Your Source for Leaks Around the World!

Archive for the ‘Saudi Arabia’ Category

The Yinon Plan, “Greater Israel”, Syria, Iraq, and ISIS: the Connection

In Archive, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, News, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Syria, Zionism on January 17, 2015 at 7:05 AM

By The Times Of Pol

The Zionist Plan for the Middle East, also known as the Yinon Plan, is an Israeli strategic plan to ensure Israeli regional superiority. It insists and stipulates that Israel must reconfigure its geo-political environment through the balkanization of the surrounding Arab states into smaller and weaker states.

Reach of a "Greater Israel"When viewed in the current context, the war on Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya, the ongoing war on Syria, not to mention the process of regime change in Egypt, must be understood in relation to the Zionist Plan for the Middle East. The latter consists in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of an Israeli expansionist project. 

“Greater Israel” consists in an area extending from the Nile Valley to the Euphrates.

Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge. This is why Iraq was outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one Shiite and the other Sunni.

The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military’s Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region.

“Greater Israel” requires the breaking up of the existing Arab states into small states. The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must

  1. become an imperial regional power, and
  2. must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states.

Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation… This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme.

Viewed in this context, the war on Syria is part of the process of Israeli territorial expansion. Israeli intelligence working hand in glove with the US, Turkey and NATO is directly supportive of the Al Qaeda terrorist mercenaries inside Syria.

The Zionist Project also requires the destabilization of Egypt, the creation of factional divisions within Egypt as instrumented by the “Arab Spring” leading to the formation of a sectarian based State dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Richard Perle.

Similarly, although tweaked, the Yinon Plan is in motion and coming to life under the Clean Break”. This is a policy document written in 1996 by Richard Perle and the Study Group on “A New Israeli Strategy Towards 2000″ for Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel at the time.

Like many in the neoconservative movement, Perle had long been an advocate of regime change in Iraq. In 1998 Perle led an effort known as the Project for the New American Century with close neoconservative allies Wolfowitz, Woolsey, Elliott Abrams, and John Bolton. The Project culminated in a letter sent to US President Bill Clinton calling for the military overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime.

Prior to and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Perle held several exclusive meetings in his home where he discussed issues regarding American foreign policy on Iraq. In an effort to help fund their goals, Ahmed Chalabi an Iraqi-born businessman and founder of the Iraqi National Congress, helped Perle secure millions of dollars from the U.S. government in 1990. Chalabi was one of the key figures driving the war in Iraq and helped transmit important “information” to U.S congress and the public that would successfully help sell the war effort.

One might remember that it was PNAC that also published the now infamous documentRebuilding Americas Defenses” in which the following statement was made:

Further, the process of transformation [of the military], even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor”.

Finally, as mentioned above, the Armed Forces Journal published an article in 2006 entitled: “Blood Borders”.

What follows are maps based upon the description in the article. One is the Middle East as it currently exists, and the other is the Middle East according to the suggestions in the article:

Blood borders: before and after.

Blood borders: before and after.

You will note how congruent these divisions are with both the Yinon Plan and “Clean Break”.

You might also note that the advance of ISIS in Iraq, thus far, is congruent with all three documents. They are not engaging the Kurds and have stopped North of Baghdad, thus effectively dividing Iraq into three states as pictured on the map: Free Kurdistan, Sunni Iraq, and the Arab Shia State.

Only time will tell whether ISIS attempts to push into Baghdad, or whether the city, itself, is divided along sectarian lines. As you can see in the image, Baghdad is right on the border of “Sunni Iraq” and the “Arab Shia” State.

Here is a map of recent movements of the ISIS insurgency:

ISIS advance.
Recent ISIS advances. source

You will notice, by comparing them to the map above that they have control over the area depicted as “Sunni Iraq”. With the exception of Kirkuk, you will notice that the territory that they control aligns roughly with the borders of the proposed “Sunni Iraq” in the Blood Borders image above.

The following image is an overlay of the map of ISIS controlled territory over the map of the newly proposed borders of the Middle East to make it easier to see the congruity between ISIS movements and the Yinon plan:

Recent advances of ISIS, overlaid with borders proposed by Yinon plan.
Recent advances of ISIS, overlaid with borders proposed by Yinon plan.

