IS THE KING OF SAUDI ARABIA IS TRYING TO GET THE UNITED STATES TO SAVE HIS KINGDOM?

One Citizen Speaking...

---

IS THE KING OF SAUDI ARABIA IS TRYING TO GET THE UNITED STATES TO SAVE HIS KINGDOM? Posted: 30 Aug 2014 02:27 PM PDT The Saudis are not our friends … There is little or no doubt in my mind that Saudi Arabia pursues an outreach program to build Mosques around the world that support the fundamentalist Wahhabist religion that is found in Saudi Arabia. Mosques that can be used to radicalize Americans and foment jihadist terror strikes within America. There is also little or doubt in my mind that Saudi Arabia’s rulers may be paying-off terrorists to avoid an attack on their Kingdom and an overthrow over their cushy lifestyles. The Struggle against Jahiliyya – Taken literally, the word Jahiliyya is a reference to a state of barbarism and ignorance. But al-Wahhab used it in a different context. In Wahhabi Islam, all societies that do not follow the true ways of Islam are considered to be in a state of Jahiliyya. All “infidels” are Jahili. Used in this context, Jahiliyya can more accurately be described as a representation of what Wahhabists consider to be the unholy, polytheistic, barbaric, corrupt, and evil state of Arabia before the coming of Islam. Jahiliyya is a representation of the culture that Mohammad fought against and destroyed with the inception of Islam. By so closely comparing their struggle against Jahiliyya with Mohammad’s fight against the polytheists of his time, Wahhabists see the struggle as one of the most holy actions they can take. (Cline; Idris; Metz, Saudi) According to al-Wahhab, it is the duty of all true Muslims to fight Jahiliyya and the Jahili. Though conversion to “true Islam” is an option, Wahhabists are permitted by their doctrine to “rob, murder, and sexually violate” Jahili (Lopez). We can find an example of Wahhabi Islam’s brutal treatment of what they consider to be Jahili in the gruesome beheadings of such people as Paul Johnson, Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg, etc.. (Cline; Idris; Metz, Saudi)  <Source> There appears to be little difference between ISIS (or ISIL) and the Wahhabists of Saudi Arabia – except for who they pledge their allegiance to. Bayah (the oath of allegiance) – According to al-Wahhab’s teachings, all Muslims must individually pledge their allegiance to a Muslim leader. As long as this leader follows the laws of Islam (as determined by Wahhabi Islam) completely, the individual must give him his unquestionable allegiance. The Wahhabist must make this pledge to ensure his redemption by God after death. The purpose of the bayah is to merge religion and politics into one, ensuring that all Muslims dedicate their lives to following a “pure” leader who upholds all the tenets of Islam while at the same time ensuring that every leader must follow the laws of Islam completely. The Muslim community is thus to become the living embodiment of God’s laws and dictates. It is the responsibility of the leader to ensure that all people who live under his control know and follow the laws of God. (Metz, Saudi) Conformity – Wahhabi Islam demands conformity. All people must dress similarly (you may notice in Saudi Arabia, most men wear the same white cloths), behave similarly, pray at the same time, use the same rituals in prayer, and speak in a similar manner. Adherence to the “true faith” is demonstrable in physical and tangible ways. The Wahhabists believe that they can judge a person’s faith by observing his actions and level of conformity to the Islamic ways. It is thus the responsibility of each Wahhabist to constantly observe his neighbors and friends in search of unholy actions and behavior. (Metz, Saudi; Mortimer) <Source> So I have basically have absolutely no trust in the King of Saudi Arabia or those politicians in our government who appear to be hiding something that every American should know about the 9/11 terrorist attack. In fact, I believe that certain Saudis were somehow complicit in providing financing and operational support for the 9/11 terrorist attack in the United States. Something that we may never know because former President George Bush (43) and now President Barack Obama refuse to declassify the 28 classified pages of the 9/11Commission Report that deals with possible foreign involvement with the 9/11 attack. It is believed that the Saudi government, either directly or indirectly, may have provided material support to the 9/11 hijackers - 15 of the 19 which were citizens of Saudi Arabia. Sen. Bob Graham: Did They Act Alone? Here is an edited transcript of the press conference held March 12 by Reps. Walter B. Jones (R-N.C.), Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.), and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), calling for declassification of the suppressed 28 pages of the Congressional 9/11 Inquiry. Also participating were representatives of the 9/11 Families United for Justice Against Terrorism. The press conference received a videotaped message from former Sen. Bob Graham of Florida, who co-chaired the Joint Congressional Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks. Good morning. I appreciate the opportunity to be a part of this