Yemen

New Saudi King Unveils Internal Power Shake-up in Desperate Pivot Toward Increased Authoritarianism

by

Screen Shot 2015-05-06 at 12.09.33 PM

A 4 a.m. communique from Riyadh on Wednesday detailed one of the most momentous political shake-ups in the history of Saudi Arabia. King Salman, who took office in January, in a stroke transferred power to a new generation, offered appeasement to the kingdom’s religious conservatives, reinforced his regime’s pro-American and anti-Iranian character, and underlined its intention to act boldly both at home and abroad.

These developments would be more encouraging if they were accompanied by signs the new leaders were likely to accelerate the glacial movement by the previous king, Abdullah, toward a more inclusive political system and increased civil rights, including for women. Unfortunately, the signs point to the opposite. King Salman has already taken steps to appease religious conservatives, including restoring power to the reactionary religious police. Last week’s reshuffling ousted the only female member of the cabinet, a deputy education minister.

– From the Washington Post article: Shake-up in the House of Saud

Unless you’ve been living under a geopolitical rock for the past several months, you’ll be aware that Saudi Arabia has a new king. Specifically, Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, was crowned the head monarch on January 23, 2015 following the death of the prior king. If you were hoping to see a pivot away from medieval cruelty, oppression and general societal backwardness you’ll be sorely disappointed.

Although Salman immediately reshuffled the cabinet following his succession, it’s his more recent maneuverings that have caught the attention of many. Specifically, he appointed his nephew, and 55-year-old Interior Minister Mohammed bin Nayef, as new heir-presumptive, while naming Mohammed bin Salman, as deputy crown prince, or second in line to rule.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

Can’t Make This Up – U.S. Providing Aid in Fight Against ISIS in Iraq Alongside Iranian Troops

by

The war, therefore, if we judge it by the standards of previous wars, is merely an imposture. It is like the battles between certain ruminant animals whose horns are set at such an angle that they are incapable of hurting one another. But though it is unreal it is not meaningless. It eats up the surplus of consumable goods, and it helps to preserve the special mental atmosphere that a hierarchical society needs. War, it will be seen, is now a purely internal affair. In the past, the ruling groups of all countries, although they might recognize their common interest and therefore limit the destructiveness of war, did fight against one another, and the victor always plundered the vanquished. In our own day they are not fighting against one another at all. The war is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society intact. The very word ‘war’, therefore, has become misleading. It would probably be accurate to say that by becoming continuous war has ceased to exist. The peculiar pressure that it exerted on human beings between the Neolithic Age and the early twentieth century has disappeared and been replaced by something quite different. The effect would be much the same if the three super-states, instead of fighting one another, should agree to live in perpetual peace, each inviolate within its own boundaries. For in that case each would still be a self-contained universe, freed for ever from the sobering influence of external danger. A peace that was truly permanent would be the same as a permanent war. This — although the vast majority of Party members understand it only in a shallower sense — is the inner meaning of the Party slogan: WAR IS PEACE.

– George Orwell, 1984

While the incompetence and idiocy of U.S. foreign policy remains on clear display across the globe, nowhere is it more embarrassingly evident than within Iraq. Ironically, nowhere is it playing out more tragically within Iraq itself than in the birthplace of deposed dictator Saddam Hussein, Tikrit.

Naturally, there is another explanation for the insanity of it all besides incompetence. That is the 1984 explanation from the quote at the top, which is that endless war represents a deliberate strategy of the oligarchy in order to to crack down on dissent at home and keep enemies divided abroad.

As I outlined in the post, The Forgotten War – Understanding the Incredible Debacle Left Behind by NATO in Libya, there are only two logical conclusions that can be reached about American foreign policy leadership in the 21st century.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

Government Watchdog Warns – Fannie, Freddie Could Need Another Bailout

by

Screen Shot 2015-03-19 at 4.27.38 PM

It’s always nice to be reminded of how far we’ve come since the dark days of 2008/09 ,when American plebs involuntarily bailed out the oligarchy generally, and Wall Street specifically, to the tune of trillions. Sure, all the gains went to the 0.001%, but the wounds have healed, and we’re in the midst of a stellar economic recovery.

