from the so-called "international community" comprised of Wall Street, Washington, London, Brussels, and the myriad of faux-international institutions they have created to lend legitimacy to their otherwise illegitimate, unwarranted power and influence.

When Saudi Arabia began airstrikes on neighboring Yemen, we saw once again not only the United States, United Kingdom, and the European Union fail to protest the extraterritorial aggression, but the United Nations itself also failed to condemn or act in response. Furthermore, Western support for Saudi military aggression has continued unabated regardless of the atrocities and deaths unfolding in Yemen.

And while it can safely be said that Al Qaeda is a reflection of Saudi Arabia, it can also be safely stated that Saudi Arabia, its barbarism and regional crimes against humanity, its state-sponsorship of global terrorism, and even the ideology it actively promotes worldwide that serves as the foundation global terrorism is inspired from, is a reflection in turn of the depravity of the special interests ruling Wall Street, Washington and their Transatlantic counterparts in London and Brussels.

Understanding the special accommodations made by the West for perhaps the most barbaric nation on Earth, amid disingenuous bleating about "Iran," "North Korea," "Russia," "China," and other enemies of Western hegemony, exposes the emptiness of Western principles - or more accurately - the emptiness of those hiding behind them.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.  

US-Saudi Blitz in Yemen: Naked Aggression, Absolute Desperation

March 27, 2015 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The "proxy war" model the US has been employing throughout the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and even in parts of Asia appears to have failed yet again, this time in the Persian Gulf state of Yemen.

Overcoming the US-Saudi backed regime in Yemen, and a coalition of sectarian extremists including Al Qaeda and its rebrand, the "Islamic State," pro-Iranian Yemeni Houthi militias have turned the tide against American "soft power" and has necessitated a more direct military intervention. While US military forces themselves are not involved allegedly, Saudi warplanes and a possible ground force are.

Though Saudi Arabia claims "10 countries" have joined its coalition to intervene in Yemen, like the US invasion and occupation of Iraq hid behind a "coalition," it is overwhelmingly a Saudi operation with "coalition partners" added in a vain attempt to generate diplomatic legitimacy.

The New York Times, even in the title of its report, "Saudi Arabia Begins Air Assault in Yemen," seems not to notice these "10" other countries. It reports:

Saudi Arabia announced on Wednesday night that it had launched a military campaign in Yemen, the beginning of what a Saudi official said was an offensive to restore a Yemeni government that had collapsed after rebel forces took control of large swaths of the country.  

The air campaign began as the internal conflict in Yemen showed signs of degenerating into a proxy war between regional powers. The Saudi announcement came during a rare news conference in Washington by Adel al-Jubeir, the kingdom’s ambassador to the United States.

Proxy War Against Iran 

Indeed, the conflict in Yemen is a proxy war. Not between Iran and Saudi Arabia per say, but between Iran and the United States, with the United States electing Saudi Arabia as its unfortunate stand-in.

Iran's interest in Yemen serves as a direct result of the US-engineered "Arab Spring" and attempts to overturn the political order of North Africa and the Middle East to create a unified sectarian front against Iran for the purpose of a direct conflict with Tehran. The war raging in Syria is one part of this greater geopolitical conspiracy, aimed at overturning one of Iran's most important regional allies, cutting the bridge between it and another important ally, Hezbollah in Lebanon.

And while Iran's interest in Yemen is currently portrayed as yet another example of Iranian aggression, indicative of its inability to live in peace with its neighbors, US policymakers themselves have long ago already noted that Iran's influence throughout the region, including backing armed groups, serves a solely defensive purpose, acknowledging the West and its regional allies' attempts to encircle, subvert, and overturn Iran's current political order.

The US-based RAND Corporation, which describes itself as "a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decision making through research and analysis," produced a report in 2009 for the US Air Force titled, "Dangerous But Not Omnipotent : Exploring the Reach and Limitations of Iranian Power in the Middle East," examining the structure and posture of Iran's military, including its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and weapons both present, and possible future, it seeks to secure its borders and interests with against external aggression.

The report admits that:

Iran’s strategy is largely defensive, but with some offensive elements. Iran’s strategy of protecting the regime against internal threats, deterring aggression, safeguarding the homeland if aggression occurs, and extending influence is in large part a defensive one that also serves some aggressive tendencies when coupled with expressions of Iranian regional aspirations. It is in part a response to U.S. policy pronouncements and posture in the region, especially since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The Iranian leadership takes very seriously the threat of invasion given the open discussion in the United States of regime change, speeches defining Iran as part of the “axis of evil,” and efforts by U.S. forces to secure base access in states surrounding Iran.