conference, which is going to be discussing some of the most important issues affecting the relationships within Congress, and the Executive relationships between government and its people, and the national security of our nation. It's very significant that this conference is being held, the day after Senator Feinstein made her statements relative to the relationship between the inquiry which has been conducted by the Senate Intelligence Committee and the CIA. Because what we're going to be talking about today, raises many of the same fundamental issues. Immediately after 9/11, the leadership of the House and Senate asked the chairs of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees to do what Congress had never done in 200 years, and that is, to form a joint committee for purposes of conducting an inquiry as to what had happened in 9/11, with particular focus on the role of the United States intelligence community. We spent the better part of 15 months working on that inquiry. We had staff that represented persons who were knowledgeable in each of the intelligence communities. We had persons who had experience in the Department of Justice, in other law-enforcement-related agencies of the Federal government. We conducted hundreds of interviews, read thousands of pages of documents, and in December of 2002, produced an 800-plus-page report. That report took over six months in the declassification process, and when the report was returned in publicly releasable form, there were a number of specific redactions. There were names and places and other specific pieces of evidence which were withheld. But the most stunning thing, was that an entire chapter, 28 pages, was censored, from word one to the last word of the chapter. That chapter dealt primarily with who financed 9/11. That was a very fundamental question, because it went to an even larger question. And that is: Did those who committed that heinous attack on Sept. 11, did they act alone, or were they supported by a network of individuals? All of the people who have been in leadership positions of investigations into 9/11have come away with the feeling that it was implausible to believe that these 19 people, most of whom didn't speak English; most of whom had only been in the United States for—if any—a very brief period of time, could have carried out such a complex operation, which required completion of the planning, the practicing, and then, finally, the execution of the plot. A key part of that question of whether they acted alone or had support, related to the financing of9/11: How could these people have financed a project that was as expensive, in terms of the cost of the 19 individuals, without having some support network? That missing chapter provides evidence that would be important to answer the question: Did these people act alone? That chapter has now been censored, since the Summer of 2003, for over 10 years. Whatever reason there may have been for the initial censorship, has long since passed. At the time that we heard that it was being censored, Sen. Dick Shelby, a Republican from Alabama, who was the vice-chair of the Senate Committee, and myself as chair, both agreed that there was no reason to censor that 28-page, important chapter, for national security reasons. But here we are, 10 years later, and it continues to be censored. You may wish to read 9/11 Link To Saudi Arabia Is Topic Of 28 Redacted Pages In Government Report; Congressmen Push For Release. Why did President Bush rush to protect individual Saudis and members of the bin Laden family after the attack when no civilian aircraft in the United States were permitted to fly? Bin Laden Family 'Evacuated' From US Members of Osama bin Laden's family were allowed to fly out of the US shortly after theSeptember 11 terror attacks, a senior official has said. Even though American airspace had been shut down, the Bush administration allowed a jet to fly around the US picking up family members from 10 cities, including Los Angeles, Washington DC, Boston and Houston. Some 140 high ranking Saudi officials were also on the plane. The revelations come from former White House counter-terrorism chief Richard Clarke. He said the Bush administration sanctioned the repatriation of the family in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. 'Repatriation approved' "Somebody brought to us for approval the decision to let an airplane filled with Saudis, including members of the bin Laden family, leave the country," he told Vanity Fair magazine. Mr Clarke said he checked with FBI officials, who gave the go ahead. "So I said, 'Fine, let it happen'."  He first asked the bureau to check that no one "inappropriate" was leaving. "I have no idea if they did a good job. I'm not in any position to second guess the FBI," he said. But Dale Watson, the FBI's former head of counter-terrorism, said the Saudis "were not subject to serious interviews or interrogations". Permission to fly Federal authorities gave permission for the plane to fly. Tom Kinton, director of aviation at Boston's Logan airport, said: "We were in the midst of the worst terrorist act in history and here we were seeing an evacuation of the bin Ladens! ... I wanted to go the highest levels in Washington." Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador to the US who is said to have organised the exodus, met President George Bush on September 13, 2001, two days after the terror attacks. <Source> Now it appears that the Saudi King wants the United States to spent its blood and treasure further protecting his Kingdom … Saudi king warns West will be jihadists' next target King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has warned that the West will be the next target of the jihadists sweeping through Syria and Iraq, unless there is "rapid" action. "If we ignore them, I am sure they will reach Europe in a month and America in another month," he said in remarks quoted on Saturday by Asharq al-Awsat daily and Saudi-backed Al-Arabiya television station. "Terrorism knows no border and its danger could affect several countries outside the Middle East," said the king who was speaking at a welcoming ceremony on Friday for new ambassadors, including a new envoy from Saudi ally the United States. The Islamic State (IS) jihadist group has prompted widespread concern as it advances in both Syria and Iraq, killing hundreds of people, including in gruesome beheadings and mass executions. Lack of action would be "unacceptable" in the face of the phenomenon, King Abdullah said. "You see how they (jihadists) carry out beheadings and make children show the severed heads in the street," he said, condemning the "cruelty" of such acts. "It is no secret to you, what they have done and what they have yet to do. I ask you to transmit this message to your leaders: 'Fight terrorism with force, reason and (necessary) speed'." Source: Saudi king warns West will be jihadists' next target - Yahoo News It seems to me that Saudi Arabia would be in more jeopardy than the west due to its location, its assets, and the general hatred of Saudis not connected with the Royal family. Bottom line … Yes, Saudi Arabia purchases a significant amount of weaponry from the United States, is a major oil-producing nation, and apparently has purchased influence with our government – especially with the Bushs and Clintons – so who is likely to demand the declassification of the 9/11 report? Who is going to demand that the Saudis pay a heavy price for the Americans who will bear the burden of saving the Kingdom from terrorism? And, I do not mean that the money or benefits flow to the politicians and special interests, but to the Treasury of the United States. I think that there should be an audit of all post-presidential actions involving the Saudis and their “contributions” to presidential libraries, foundations, and initiatives. Including funds paid to relatives and others that benefit presidents, past, current, and future. Above all – we should think hard and fast about allowing our military to protect Saudi Arabia without some form of compensation that benefits the American people. Declassifying the 28-pages so that Americans can be fully informed about what their government representatives are doing in their name. And, another reason why we cannot trust another Bush or Clinton in the White House. -- steve Related articles The Muslims riot over a cartoon, but sit idly by as Saudia Arabia turns the Mecca house of one of the Prophets wives into a public toilet Why Does the U.S. Support a Country which was FOUNDED With Terrorism? Huffington Post: ISIS Horror Explained by Saudi Wahhabism Why Does the U.S. Support Saudi Arabia, A Country Which Hosts and Finances Islamic Terrorism? ... Why Does the U.S. Support a Country which was FOUNDED With Terrorism ... and Is Still the MAIN SOURCE of Islamic Terrorism Today? You Can't Understand ISIS If You Don't Know the History of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia does not support Islamic State terrorists - or any others Saudi king warns of terrorist threat to Europe, US

BLACK HYPOCRISY: RAISING MILLIONS FOR FOUNDATIONS THAT HONOR THUGS, BUT DENYING A POLICE OFFICER A LEGAL DEFENSE FUND? Posted: 29 Aug 2014 03:30 PM PDT There is little or no doubt in my mind that radical progressive socialist democrats are liars and hypocrites. Beyond the racial rantings of self-promoting race-baiters and race-hustlers like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, there is a whole cadre of radicals who believe that freedom of speech is a one way street where they police the content and operate the toll-booth. The idea that all sides of a position have an equal right to media exposure, to raise funds, and to make their position known appears to be abhorrent to these idiots as they demand “equality” and “fairness.” Let us consider the concerted attempt by radicals to stop a fundraising effort for the police officer who shot Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Not only have the progressive socialist democrats and their race-hustlers like Al Sharpton tried and convicted the officer of “murdering an unarmed black teenager,” but they want to prevent the officer from defending himself against a biased array of prosecutors, including Attorney General Eric Holder, whose self-interests lie not in justice, but in self-serving racial politics. Here is an example of the type of radical, one-sided and self-serving, political