The latest proof of how far we’ve come was laid bare by an article in the Wall Street Journal:

Mortgage-finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could be at risk of needing more government bailouts, a watchdog said in a report set to be released Wednesday.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

The Great Wall of Saudi – Feudal Desert Kingdom to Build 600-Mile Wall to Protect from ISIS

by

Screen Shot 2014-09-15 at 10.36.07 AMOh the irony. You just have to laugh when you see this closed, autocratic regime scramble to build a neo-feudal wall in order to protect itself from radical terrorists of its own creation. In fact, it reminds me a lot of U.S. foreign policy. In case you aren’t up to speed on the Saudi relationship to ISIS, I suggest you read the following post: America’s Disastrous Foreign Policy – My Thoughts on Iraq. Here are a couple of excerpts from that piece:

So after the grotesquerie of the Taliban and Osama bin Laden and 15 of the 19 suicide killers of 9/11, meet Saudi Arabia’s latest monstrous contribution to world history: the Islamist Sunni caliphate of Iraq and the Levant, conquerors of Mosul and Tikrit – and Raqqa in Syria – and possibly Baghdad, and the ultimate humiliators of Bush and Obama.

From Aleppo in northern Syria almost to the Iraqi-Iranian border, the jihadists of Isis and sundry other groupuscules paid by the Saudi Wahhabis – and by Kuwaiti oligarchs – now rule thousands of square miles.

Under Obama, Saudi Arabia will continue to be treated as a friendly “moderate” in the Arab world, even though its royal family is founded upon the Wahhabist convictions of the Sunni Islamists in Syria and Iraq – and even though millions of its dollars are arming those same fighters. Thus does Saudi power both feed the monster in the deserts of Syria and Iraq and cosy up to the Western powers that protect it.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

NY Times Admits: Al-Qaeda Terror Threat Used to “Divert Attention” from NSA Uproar

by

Some analysts and Congressional officials suggested Friday that emphasizing a terrorist threat now was a good way to divert attention from the uproar over the N.S.A.’s data-collection programs, and that if it showed the intercepts had uncovered a possible plot, even better.

– NY Times article from August 2, 2013: Qaeda Messages Prompt U.S. Terror Warning

Nothing about the above quote should surprise any of my readers, we all know the sick, twisted mindset of those involved in the Military-Industrial-Wall Street complex. What’s more shocking is the fact that these folks so openly admit it to the New York Times, albeit in a typical anonymous and cowardly fashion. Let’s not forget what Robert Shapiro, former Clinton official and Obama supporter told the FT in July 2010:

The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership. He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.

I discussed the above quote and related topics in my 2010 piece: The Dangers of a Failed Presidency. Well, if Mr. Shapiro thinks President Obama didn’t have credibility in 2010, one can only imagine what he thinks today. That is precisely what makes the current moment so extraordinarily dangerous. From the New York Times:

WASHINGTON — The United States intercepted electronic communications this week among senior operatives of Al Qaeda, in which the terrorists discussed attacks against American interests in the Middle East and North Africa, American officials said Friday.

It is unusual for the United States to come across discussions among senior Qaeda operatives about operational planning — through informants, intercepted e-mails or eavesdropping on cellphone calls. So when the high-level intercepts were collected and analyzed this week, senior officials at the C.I.A., State Department and White House immediately seized on their significance. Members of Congress have been provided classified briefings on the matter, officials said Friday.

“Unusual,” but somehow also extremely convenient for this to occur just as public opinion turns against the NSA and near passage of the Amash Amendment.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.

The Drone That Killed My Grandson

by

I’ve covered the death of Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16 year old son Abdulrahman previously. They were both American citizens killed without a trial using our latest preferred war toy, drones. While Anwar was on the U.S. “kill list,” his teenage son was not and he was killed by a drone in an entirely separate incident two weeks after the death of his father. The U.S. government has never explained his murder, and all I can recall hearing is Eric Holder statement that he wasn’t “specifically targeted.” Last week, his grandfather wrote a powerful and impassioned Op-Ed in the New York Times. Here are some excerpts:

SANA, Yemen — I LEARNED that my 16-year-old grandson, Abdulrahman — a United States citizen — had been killed by an American drone strike from news reports the morning after he died.

The missile killed him, his teenage cousin and at least five other civilians on Oct. 14, 2011, while the boys were eating dinner at an open-air restaurant in southern Yemen.

I visited the site later, once I was able to bear the pain of seeing where he sat in his final moments. Local residents told me his body was blown to pieces. They showed me the grave where they buried his remains. I stood over it, asking why my grandchild was dead.

The attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr., said only that Abdulrahman was not “specifically targeted,” raising more questions than he answered.

Abdulrahman was born in Denver. He lived in America until he was 7, then came to live with me in Yemen. He was a typical teenager — he watched “The Simpsons,” listened to Snoop Dogg, read “Harry Potter” and had a Facebook page with many friends. He had a mop of curly hair, glasses like me and a wide, goofy smile.

Read more

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G


Follow me on Twitter.