Whatever imperative Saudi Arabia is attempting to cite in justifying its military aggression against Yemen, and whatever support the US is trying to give the Saudi regime rhetorically, diplomatically, or militarily, the legitimacy of this military operation crumbles before the words of the West's own policymakers who admit Iran and its allies are simply reacting to a concerted campaign of encirclement, economic sanctions, covert military aggression, political subversion, and even terrorism aimed at establishing Western hegemony across the region at the expense of Iranian sovereignty.

Saudi Arabia's Imperative Lacks Legitimacy 

The unelected hereditary regime ruling over Saudi Arabia, a nation notorious for egregious human rights abuses, and a land utterly devoid of even a semblance of what is referred to as "human rights," is now posing as arbiter of which government in neighboring Yemen is "legitimate" and which is not, to the extent of which it is prepared to use military force to restore the former over the latter.

The United States providing support for the Saudi regime is designed to lend legitimacy to what would otherwise be a difficult narrative to sell. However, the United States itself has suffered from an increasing deficit in its own legitimacy and moral authority.

Most ironic of all, US and Saudi-backed sectarian extremists, including Al Qaeda in Yemen, had served as proxy forces meant to keep Houthi militias in check by proxy so the need for a direct military intervention such as the one now unfolding would not be necessary. This means that Saudi Arabia and the US are intervening in Yemen only after the terrorists they were supporting were overwhelmed and the regime they were propping up collapsed.

In reality, Saudi Arabia's and the United States' rhetoric aside, a brutal regional regime meddled in Yemen and lost, and now the aspiring global hemegon sponsoring it from abroad has ordered it to intervene directly and clean up its mess.

Saudi Arabia's Dangerous Gamble 

The aerial assault on Yemen is meant to impress upon onlookers Saudi military might. A ground contingent might also attempt to quickly sweep in and panic Houthi fighters into folding. Barring a quick victory built on psychologically overwhelming Houthi fighters, Saudi Arabia risks enveloping itself in a conflict that could easily escape out from under the military machine the US has built for it.

It is too early to tell how the military operation will play out and how far the Saudis and their US sponsors will go to reassert themselves over Yemen. However, that the Houthis have outmatched combined US-Saudi proxy forces right on Riyadh's doorstep indicates an operational capacity that may not only survive the current Saudi assault, but be strengthened by it.

Reports that Houthi fighters have employed captured Yemeni warplanes further bolsters this notion - revealing tactical, operational, and strategic sophistication that may well know how to weather whatever the Saudis have to throw at it, and come back stronger.

What may result is a conflict that spills over Yemen's borders and into Saudi Arabia proper. Whatever dark secrets the Western media's decades of self-censorship regarding the true sociopolitical nature of Saudi Arabia will become apparent when the people of the Arabian peninsula must choose to risk their lives fighting for a Western client regime, or take a piece of the peninsula for themselves.

Additionally, a transfer of resources and fighters arrayed under the flag of the so-called "Islamic State" and Al Qaeda from Syria to the Arabian Peninsula will further indicate that the US and its regional allies have been behind the chaos and atrocities carried out in the Levant for the past 4 years. Such revelations will only further undermine the moral imperative of the West and its regional allies, which in turn will further sabotage their efforts to rally support for an increasingly desperate battle they themselves conspired to start.

America's Shrinking Legitimacy 

It was just earlier this month when the United States reminded the world of Russia's "invasion" of Crimea. Despite having destabilized Ukraine with a violent, armed insurrection in Kiev, for the purpose of expanding NATO deeper into Eastern Europe and further encircling Russia, the West insisted that Russia had and  still has no mandate to intervene in any way in neighboring Ukraine. Ukraine's affairs, the United States insists, are the Ukrainians' to determine. Clearly, the US meant this only in as far as Ukrainians determined things in ways that suited US interests.

This is ever more evident now in Yemen, where the Yemeni people are not being allowed to determine their own affairs. Everything up to and including military invasion has been reserved specifically to ensure that the people of Yemen do not determine things for themselves, clearly, because it does not suit US interests.

Such naked hypocrisy will be duly noted by the global public and across diplomatic circles. The West's inability to maintain a cohesive narrative is a growing sign of weakness. Shareholders in the global enterprise the West is engaged in may see such weakness as a cause to divest - or at the very least - a cause to diversify toward other enterprises. Such enterprises may include Russia and China's mulipolar world. The vanishing of Western global hegemony will be done in destructive conflict waged in desperation and spite.

Today, that desperation and spite befalls Yemen.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.

Mystery Behind Dropping Oil Prices Solved - Concerted Manipulation

February 7, 2015 (Ulson Gunnar - NEO) Who's surprised? Various stories had been invented by media houses across the Western world in an attempt to explain why oil prices have conveniently fallen, just in time to pressure Russia, Venezuela and Iran, and all while covert political subversion, attempts to sell all-out-war and other measures have completely failed to assert US interests around the world. The obvious answer was market manipulation, an answer US and other Western news sources refused to admit ... that is until now.