actions that point to the hypocrisy of those who refuse to wait for the official grand jury report before jumping to their racist conclusions … From the radical left Alternet.com … Pressure Grows for GoFundMe to Stop Its 'Support Officer Darren Wilson' Campaign More than $400,000 has been raised on two separate GoFundMe pages for Darren Wilson, the officer whoshot unarmed Michael Brown dead on Aug. 9, sparking sharp criticism of the online crowdfunding site. To focus some of that outrage into getting GoFundMe to end the campaign,  organizers atColorOfChange.org have created a petition  demanding that the site return all money donated to the officer because it "is profiting off racially-motivated donors, some of whom are celebrating the police killing of Michael Brown." Besides GoFundMe gets a 5 percent cut from donations Wilson's supporters raise--which many consider profiting from a black teenager's death. Source:  Pressure Grows for GoFundMe to Stop Its 'Support Officer Darren Wilson' Campaign Unarmed is not synonymous with innocent or harmless … One should note that although Michael Brown was “unarmed,” he was an existential threat to the police officer. A 6’4” and 292-pounds, Brown was capable of inflicting great bodily injury and causing the death of the police officer with little more than a blow to the head or any other vital area of the officer’s anatomy. It has been suggested in media reports that Brown punched the officer in such a manner as to possibly impair both his sight and his perception. Unarmed does not equate to either innocent or harmless in the real world. As for profiting off racially-motivated donors, consider those that have declared Trayvon Martin, another thuggish black man, who met his death when he assaulted an armed Neighborhood Watch captain under suspicious circumstances. It appears that significant sums of money have been donated to the foundation that bears his name – yet, does not process the money or report to the government under that name. There is no accounting for the funds that were collected and expended – and I do not expect an accurate accounting to ever take place. Why did I mention this? Because the same lawyer, Benjamin Crump, and race-baiter, Al Sharpton, were the driving forces behind the almost canonization of Treyvon Martin. Martin, from all official and media accounts, was a wannabe gansta and possessed stolen property from a nearby residential burglary (along with a burglary tool) when confronted by school authorities. Because the school police wanted to curtail the number of black youngsters turned into the municipal police, the incident was never reported and the evidence was filed. Only during the court case did the truth come out. Race-hustler, anti-Semite Al Sharpton is Obama's Go-To Guy Anyone else find this disgraceful and immoral? Al Sharpton has a sordid history. First of all, though he uses the rubric “Reverend” to give him some degree of respectability, he never attended a seminary. He just made up the title and bestowed it upon himself. His fraud does not end there. There was the Tawana Brawley rape hoax that he orchestrated that led to race riots and severe personal damage to a policeman Sharpton tried to frame for the fraudulent rape. He has a long and disgraceful history of stoking racism against whites. Now President Obama, who invites Sharpton to official White House state dinners (wonder what foreign leaders make of Sharpton) has made him the go-to-guy to deal with the riots going on in Ferguson (cooled down-for now).  Read more   Bottom line … While it is the right of individuals and organizations to mount a campaign against any fundraising on behalf of Officer Wilson – remember that pesky innocent until proven guilty concept – it is both hypocritical and disingenuous that the effort be characterized along racial lines and suggesting that it is racism – as opposed to fairness – that motivates the donors. Let us consider that this incident would have never seen the light of day had it not been a white cop shooting a black suspect. But, it was perfect for the self-serving race-baiters, race-hustlers like Al Sharpton who are motivated by money and media attention. Not to mention the self-serving politicians like Barack Obama and his cadre of progressive socialist democrats who need to rally their black base for the upcoming November congressional election cycle. Especially in light of the decimation of black job opportunities when they clearly abandoned the blacks to pursue future political power with illegal alien Hispanics. And, especially in light of the almost daily slaughter of young black men in the inner cities governed by progressive socialist democrats. In what alternative universe would we find a corrupt, lying race-hustler and agitator like Al Sharpton serving as point-man for the White House? A man whose lies have caused death, destruction, and increased racial tensions in America. We need to throw the race-baiters, race-hustlers, and the corrupt progressive socialist democrats out of the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. Protect our Constitution and the rule of law by denying the progressive socialist democrats their “fundamental transformation of America.” -- steve