While there are various conceptions of the borders of “Greater Israel” (Eretz Israel HaShlema), here is an overlay of the image of “Greater Israel” (above) on the map of the newly proposed borders of the Middle East to give a sense of the area of balkanized Arab states that Israel would have in its sphere of influence if the Yinon Plan is successfully implemented:

"Greater Israel" overlaid over the proposed borders.
“Greater Israel” overlaid over the proposed borders.

Either the Yinon Plan is actually being implemented, using the sectarian animosity within the Muslim community as the vector or it is phenomenally coincidental that from Sudan, to Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Iraq the essential tenets of the Yinon Plan are being implemented.

It would certainly explain many of incongruities that we see in US foreign policy, especially with regard to our decision to arm and fund radical Islamic groups in Syria.

NSA Intelligence Relationship with Saudi Arabia

In Archive, NSA, NSA Files, Saudi Arabia, Surveillance on August 1, 2014 at 8:44 AM
nsa-alexander-saudi-abdulaziz

Saudi Interior Minister Prince Mohammed bin Naif bin Abdulaziz meets with former NSA Director Keith Alexander – February 2014

07/25/2014

//TheIntercept:

The National Security Agency last year significantly expanded its cooperative relationship with the Saudi Ministry of Interior, one of the world’s most repressive and abusive government agencies. An April 2013 top secret memo provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden details the agency’s plans “to provide direct analytic and technical support” to the Saudis on “internal security” matters.

The Saudi Ministry of Interior—referred to in the document as MOI— has been condemned for years as one of the most brutal human rights violators in the world. In 2013, the U.S. State Department reported that “Ministry of Interior officials sometimes subjected prisoners and detainees to torture and other physical abuse,” specifically mentioning a 2011 episode in which MOI agents allegedly “poured an antiseptic cleaning liquid down [the] throat” of one human rights activist. The report also notes the MOI’s use of invasive surveillance targeted at political and religious dissidents.

But as the State Department publicly catalogued those very abuses, the NSA worked to provide increased surveillance assistance to the ministry that perpetrated them. The move is part of the Obama Administration’s increasingly close ties with the Saudi regime; beyond the new cooperation with the MOI, the memo describes “a period of rejuvenation” for the NSA’s relationship with the Saudi Ministry of Defense.

In general, U.S. support for the Saudi regime is long-standing. One secret 2007 NSA memo lists Saudi Arabia as one of four countries where the U.S. “has [an] interest in regime continuity.”

But from the end of the 1991 Gulf War until recently, the memo says, the NSA had a “very limited” relationship with the Saudi kingdom. In December 2012, the U.S. director of national intelligence, James Clapper, authorized the agency to expand its “third party” relationship with Saudi Arabia to include the sharing of signals intelligence, or “SIGINT,” capability with the MOD’s Technical Affairs Directorate (TAD).

“With the approval of the Third Party SIGINT relationship,” the memo reports, the NSA “intends to provide direct analytic and technical support to TAD.” The goal is “to facilitate the Saudi government’s ability to utilize SIGINT to locate and track individuals of mutual interest within Saudi Arabia.”

Even before this new initiative in 2012, the CIA and other American intelligence agencies had been working with the Saudi regime to bolster “internal security” and track alleged terrorists. According to the memo, the NSA began collaborating with the MOD in 2011 on a “sensitive access initiative… focused on internal security and terrorist activity on the Arabian Peninsula”; that partnership was conducted “under the auspices of CIA’s relationship with the MOI’s Mabahith (General Directorate for Investigations, equivalent to FBI).”

The NSA’s formal “Third Party” relationship with the Saudis involves arming the MOI with highly advanced surveillance technology. The NSA “provides technical advice on SIGINT topics such as data exploitation and target development to TAD,” the memo says, “as well as a sensitive source collection capability.”

The Saudi Ministry of Defense also relies on the NSA for help with “signals analysis equipment upgrades, decryption capabilities and advanced training on a wide range of topics.” The document states that while the NSA “is able to respond to many of those requests, some must be denied due to the fact that they place sensitive SIGINT equities at risk.”

