With America’s sale of $350 billion of its weapons to Saudi Arabia during the next ten years, which side will dominate, if the royal family of Saudi Arabia — the owners of Saudi Arabia, which is to say the Saud family — again finance, and participate in directing, an attack against the U.S., such as 9/11?
The last time around, the U.S. government hid for fifteen years the damning evidence (the ‘missing 28 pages’ that were actually 29 pages) in the 9/11 report that documented from the testimony to the congressional panel by FBI agents, that Prince Bandar bin Sultan al-Saud and his wife had personally financed the apartment rentals and flight training of at least some of the 15 Saudi members of the 19-member team that carried out the 9/11 attacks. The U.S. government also hid from the public the U.S. court testimony by Osama bin Laden’s captured bagman who had personally collected each one of the million-dollar-plus cash donations to Al Qaeda before 9/11, most of which mega-donations were from members of the Saud family — and Prince Bandar was among those, too — and so, it was more than just the tens of thousands of dollars which the FBI had found and had been reporting. Then, when the 9/11 victim families pursued in U.S. courts a civil case against the Saudi government (which is 100% owned by the Saud family), U.S. President Barack Obama vetoed the bill that Congress had passed to allow the case to proceed. That was the U.S. victims, seeking court investigations into possible massive criminality against them and against the United States of America, by members of Saudi Arabia’s royal family and their agents (perhaps including George W. Bush himself) working on their behalf — and U.S. President Barack Obama did everything he could to block even the investigations. He was George W. Bush #2, but with prettier rhetoric (designed specifically to fool liberals; not, like Bush’s, to fool outright conservatives).
Consequently: at the level of the U.S. Presidency, though ultimately not of the U.S. Congress, there has been a solid record of submission to the Sauds (andeven in the matters of symbolism and etiquette) (including participation in a head-chopper’s ritual dance) so as to be able to protect mega-criminals among them from facing American justice — even at its weaker, merely civil, level.
The Hill reported, on Tuesday, the 19th of April, in 2016, the view of the then-candidate Trump, regarding what the then yet-to-be-released ’28 redacted pages’ from the 9/11 report might likely show:
«I think I know what it’s going to say», he said on Fox News’s «Fox & Friends». «It’s going to be very profound, having to do with Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia’s role on the World Trade Center and the attack. That’s very serious stuff. It’s sort of nice to know who your friends are and perhaps who your enemies are. You’re going to see some very revealing things released in those papers… I look forward to reading them».
However, later, as President Trump, on 5 February 2017, he was asked in a Super Bowl television interview, what his policies would be regarding Iran, and he answered (video here, transcript here): «They have total disregard for our country. They are the number one terrorist state». This (boldfaced) phrase is the standard one that Israel uses to refer to Iran — which, unlike Saudi Arabia, does support terrorism against Israel. So: the U.S. President there was representing actually the Israeli people (or, specifically, Jewish Israelis), and not at all the American people. (He also wasn’t representing the European people, who, like the American people, suffer terrorism that’s financed by the Sauds and their fellow fundamentalist Sunnis, and who suffer virtually no terrorism from Iran or any Shiites at all — and yet whose aristocracies bond with America’s (the key Western backers of the terrorism they suffer).
So: he’s not entirely ignorant of at least the «redacted pages», and he even said he «looked forward to reading them», and his understanding of the situation prior to his having read them was that they had «to do with Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia’s role on the World Trade Center and the attack. That’s very serious stuff. It’s sort of nice to know who your friends are and perhaps who your enemies are». And, if he read them, then that’s precisely what they documented (from the FBI). They show exactly what he expected them to show. But now, as the President, he claims that Iran — and not its rabid enemy Saudi Arabia — is «the number one terrorist state».
As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted in a State Department cable on 30 December 2009, «Donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide». She also mentioned other Islamic-majority countries in that cable, but none of them were Shiite majority or Shiite-led; they all were clearly fundamentalist-Sunni countries — the countries that America’s aristocracy allies with. (And never were the Sauds mentioned in her cable by name. She just wanted to get onto the official record, that she ‘cared’. Everything for her was PR, in order to win more power, and more money.)
The U.S. government, because of its bought Presidents, is now selling $350 billion of U.S. weapons to «the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups [which is all of the terrorist groups except for the Shiite group Hezbollah] worldwide».
There are contrasting hypotheses put forth to explain why this 180-degree turnabout by Trump is happening:
On May 21st, Blake Hounshell at Politico attributed this change to its being allegedly due to Trump’s promise «to stop pestering them about human rights and political freedoms… Trump is offering, in short, a war on terror without the pretense of idealism. There has always been a strong odor of hypocrisy hanging over the U.S. relationship with regimes like Saudi Arabia, and perhaps there’s something refreshing in Trump’s ‘we are not here to lecture’ candor». Hounshell was using the internal self-contradictions within Trump’s sales-pitches, in order to ‘explain’ what was actually a stunning change in Trump’s sales-pitches. However, this excuse ignores that Trump is, in fact, not waging America’s «war on terror» (such as he’s implying) but instead Israel’s — and America already donates $3.8 billion per year to the Israeli government, which, moreover, is an enemy of the American people though not nearly to the extent that the Sauds (the Saudi government) are. At the very top level, the U.S. Presidency is owned by the Sauds but with considerable assistance from Jewish and some Christian billionaires who are American citizens. (And some of them are simultaneously Israeli citizens, which should be outlawed.) It’s not merely the Saud family, and their Thani family friends who own Qatar, and the other royal families who own yet other fundamentalist-Sunni kingdoms.