The New York Times in their article, "Saudi Oil Is Seen as Lever to Pry Russian Support From Syria’s Assad," finally admits, "Saudi Arabia has been trying to pressure President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to abandon his support for President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, using its dominance of the global oil markets at a time when the Russian government is reeling from the effects of plummeting oil prices. "

But of course, despite this grain of truth, Saudi Arabia didn't do this on their own, since Saudi Arabia isn't destabilizing Syria on its own, or for its own interests. Saudi Arabia, while playing a significant part in the manipulation of global oil prices, is solely blamed for the purpose of compartmentalizing public perception. The reality is that global oil prices are being manipulated at the behest of the US not only to overthrow the government of Syria or pressure Iran, but to strike at Russia itself.

The New York Times would have us believe that Saudi Arabia is rigging international oil prices to "bring peace in Syria," making no mention of Saudi Arabia's role in backing heavily armed militants streaming into the country turning it into a war zone to begin with. The NYT also makes no mention of the prospect of peace that might result should Saudi Arabia stop its immense state-sponsorship of international terrorism.

For the "cause of peace," Saudi Arabia is already estimated to have lost $39 billion. For a regime that chops the heads off its political opponents in public demonstrations meant to inspire medieval fear among its people, the idea that it is willing to lose billions in oil revenue to "promote peace" in Syria is plainly absurd, and raises serious questions about the legitimacy of the NYT.

The New York Times would also mention Crimea's return to Russia, but would stop short of linking oil market manipulation to the conflict in Ukraine. However, this is actually the key to understanding global geopolitics and how dropping oil prices fit in. Syria and Ukraine are linked, and Saudi Arabia's role in putting pressure on Russia for one that matters a little to Riyadh (Syria), and another that matters not at all (Ukraine), shows how Riyadh's foreign policy is driven not by national interests, but by obligations it apparently owes to Washington and London (significant obligations that if not met would end with the dissolution of the House of Saud).

Instead of focusing on Saudi Arabia and claims that it is solely responsible for global oil prices being cut in half despite no discernible changes in supply and demand, the global public should see a wider confrontation playing out. The US is using its vast influence over finance, energy, the media and many other economic and political sectors to wage full spectrum war on those resisting its hegemonic expansion globally.

Other news agencies who helped invent explanations regarding dropping oil prices, included the Washington Post which claimed in its article, "Falling oil prices put pressure on Russia, Iran and Venezuela," that, "THE SILVER lining in the recent financial market turbulence has been the continued decline in the price of oil, which is down about 25 percent since June. In addition to creating a windfall for U.S. consumers — one analysis reckoned the savings could amount to $600 per household — the drop, if sustained, will place considerable pressure on three problematic petrostates: Russia, Iran and Venezuela. The aggressively anti-American foreign policies pursued by all three countries in recent years have been financed in large part by soaring oil revenue."

Silver lining? Or concerted conspiracy? The NYT provides the light shining through the Washington Post's cloudy analysis, confirming indeed it is a concerted conspiracy.

What does this say about global energy markets and their intertwining with various other sociopolitical issues including the debate over climate change, spikes in prices that strangulate development globally and wars waged for "humanitarian reasons" against nations that just so happen to export oil outside of markets controlled by Washington and London? It says a lot, and illustrates that many of the facades and social crusades well-meaning people have taken up leave them carrying water for one of the most perverse, destructive industries on Earth, in human history ... big oil.

The Saudis wouldn't last long without both internal and external security and support both military and political, provided by the US and others to prop up the otherwise politically and morally bankrupt petrostate. Despite exercising barbarism as a matter of national policy not seen in other countries since the dark ages, its head of state was given passionate eulogies by Western dignitaries as he passed away, with London going as far as flying its national flag at half-mast for the deceased monarch.

Showing general respect for others, good or evil, may not be so offensive, were it not for the fact that the US and UK regularly undermine and destroy the governments of others guilty of far less egregious crimes than those associated with the House of Saud. This illustrates that US foreign policy toward nations is not determined by moral or legal obligations, but rather the utility or opposition each state poses to the hegemonic designs driving US ambitions overseas.

Taking this to its logical conclusion, the US and its large collection of client states around the world, are undermining Syria, waging economic war against Russia, destabilizing China at home while chasing their investors out of any nation they're found in, not based on some moral imperative, but specifically because of the absolute, utter lack of morality. Understanding this cuts through the various invented stories constantly emanating from the Western media, including myths about miraculously dropping oil prices and their "serendipitous" and "coincidental" impact they just so happen to have on all of America's perceived enemies.