Over the past year, the Saudi government has escalated its crackdown on activists, dissidents, and critics of the government. Earlier this month, Saudi human rights lawyer and activist Waleed Abu al-Khair was sentenced to 15 years in prison by a so-called “terrorist court” on charges of undermining the state and insulting the judiciary. In May, a liberal blogger, Raif Badawi, was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes; in June, human rights activist Mukhlif Shammari was sentenced to five years in prison for writing about the mistreatment of Saudi women.

At the time of the al-Khair sentencing, State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki issued a statement saying, “We urge the Saudi government to respect international human rights norms, a point we make to them regularly.”

Asked if the U.S. takes human rights records into account before collaborating with foreign security agencies, a spokesman for the office of the director of national intelligence told The Intercept: “Yes. We cannot comment on specific intelligence matters but, as a general principle, human rights considerations inform our decisions on intelligence sharing with foreign governments.”

Bendigo – the town that said “NO” to Islam (and failed?)

In Activism, Afghanistan, Al Jazeera NEWSHOUR, Anonymous, Archive, ASIO, ASIS, Australia, Censorship, Environment, Facebook, FBI, FDA, FED, Fiscal Cliff, FOI, FOIA, France, Google, Indonesia, INTERPOL, leaksource, NSA, NWO, Occupy, Pakistan, Pope, PSYOP, Russia, Saudi Arabia, SOCOM, SPIN, Surveillance, UN, video, Viral Videos, Yemen on June 19, 2014 at 8:42 AM

 

 

More than 200 Bendigo residents have voiced their opposition to the Bendigo City Council approving plans for the construction of a $3 million Mosque in the eastern part of the town.

There were some 350 objections to the development and more than 40 submissions of support.

If you’re Muslim and you want a mosque, go back to the Middle East. This is Australia,”

One example of the type of Islam-a-phobia that grips the region along with a  deep ignorance towards the unknown.

Regardless the Council has approved the construction, with some changes in the height of the minaret for example, and no prayer calls.

Bendigo people own Bendigo, it’s their town, they have the right to say mosque or no mosque,”

We’re not racists.”  were common threads heard at the meeting.

The International students which come to Bendigo to study at the near by La Trobe Uni make up a large part of the Muslim Population in Bendigo.

A Mosque in Bendigo would be a great asset..and lets face it, Bendigo needs all it can get.

UPDATE 28 June 2014

Restore Australia has paid for a Sydney lawyer often used in anti-mosque hearings, Robert Balzola, to appeal to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal on planning grounds.

Update 20 October 2014

Recent article from September from The Castlemanian should be noted.

Was this more about the safety of the Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation, which is also in Bendigo?

A cleverly disguised attempt by Oz spooks to keep Bendigo free from some unseen danger associated with Islam?

DIO-Bendigo

 

PDLA

 

(full article)

 

Further to this

(full article)

BenMosque-causeceleb

 

Vodafone – Secret Six

In Activism, Anonymous, ANT, Archive, ASIO, Australia, Bahrain, Big Brother, Big Data, CENTCOM, CIA, CYBERCOM, DAILY NEWS ARCHIVE, DEA, DOJ, EFF, Encryption, FBI, Five Eyes, FOI, FOIA, FRA, GCHQ, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Huawei, India, Indonesia, INSCOM, Internet, INTERPOL, Israel, Japan, Kenya, LAPD, leaksource, Mali, Mandela, NDAA, New Zealand, News, Norway, OPEC, Politics, PSYOP, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Scotland, Snowden, Somalia, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Surveillance, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, TAO, Technology, TrapWire, TSA, Turkey, Uganda, UK, Ukraine, USA, Venezuela, Verizon on June 7, 2014 at 11:52 AM

Vodafone in all their magnificence and gorgeosity have shocked the monkey and released a “Law Enforcement Disclosure Report” (here). At the request of little old Gardai.

Unfortunately they have upset the Department of Justice who are claiming that the information Vodafone released could ‘compromise national security and hinder investigation of  serious criminal activity’.

fwfw4f44

 

The wonderful folk at Vodafone reveal in the report the surveillance practices of governments in 29 countries which it operates in, but stops short of disclosing details of data surveillance in Ireland.