By contrast, I have put forth two hypothesis to explain Trump’s change-of-tune, which probably function in conjunction with one-another to provide a fuller explanation of this: (1) that the Sauds are crucial to the bottom lines of Lockheed Martin and America’s other top ‘defense’ contractors; and, (2) that the Sauds’ financing of jihadists in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Syria and other Russia-allied lands, is crucial to the conquest of Russia by America’s aristocracy, which conquest is the top foreign-policy goal of the U.S. aristocracy, who carry water for the Sauds. Combining those two partial explanations together produces an understanding both of the anti-Iranian and of the anti-Russian obsessions of the U.S. aristocracy — who, after all, are the main people who control America, and who thus control the U.S. President.
The Sauds are chiefly determined to conquer Iran, and the American aristocrats are chiefly determined to conquer Russia.
Israel is mainly on the side of the Sauds. (After all, Israel never militarily attacked Saudi Arabia, but it did militarily attack the United States — and the U.S. aristocracy hid that, much as they’ve hidden the Sauds’ attack, 9/11.) Furthermore, just as there were some U.S. operatives who knew about the 9/11 attacks before the event, and who benefited from it, there also were Israelis who knew about it ahead of time and who were delighted once it had occurred — and this delight went straight up to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself. (Anti-Semites claim that facts like those are somehow ‘proof’ that «the Jews did it», but these people simply ignore the ovewhelming mass of solid evidence implicating the Sauds and Al Qaeda in financing and executing the actual operation — as if «Foreknowledge entails guilt», instead of «Guilt entails foreknowledge and lots more than that», such as is actually the case.)
Even within a given aristocracy (or other, such as corporate, organzation), there are circles who know about and participate in a particular operation, and circles who are ignorant of it. Never is the full entity involved in it, no matter how organized the entity happens to be. And, of course, any ‘conspiracy theory’ that blames an ethnicity or other mass of people for anything, isn’t even a conspiracy-theory at all, because any conspiracy is a highly organized, and usually highly hierarchical, operation, no mass at all. Such a ‘theory’ is instead pure bigotry — like Adolf Hitler’s, or Paul Kagame’s, both of whom were themselves gifted at conspiracy, and, unfortunately, put it to the most evil of uses. In fact, good conspiracies also exist, and they were essential to, for example, the winning of World War II. Therefore, anyone who blanketly condemns «conspiracy theories» or even «conspiracies», is either a con-artist, or else a dupe of one.
If the Saud family again finance, and participate in directing, an attack against the U.S., such as 9/11, it will be with the participation of the U.S. aristocracy, just as it was on 9-11. In other words: the aristocracies of the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and Israel, are joined-at-the-head, inseparable. They function as one gang, though, like in the Mafia and other criminal gangs, they each have their respective turfs.
However, Donald Trump clearly knows about «Saudi Arabia’s role on the World Trade Center and the attack. That’s very serious stuff. It’s sort of nice to know who your friends are and perhaps who your enemies are». But, after he was elected, he got bought-off, by the Sauds, and by the Israelis. However, the Americans — this nation’s aristocracy, and not its people — have clearly been pushing him to do this, or else he’ll soon be replaced by his Vice President, Mike Pence. So: the people who have been carrying out this Saudi operation are their U.S. partners, who have big megaphones in the U.S.
Ranking the relative power between these three aristocracies would be difficult and merely a guess, but my own ordering of them would be: (1) the Sauds; (2) the Israeli and pro-Israeli aristocracy; (3) the U.S. aristocracy. In any case, since they’re all joined-at-the-head, they’re basically all one aristocracy — each of them needs the other two in order to be able to do what they do. That’s the world’s most powerful political force. It is by far the leading gang. And this is actually the most important thing to understand about international affairs today.
The main factual basis I can offer for that ranking, would be that, whereas the U.S. has been physically invaded by both of the others, (by Israel in 1967, and by the Sauds in 2001), the U.S. has not invaded either of the others. The U.S. instead continues to accept both of the others as ‘allies’. This is remarkable. What self-respecting, sovereign, country would do a thing like that? None. This is the main factual basis. But it’s not the only factual basis. For another factual example, several American Presidents have been captured on photographs as bowing down to the Saudi king. Never once has any indication been published of a Saudi king having bowed down to an American president. (Of course, no head-of-state ever should bow down to any other, except perhaps in a public and physical surrender. And for the American people to accept it from its presidents, is stunning. But the American people accept lots of abuse from the governments of Saudi Arabia and Israel. It’s par for the course in the tri-partite relationship — which yet further indicates that the U.S. is at the bottom of this totem-pole.)
By Eric Zuesse
Source: Strategic Culture