Even the Washington Post admits there really is no tie between Venezuela, Iran and Russia, except claims that each is "autocratic" and "anti-American." The real common denominator is their respective resistance to US hegemony in their regions of the world. And while many reasons were invented to explain the convenient drop in oil prices, we can see once again that when events unfold the first question to be asked in identifying the perpetrators is "to whose benefit?" Had the Washington Post fulfilled their duty as journalists and asked this question, readers around the world would not have waited months to finally learn the truth behind dropping oil prices. The answer was simple but ridiculed as "Kremlin propaganda" at the time, but of course, is now fully admitted to to be machinations carried out by Russia's enemies.

Lesson learned? Hopefully the next turn in economic fortune in the markets, or terrorist act carried out that "just so happens" to benefit the US and its partners around the world, people will hold those who stand to benefit the most with increased scrutiny and suspicion.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

The World According to TIME Magazine

May 10, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - TIME Magazine echos Wall Street and Washington - so when it speaks, readers must listen in that context. Nothing shows the link between TIME's biased, intentionally misleading propaganda and the agenda of the corporate-financier elite that rule America better than the fact that its last managing editor left in 2013 to join the US State Department. Politico would report in its article, "Richard Stengel leaving Time for State Department," that:

Richard Stengel, the top editor of Time magazine for the past seven years, is planning to step down as managing editor for a new job at the U.S. Department of State, sources familiar with the situation tell POLITICO and Capital New York.

With this revolving door spinning between TIME's editorial board and the US State Department in mind, readers must understand that what TIME publishes isn't reality, but rather "reality" according to what suits US interests, and more specifically, Wall Street and Washington's interests. 

It is then no surprise to open up its most recent issue covering what it calls "The 100 Most Influential People" and find the likes of Hillary Clinton heaping on praise for John Kerry, or Madeleine Albright condemning Russian President Vladimir Putin. It is the US State Department's version of the Oscars, an annual ritual centered around self-aggrandizement and the reinforcement of the West's perceived worldview. 

Of current US Secretary of State John Kerry, former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would claim: 

Diplomacy is in John Kerry’s blood. As the son of a foreign-service officer, he grew up understanding that America’s destiny is entwined with that of the wider world.

Diplomacy takes stamina, passion and perspective, and John embodies these traits. He is relentless in the face of the most persistent obstacles — keeping alive the dream of peace in the Middle East, standing up to Russia’s ongoing aggression in Ukraine, negotiating the removal of chemical weapons from Syria and signing an interim nuclear deal with Iran. And his work on climate change exemplifies these qualities. Addressing the dangers posed by global warming has long been a personal commitment for him. I know from experience just how hard this is. There’s nobody better suited to carry the cause forward than John Kerry. The people of the United States can be proud he’s representing America and its interests abroad. I know I am.

"The people of the United State can be proud he's representing America and its interests abroad..." Clinton claims. Ironically, the picture featured alongside Clinton's comments was of Kerry in Riyadh visiting the unelected Saudi regime who currently preside over a kingdom where state resources are squandered funding sectarian extremists abroad in places like Libya and Syria, and domestically where women can neither vote nor drive, and enemies of the state - which include heretics, homosexuals, and political opponents (charged for treason, sedition, or terrorism) - are beheaded publicly by swordsmen. Surely Kerry is not representing America or its interests - but rather corporations and financiers residing within America and their interests.

TIME Magazine would continue, with commentary by yet another former US Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright. Albright took on Russian President Vladimir Putin, claiming:

In 2008, in these same pages, I wrote that Putin would “remain an irritant to NATO, a source of division within Europe and yet another reason for the West to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.” I was wrong. It’s worse.

Through his illegal actions in Ukraine, Putin has reminded us that leaders of great countries are most dangerous when they make up their own facts. Putin’s worldview is colored by toxic fictions.

Putin’s ultra-nationalistic instinct has upped his poll numbers, but his increased influence will be temporary. Russia has acquired territory but lost credibility. Putin has bought himself a pile of problems at the cost of the international ties Russia needs to prosper. He has betrayed Russia’s best resource — its people — who will eventually realize his rhetoric is nothing more than a fantasy inside a delusion wrapped in a tissue of lies.

To some, Putin has “won” Crimea. Will he recognize his “victory” is Pyrrhic — or try to repeat it? History is filled with aggressors who triumphed for a moment. Then failed.

Had Albright not mentioned Putin by name, one may have thought she was reflecting on her own career - one which included the sanctioning of Iraq at the cost of starving to death over half a million children, before an illegal war based on "toxic fictions" that led to the death of another 1 million civilians, and left the nation of Iraq to this day in perpetual violent conflict.

Albright's parting shot of, "history is filled with aggressors who triumphed for a moment. Then failed," could just as easily be directed at US President George Bush who proclaimed aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln in 2003, "mission accomplished," before America was dragged through a nearly decade long occupation of Iraq that ended in its withdrawal and Iranian influence filling the remaining void.

The audacity of American politicians standing in judge of the world, even as their own hands are covered in the blood of millions, condemning others for simply reacting to their extraterritorial meddling, is generally the hallmark of an empire at its height. But as history teaches, empires at their height merely stand at the edge of their inevitable and irreversible decline.

The world according to TIME is thankfully not the true world we inhabit. The annual self-aggrandizing of TIME and other publications and productions across the Western media are designed to reinforce a fiction aimed at justifying and legitimizing otherwise unjustified and illegitimate leadership and agendas. Seeing through this ill-constructed facade is the first step in tearing it down and letting the light of truth finally shine through.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Qatar's Isolation a Geopolitical Trick?

Image: The West enjoys portraying Qatar as a modern nation-state
on the rise. Under the carefully managed facade lies barbarism and
institutionalized support for international terrorism in support of the
West's hegemonic goals across the planet - not to mention the fact that
it is ruled by an unelected, autocratic, hereditary dictatorship. 

March 13, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci - New Eastern Outlook) - The sudden shift in Qatar's standings in the Middle East has left much of the world perplexed, suspicious, and skeptical. Others are hopeful that it indicates a fraying in an axis that has been sowing violence and destabilization across much of North Africa and the Middle East for years. 

The Irish Times reported in its article, "Saudi Arabia threatens to blockade Qatar over terrorism," that: 

Saudi Arabia has threatened to blockade neighbouring Qatar by air, land and sea unless Doha cuts ties with Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, closes global channel al-Jazeera, and expels local branches of the US Brookings Institution and Rand Corporation think tanks. 

The threat was issued by Riyadh before it withdrew its ambassador to Doha and branded as “terrorist organisations” the brotherhood, Lebanon’s Hizbullah and al-Qaeda-linked Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and Jabhat al-Nusra. 

Although the kingdom has long been the font of Sunni ultra-orthodox Salafism and jihadism, it now seeks to contain radical movements and media and other organisations giving them publicity.

The Irish Times would then go on to point out the bizarre contradiction of the Saudis' move, reminding readers that:

While the law and decree are meant to curb jihadi operations on Saudi soil as well as counter non-jihadi dissidence, these legal instruments appear to contradict government policy on foreign jihad. 

While 400 Saudis have returned home from Syrian battlefields, another 1,000-2,000 are believed to be fighting with jihadi groups funded by the government as well as wealthy Saudis, Kuwaitis and Qataris.

What then could the reason be for this clearly hypocritical, conflicting foreign policy shift? Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates have also joined Saudi Arabia in isolating Qatar leaving many to speculate over a wide range of possibilities. 

1. An Axis in Need of  Renewed Credibility? 

Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel, and the United States have been inexorably linked geopolitically, financially, and even militarily for decades. In recent years, this axis has worked in tandem to destabilize, destroy, and reorder North Africa and the Middle East through a combination of covertly-backed political uprising (the US-engineered Arab Spring), terrorism, proxy-war (Syria), and outright invasion (Libya). The proxy networks used to carry out this vast geopolitical reordering includes the terrorist organization Al Qaeda and its various regional franchises, as well as the Muslim Brotherhood which provides the sociopolitical scaffolding upon which Al Qaeda builds its support, its ranks, and its material resources.

With Libya left decimated and in the hands of Western-aligned proxies, and Syria emerging from a prolonged proxy-war the victors over Western-backed militants, the spanning and vulnerable axis may no longer be needed to operate in such an overt manner upon the global stage. 

Continue reading at New Eastern Outlook... 

Tahrir turbulence: Washington & SCAF as obstacles to change in Egypt

Nile Bowie

Russia Today

As figures in Egypt’s powerful military collude with the political opposition to form a civilian interim government, what kind of political and economic solutions will the new regime offer, and is Washington’s hidden hand at play?

Political polarization has reached new heights in Egypt following the dramatic overthrow of Mohamed Morsi, the country’s first democratically elected leader. Recent polls taken before the June 30 protests showed that SCAF’s approval rating had reached 94 percent while the Muslim Brotherhood’s rating was at 28 percent and the opposition’s at 38 percent. It’s strange that Egypt’s anti-Morsi activists would place their trust in SCAF given its extensive crackdown on civilian protesters since the revolution began, and certainly no one can deny that the Muslim Brotherhood was isolated during its final days. It is highly unlikely that Morsi would ever be reinstated at this point, and the interim government can be expected to pursue austerity measures, economic restructuring, and a foreign policy in step with Western-Gulf states. Morsi had something that the current rulers of Egypt do not – democratic legitimacy – and despite that only 34 percent of Egyptians took part in the vote, the result should have been respected by the military. Morsi was by no means a democrat, but the Muslim Brotherhood captured the majority in parliament, and their persecution and total exclusion from the interim government is unacceptable.

After sweeping away two presidents since 2011, the original goals of the revolution, embodied in the popular slogan “Bread, Freedom, Social Justice and Human Dignity,” haven’t come close to materializing. For all intents and purposes, life for the average Egyptian is more difficult now than under Hosni Mubarak, and although Morsi’s shortcomings may not have justified a military coup, his tenure was a spectacular failure. Although many perceive Morsi and Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) as being hijackers of the 2011 revolution, the bottom line is that the revolutionary fervor emanating from Tahrir Square is not directed against one party or political figure, but against economic conditions and neo-liberal tendencies that have largely remained unchanged throughout the ebb and flow of Egyptian politics in recent times.

Continue reading >>

Nile Bowie is a Malaysia-based political analyst and a columnist with Russia Today. He also contributes to PressTV, Global Research, and CounterPunch. He can be reached at nilebowie@gmail.com.

Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the Struggle for Influence in Syria

Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the Struggle for Influence in Syria

By Eric Draitser

StopImperialism.com

This week’s resignationof Ghassan Hitto, the so-called “Prime Minister in waiting” of the Syrian Opposition Coalition, coupled with the July 6^th election of Ahmed Assi al-Jarba to head the umbrella coalition of US-supported proxy groups attempting to topple the Assad government, has revealed further cracks in the edifice of the imperialist assault on Syria.

Qatar's Man in the Middle 

Ghassan Hitto, the Syrian expatriate and technocrat from Texas, was seen by most informed observers as the darling of the Muslim Brotherhood and Qatar.  As noted by AFP shortly after Hitto’s election:

Some coalition members described Hitto as a consensus candidate pleasing both the opposition’s Islamist and liberal factions.  But some of the 70-odd Coalition members withdrew from the consultations before the vote could take place, accusing opposition heavyweight Muslim Brotherhood of imposing Hitto as a candidate. 

Indeed, the imposition of Hitto as the political face of the foreign-backed opposition was seen by many inside the opposition and around the world as a power-play by Qatar to control the direction of the conflict in Syria and establish Doha as the real center of power in a post-Assad Syria.

This connection between Hitto, the Muslim Brotherhood and Qatar was the source of much tension within the opposition.  The NY Times reported that:

 [Hitto] faced several challenges: he was seen by some rebels and activists as out of touch with the country, and some members of the often-squabbling coalition complained that he was a favorite of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood and of its main foreign backer Qatar.  Many in the opposition say Qatar wields too much influence in the movement.

What became clear during the course of Hitto’s short tenure as the public face of the foreign-backed opposition was that he was less a political leader than a proxy of Qatar and the United States.  This despite what can only be called competition between its allies in Doha and Riyadh who at times collaborate and at other times compete for power and influence among the extremist jihadi elements throughout the Middle East and North Africa.  Essentially then, Hitto must be understood as a placeholder, a man whose responsibility was not to lead, but simply to act as a foothold for the al-Thani regime and the Muslim Brotherhood within the leadership of the opposition.  The goal was of course to have Hitto in place for the potential fall of Assad, so that Qatar could immediately secure its control over the country in a post-Assad scenario.

Saudis Reclaiming Dominant Role?

Hitto’s resignation places even more significance on last week’s election of Ahmed Assi al-Jarba as head of the Syrian Opposition Coalition.  Whereas Hitto was understood to be a proxy of Qatar, Jarba can be correctly characterized as a proxy of Saudi Arabia.  As McClatchy News explains:

            

            Jarba is a chief of the Shammar tribe, one of the Arab world’s most powerful clans with members stretching from southern Turkey to Saudi Arabia...He was jailed early in the revolt against Assad…After being released from prison in August 2012, he fled to Saudi Arabia where his tribal connections put him into close touch with senior members of the Saudi intelligence services.

It should be noted that the innocuous-sounding phrase “close touch with senior members of Saudi intelligence” is a euphemism for Saudi agent, which is precisely what Jarba is.  Note the fact that, like Hitto, Jarba has already stated publicly his opposition to peace talks with the Assad government, thereby perpetuating the cycle of violence that benefits Riyadh and Doha and costs more innocent Syrians their lives. 

Jarba has said that “Geneva in these circumstances is impossible.”  However, one must consider precisely which “circumstances” he was referring to.  Keen political observers who have been following events in Syria for some time understand the “circumstances” to be the continued military defeats of the foreign-backed rebels and jihadis by the forces of the Assad government.  Jarba and his Saudi handlers understand quite clearly that they must first achieve substantive military victories on the ground before they can even pay lip service to peace talks.

It is precisely this desperate need for tactical victories by the rebels that has driven Saudi Arabia to become even more involved in fomenting this war.  Using Jarba as their proxy, the Saudis have attempted to launch a new and perhaps even deadlier phase of the war against Syria.  In his first two days as head of the coalition, Jarba has already announcedthat the rebels will soon receive “a new shipment of sophisticated weapons from Saudi Arabia” as well as proposing a truce during Ramadan. 

However, these announcements should be interpreted as cynical ploys designed to buy time for Saudi arms to reach their destination and for the rebels to train in their use.  Jarba said as much when he proclaimed to Reuters, “I will not rest until I procure the advanced weapons needed to hit back at Assad and his allies.  I give myself one month to achieve what I am intent to do.”  So, while proposing a one-month truce under the cover of religious piety in the observance of Ramadan, Jarba gives himself exactly that same one month window to procure advanced weapons.  The hypocrisy and duplicity needs no further explanation.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar have a complicated relationship, at times friendly and at other times acrimonious.  Throughout the course of the destabilization and subversion of Syria, the two countries have collaborated in the funding, arming, and importation of jihadi elements from throughout the Muslim world.  They have both been linked to intelligence agencies of the imperial Western powers while maintaining close contact with terror networks foreign and domestic.  As such, both countries have played the indispensable role of intermediary between these disparate forces.  However, now that the threat to their terrorist proxies in Syria is an existential one, and Assad victories become ever more decisive, it seems the bond between the monarchies is fraying.  The recent changes in the political leadership of the so-called opposition merely reflect this.

Eric Draitser is the founder of StopImperialism.com.  He is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City.  You can email him at ericdraitser@gmail.com.

Malaysia Invaded - 100's of Terrorists Land on Beaches, Western Media Mute

March 7, 2013 (LD) - Hundreds of heavily armed terrorists have crossed from the Philippines and landed in the eastern Malaysian state of Sabah. Dozens are already dead, and the Malaysian military has brought in aircraft and armor to confront the audacious, bizarre invasion, scattering militants into the jungles of Borneo island. A seemingly headline news event, the invasion has been downplayed and spun by the Western media, many calling militant Al Qaeda-linked terrorists, an "armed Filipino clan."  

Image: Malaysia has called in air support and armor to confront a bizarre terrorist invasion in its eastern state of Sabah.

....

The West's woeful, irresponsible coverage of a burgeoning region-wide destabilization, fits in nicely with its coverage of US-Saudi funded/armed terrorism around the world, including in Syria where US-funded terrorists of the so-called "Free Syrian Army" have just taken dozens of UN peacekeepers hostage in the Golan Heights - just days after the US announced it would fund the terrorists further, to the tune of $60 million and the West's Arab partners have just granted the terrorist faction Syria's seat at the "Arab League."



Terrorists are US-Saudi Funded Extremists - Part of Engineered Destabilization.

While the West pleads ignorance over the identity of the militants held up in the jungles of Malaysia's Sabah state, the militant organizations themselves have declared thousands more in reinforcements are being arranged in the Philippines to join and exasperate the conflict. The Free Malaysia Today newspaper reported in its article, "10,000 Tausugs to sail to Sabah," that :

Thousands of Tausug from Basilan, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi have sailed to Sabah to reinforce members of the so-called royal army of the sultanate of Sulu who are fighting it out with Malaysian security forces, a Moro National Liberation Front official said Tuesday.

The Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) of course, is one of several of Al Qaeda's franchises in Southeast Asia, and spun off the notorious terrorist organization, Abu Sayyaf, a US State Department-listed foreign terrorist organization with direct ties to Al Qaeda.

The Philippines' terrorist organizations, located amongst the country's southern islands have long held ties to Al Qaeda and receive funding and support from Saudi Arabia. AFP reported in their 2010 article, "WikiLeaks: US suspected Saudi ambassador to the Philippines of terror link," that:

The United States suspected a Saudi Arabian ambassador to the Philippines of potential involvement in funding terrorists, according to US diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks this week.

The report would also state: 

Francis Townsend cited Waly’s intervention to secure the release of two members of an Islamic charity detained in the Philippines, the cable showed.

The group was suspected of funnelling funds to Al-Qaeda-linked groups based in the southern Philippines.

 It continued stating: 

The February 24, 2007, US embassy cable named the charity suspected of terror financing in the Philippines as IIRO, which stands for the International Islamic Relief Organisation.
Intelligence agencies have said IIRO was set up by Muhammad Jamal Khalifa, a brother-in-law of Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.

The report concluded by stating: 

Overall, the WikiLeaks cables singled out Saudi Arabia as the key source of funding for radical Islamist groups including Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Hamas.

Saudi Arabia is of course is the chief financier of Al Qaeda, and is currently leading efforts to fund, arm, and fill the ranks of Al Qaeda's franchises from Mali and Libya, to Syria and Iraq. A multitude of reports from across the West have identified Saudi Arabia as the lynch pin in Al Qaeda's global terror campaign, including the US Army West Point Combating Terrorism Center.

Its reports "Al-Qa'ida's Foreign Fighters in Iraq" and "Bombers, Bank Accounts and Bleedout: al-Qa'ida's Road In and Out of Iraq," identify a vast terrorist network maintained by the Saudis that recruits, arms, and funds terrorists from across the Muslim World, and can funnel a mercenary army into any desired nation. At the time, the desired nation was Iraq. In 2011, it was Libya. Today it is Syria. The same network that US soldiers fought in Iraq is verifiably in use today, in support of US regime-change operations in Syria.

And while it is acknowledged across even the Western mainstream media that Saudi Arabia is a notorious state-sponsor of terrorism, including the terrorists allegedly behind the September 11, 2001 attacks that left 3,000 Americans dead, the US has had a decades-long, deep economic and military relationship with the despotic Arabian autocracy.

The US maintains permanent military bases inside Saudi Arabia, funds the Saudi military, and has recently concluded the largest arms deal in US history with the Saudis. Additionally, Saudi Arabia's brutally repressive internal security apparatus is a creation of US advisers and operators.

The Saudi royal family and the elite amongst the US corporate-financier Fortune 500, have maintained deep financial and political ties as well. Saudi Arabian corporate-financier interests (run by the royal family) are tied directly to Wall Street and London via conglomerations like the US-Saudi Arabian Business Council and representation upon the JP Morgan International Council (Khalid Al-Falih of Saudi Aramco, amongst the highest valued companies on Earth).

This also includes the Bin Laden family, whose multi-billion dollar Saudi Binladin Group is an active member of the US-Saudi Arabian Business Council and plays a central role in deciding bilateral policy for the benefit of collective US-Saudi corporate-financier and corresponding geopolitical interests. At one point, the Bin Ladens and the Bush family sat around the same table, as both families were involved in the equity firm, Carlyle. In fact, Bush and Bin Laden family members were clicking champagne glasses together in Washington on 9/11, an event that would make both families immensely rich in the coming decade.

It is clear, most acutely in Libya and Syria, that the use of Saudi Arabia's global Al Qaeda mercenary army serves both Saudi Arabia's interests as well as Western geopolitical ambitions, including to exact regime change around the world. And it just so happens that the West and Saudi Arabia both seek regime change in currently Russo-Iranian-Chinese friendly Malaysia.

West Attempts to Install Client Regime in Malaysia

The West has been propping up Malaysian opposition candidate Anwar Ibrahim for years.

Anwar Ibrahim, head of Malaysia's opposition coalition, which includes the Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS), has spent a lifetime in the service of Western interests. Anwar Ibrahim was Chairman of the Development Committee of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 1998, held lecturing positions at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, was a consultant to the World Bank, and a panelist at the Neo-Con lined National Endowment for Democracy's "Democracy Award" and a panelist at a NED donation ceremony - the very same US organization whose subsidiaries are funding and supporting Bersih, a faux-pro-democracy Western-funded street movement that in fact was created by, and in the service of Anwar Ibrahim's political ambitions.

Bersih's street activism fits into a global pattern of Western-backed "color revolutions," where meddling in sovereign nation's political processes to install Western-client regimes is disguised as "democracy promotion." 

Anwar Ibrahim's affiliations with Malaysian "Islamists," the already active political subversion his US State Department-funded Bersih movement is sowing in Malaysia's streets, and his Western backers' habitual support for terrorism internationally as a geopolitical tool, raises the possibility that his opposition movement is complicit in the conveniently timed militant destabilization Malaysia now faces, only months before 2013's general elections.

This may be why the Western media refuses to properly cover an otherwise very noteworthy conflict. The fact that these militants are emanating from long-time US ally, the Philippines, and the Philippines' current role in assisting the US "pivot" towards Asia, and more specifically facilitating a proxy confrontation with China, illustrates the greater regional implications at play. The US intends to install client regimes in Myanmar led by Aung San Suu Kyi, Thailand led by Thaksin Shinawatra's despotic political dynasty, and in Malaysia led by Anwar Ibrahim. Together, this front will then be turned against Chinese interests as part of a long-planned desire to encircle and contain China.

It will be done so under ASEAN and at the cost of Asia's stability and prosperity.

The future of Asia hangs in the balance, and therefore conflicts like Malaysia's battle against armed extremists in Sabah may not be covered by the Western press, but it must be covered by the alternative press. The unhinged insanity that is now spilling blood on Malaysia's shores, also represented by the West's proxy Anwar Ibrahim and his attempts to provoke street protests against the ruling government, illustrates just how dangerous the current Anglo-American international order is, and how far its reach extends.

We must  identify the corporate-financier interests driving this agenda, - interests we most likely patronize on a daily basis, and both boycott and permanently replace them to erode the unwarranted influence they have used, and will continue to use against people the world over.