One can only assume this is to thwart any recriminations, from spooks. Vodafone also point out in the release that reports from other operators can have inherent flaws…

execute

We have compared the statistical information we hold for our own operations in the two countries in question with the information recently published by other local operators in those countries. For some categories of agency and authority demand, the volumes involved seem closely comparable between Vodafone and other local operators, although as explained above, there is a significant risk of under or over-counting overlapping demands issued to multiple operators. Furthermore, it is also clear that certain categories of agency and authority demand have been omitted from local operators’ publications, either to comply with legal restrictions (in the case of Australia) or (in Germany) for reasons not disclosed to us.”

The Report chants the mantra “it is unlawful to disclose any information related to wiretapping or interception of the content of phone calls and messages including whether such capabilities exist.” but points that in 6 countries “authorities” have unfettered access and that the law either ‘obliges’ telecom operators to install direct access pipes, or allow governments to do so.

Vodafone further explain that these 6 un-named countries have “regimens” that could retaliate by imprisoning staff…who could that be? (read the .pdf)

However after reading through the lines and thinking about it for a few minutes…it’s not hard to narrow down the “6” countries. The graphic below from The Guardian’s Juliette Garside makes this a no brainer.

With all respect to the fantastic and marvellous work Law Enforcement do, it is important Telecommunication Companies are finally finding their own voice amongst the schrills and squawks that have become a hysterical mist of white noise…well done Vodafone.

 

f4f

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

US Cover-Up of Saudi 9/11 Ties; Lawmakers Want Entire 2002 Inquiry Report Declassified

In 9/11, Archive, Saudi Arabia on December 21, 2013 at 12:34 PM

12/15/2013

Paul Sperry/NYPost:

After the 9/11 attacks, the public was told al Qaeda acted alone, with no state sponsors.

But the White House never let it see an entire section of Congress’ investigative report on 9/11 dealing with “specific sources of foreign support” for the 19 hijackers, 15 of whom were Saudi nationals.

It was kept secret and remains so today.

President Bush inexplicably censored 28 full pages of the 800-page report. Text isn’t just blacked-out here and there in this critical-yet-missing middle section. The pages are completely blank, except for dotted lines where an estimated 7,200 words once stood (this story by comparison is about 1,000 words).

A pair of lawmakers who recently read the redacted portion say they are “absolutely shocked” at the level of foreign state involvement in the attacks.

Reps. Walter Jones (R-NC) and Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) can’t reveal the nation identified by it without violating federal law. So they’ve proposed Congress pass a resolution asking President Obama to declassify the entire 2002 report, “Joint Inquiry Into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.”

Some information already has leaked from the classified section, which is based on both CIA and FBI documents, and it points back to Saudi Arabia, a presumed ally.

The Saudis deny any role in 9/11, but the CIA in one memo reportedly found “incontrovertible evidence” that Saudi government officials — not just wealthy Saudi hardliners, but high-level diplomats and intelligence officers employed by the kingdom — helped the hijackers both financially and logistically. The intelligence files cited in the report directly implicate the Saudi embassy in Washington and consulate in Los Angeles in the attacks, making 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war.

The findings, if confirmed, would back up open-source reporting showing the hijackers had, at a minimum, ties to several Saudi officials and agents while they were preparing for their attacks inside the United States. In fact, they got help from Saudi VIPs from coast to coast:

LOS ANGELES: Saudi consulate official Fahad al-Thumairy allegedly arranged for an advance team to receive two of the Saudi hijackers — Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi — as they arrived at LAX in 2000. One of the advance men, Omar al-Bayoumi, a suspected Saudi intelligence agent, left the LA consulate and met the hijackers at a local restaurant. (Bayoumi left the United States two months before the attacks, while Thumairy was deported back to Saudi Arabia after 9/11.)

SAN DIEGO: Bayoumi and another suspected Saudi agent, Osama Bassnan, set up essentially a forward operating base in San Diego for the hijackers after leaving LA. They were provided rooms, rent and phones, as well as private meetings with an American al Qaeda cleric who would later become notorious, Anwar al-Awlaki, at a Saudi-funded mosque he ran in a nearby suburb. They were also feted at a welcoming party. (Bassnan also fled the United States just before the attacks.)

WASHINGTON: Then-Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar and his wife sent checks totaling some $130,000 to Bassnan while he was handling the hijackers. Though the Bandars claim the checks were “welfare” for Bassnan’s supposedly ill wife, the money nonetheless made its way into the hijackers’ hands.

Other al Qaeda funding was traced back to Bandar and his embassy — so much so that by 2004 Riggs Bank of Washington had dropped the Saudis as a client.

The next year, as a number of embassy employees popped up in terror probes, Riyadh recalled Bandar.

“Our investigations contributed to the ambassador’s departure,” an investigator who worked with the Joint Terrorism Task Force in Washington told me, though Bandar says he left for “personal reasons.”

FALLS CHURCH, VA.: In 2001, Awlaki and the San Diego hijackers turned up together again — this time at the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center, a Pentagon-area mosque built with funds from the Saudi Embassy. Awlaki was recruited 3,000 miles away to head the mosque. As its imam, Awlaki helped the hijackers, who showed up at his doorstep as if on cue. He tasked a handler to help them acquire apartments and IDs before they attacked the Pentagon.

Awlaki worked closely with the Saudi Embassy. He lectured at a Saudi Islamic think tank in Merrifield, Va., chaired by Bandar. Saudi travel itinerary documents I’ve obtained show he also served as the ­official imam on Saudi Embassy-sponsored trips to Mecca and tours of Saudi holy sites.

Most suspiciously, though, Awlaki fled the United States on a Saudi jet about a year after 9/11.

As I first reported in my book, “Infiltration,” quoting from classified US documents, the Saudi-sponsored cleric was briefly detained at JFK before being released into the custody of a “Saudi representative.” A federal warrant for Awlaki’s arrest had mysteriously been withdrawn the previous day. A US drone killed Awlaki in Yemen in 2011.

HERNDON, VA.: On the eve of the attacks, top Saudi government official Saleh Hussayen checked into the same Marriott Residence Inn near Dulles Airport as three of the Saudi hijackers who targeted the Pentagon. Hussayen had left a nearby hotel to move into the hijackers’ hotel. Did he meet with them? The FBI never found out. They let him go after he “feigned a seizure,” one agent recalled. (Hussayen’s name doesn’t appear in the separate 9/11 Commission Report, which clears the Saudis.)

SARASOTA, FLA.: 9/11 ringleader Mohamed Atta and other hijackers visited a home owned by Esam Ghazzawi, a Saudi adviser to the nephew of King Fahd. FBI agents investigating the connection in 2002 found that visitor logs for the gated community and photos of license tags matched vehicles driven by the hijackers. Just two weeks before the 9/11 attacks, the Saudi luxury home was abandoned. Three cars, including a new Chrysler PT Cruiser, were left in the driveway. Inside, opulent furniture was untouched.

Democrat Bob Graham, the former Florida senator who chaired the Joint Inquiry, has asked the FBI for the Sarasota case files, but can’t get a single, even heavily redacted, page released. He says it’s a “coverup.”

Is the federal government protecting the Saudis? Case agents tell me they were repeatedly called off pursuing 9/11 leads back to the Saudi Embassy, which had curious sway over White House and FBI responses to the attacks.

Just days after Bush met with the Saudi ambassador in the White House, the FBI evacuated from the United States dozens of Saudi officials, as well as Osama bin Laden family members. Bandar made the request for escorts directly to FBI headquarters on Sept. 13, 2001 — just hours after he met with the president. The two old family friends shared cigars on the Truman Balcony while discussing the attacks.

12/17/2013

JudicialWatch:

Judicial Watch quickly launched an investigation and in 2005 obtained shocking documents from the FBI detailing how well-connected Saudis, including relatives of Osama bin Laden, left the U.S. on specially chartered flights while most air traffic was still grounded. In all, 160 subjects of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, including but not limited to members of the House of Saud and/or members of the bin Laden family fled the U.S. between September 11, 2001 and September 15, 2001.

The records uncovered by JW show that two prominent Saudi families that fled the U.S. following 9/11 got personal airport escorts from the FBI and that authorities let other Saudis leave the country without first interviewing them. The secret Saudi flights left from Las Vegas, Los Angeles and other major U.S. cities. An unidentified prince in Las Vegas even thanked the FBI for its assistance, according to one internal report obtained by JW. Incredibly, the FBI returned to the Las Vegas hotels with subpoenas days after the Saudi flights departed to gather information on the royal guests, the records show.

Related Link: NY Court Restores Saudi Arabia in Sept. 11 Lawsuit

%d bloggers like this: