Skip to main content

one big happy family i guess

You know the Bushes and the Saudis are tight, right? I think most people running in these circles have some vague understanding of that of George the Younger holding hands with his pals and so forth.

There's also the question of whether the Saudi royal family are crypto-Jews. In general the subject of crypto-Jews in Arab countries remains obscure.

This information comes from The Scribe, which as best I can tell is a historical website of a Sephardic Iraqi Jew:

A crypto Jewish couple from Saudi Arabia with their twelve children came to London a few years ago and visited the offices of the Exilarch’s Foundation, asking for help to obtain a visa to enable them to emigrate to Israel. However, the Israel Embassy in London turned down their application and they decided to travel to Jordan and move over to Israel clandestinely.

According to their evidence there are thousands of crypto Jews in Saudi Arabia who lead a separate existence from the main population. To our knowledge, there are no Jews living in Kuwait, but a number of Jewish families still live in Bahrain, mainly of Iraqi origin.

also this:

(Q) Is there any further information on the Saudi family claiming to be Crypto Jews who went to London several years ago, or any other info on Saudi Crypto Jews. Medina (Al Yatribe) and Kyber Oasis were Jewish areas in Saudia which were ethnically cleansed after the death of Muhammad.

...(A) The Crypto Jews who contacted the Scribe, were unable to obtain Israeli visas and said at the time that they would go to Jordan and smuggle themselves to Israel. According to the head of the family there are a number of Crypto Jews still in Arabia who lead a separate life and inter- marry within the group.
So if it's true, it's a pretty tightly held secret.

Here is additional background (links removed, click through for more plus links):
Jews have lived in Saudi Arabia for over 1400 years. Several Arab/Muslim intelligence agencies think the Saudi royal clan are Crypto-Jewish. There mission is to spread for The UK an extreme form of Islam which is wholly irrelevant in the twenty-first century, keep Muslims backward, destroy progressive thought in Muslim society---where it was the leader in such matters in the world at one time, progressive movements and progressive persons within the umma.

Whilst the Saudi Royals live the most unholiest of lives, even by moderate Islamic standards----Western prostitutes, call girls, casino's, wild parties, massive palaces, extravagant spending in the face of Muslims suffering around the world...

Thus we see the Saudis funding 'Operation Cyclone' and 'Operation greenbelt' dollar for dollar for the creation of Islamic holy warriors in the wake of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Osama and some of his most closest cohorts came from Saudi-----more on him later. The Saudis also funded the Taliban partly. Being leaders of the two most holy places of Islam they seem to be providing minimal leadership to the umma where it matters, when Arabs are victims of genocide left, right, and center around them----Iraq, Palestine and Somalia. Finally the Saudis were installed through the good grace of the British; Rothschild Britain.
So I'm looking for news today, and I come across this (links removed):

...and I notice it has Israeli talking points. Like for instance: Iran and Ahmadinejad are bad, Western Powers are good, Iran is hiding something, etc. Hopefully you can see them. That Canada Free Press article alone presents a case of extreme Israel hagiography in which Saudi Arabia has cruelly used little Israel as a punching bag to take the body blows that rightfully should be directed at Saudi Arabia. Those mean Saudis. They're kind of like the evil big brother or something, but NO WE'RE NOT RELATED. I don't know. The passion against Saudi Arabia has a little whiff of 'Ma, this is SO NOT FAIR!' to me.
Asserting its influence on Middle Eastern politics and power relations, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused "Western powers" of wielding the media for "full-fledged psychological attacks as a lever to influence nations against their better judgment," reports Press TV.

The media's ability to shape the relationship between Iran and other nations has been increasingly analyzed and exploited in the weeks prior to the first significant negotiations between Iran and Western powers. Press TV further antagonizes this divide by referring to "Western powers" throughout the article.

Indirectly referring to Israel and the US, Ahmadinejad alleged that media campaigns led by "some regimes" have become "the prime weapon-of-choice against other countries" to advance their political agenda rather than properly report on Iranian affairs.

Khalil Sheikh, writing for the Daily 49er, laments the "aggressive right wing rhetoric," and the lack of factual analysis of Middle Eastern politics that led many people to be "blind under the umbrella of misconception that Iran is a threat to the ‘free world.'"

Ahmadinejad's comments coincided with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' (IRGC) takeover of Iran's telecommunications monopoly, reports the New York Times. The acquisition "amplified concerns in Iran over what some call the rise of a pseudo-government."

The Guards, whose mandate is to "protect the revolution," oversee Iran's nuclear and missile programs. According to the New York Times, the Guards tightened their political and economic control following this summer's elections.

It remains unclear as to whether the Guards taking over major sectors of the economy will significantly impact Iranian media freedom or foreign policy. Some analysts believe that the Guards' growing influence will further hamper opening up to the West.

"It's not just a matter of the Guards dominating the economy, but of controlling the state," commented Alireza Nader, an expert on Iran. Any integration on a global scale would require greater transparency, which the Guards are averse to do since it may imply having to relinquish some of their control.

On the eve of major negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program, experts are extensively scrutinizing President Obama's policies.

Daniel Greenfield, writing for Canada Free Press, asserts that Obama's policies toward Iran are driven by the "concerns of Saudi Arabia." In Greenfield's opinion, Saudi Arabia is mainly concerned with its Sunni influence in the Middle East jeopardized by Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons.

"Muslim holy wars that are fought against other Muslims are often indirect," writes Greenfield. "The Sunni powers in the Middle East understand that when Ahmadinejad talks about destroying Israel, he only means destroying Israel first, and them second...Israel is not the endgame, they are."

According to Greenfield, Obama's policy of "soft power, engagement and appeasement" arises directly from Saudi influence that seeks to defuse the Iranian threat "without war or any democratization or regional political instability that might rebound back in Riyadh." Consequently, "Obama is dithering on Iran, because the Saudis are dithering on Iran," a policy direction rejected by Greenfield.

The conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia is epitomized by various accusations that Iranian and Saudi Arabian media outlets have exchanged since the contested 2009 Iranian presidential elections, writes the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).

Iranian television channels allege that Saudi media is "waging an anti-Iran campaign in coordination with Israel in the West," and that Saudi Arabia is an "absolutist dictatorship" with "no status whatsoever in the Islamic world."

In response, Saudi papers have accused Al-Qaeda of being an "Iranian front organization," whose operations are primarily designed to benefit Iran. Iran's nuclear ambitions and "alleged aspirations to take over the Middle East" are repeatedly condemned and the Saudi daily Al-Riyadh called on Arabs to protect themselves "with a force that recognizes the struggle between opposites."

Unlike Greenfield, Iranian lawyer and Nobel Peace Prize recipient Shirin Ebadi supports a soft power approach, according to The Washington Post.

Ebadi claimed that the Obama administration has made several mistakes regarding Iran, arguing that the nature of Iran's regime is more crucial to US security than deals on nuclear energy, because nuclear programs would not be a threat in the hands of a government that did not view America or Israel as enemies.

"If the West focuses exclusively on the nuclear issue, Ahmadinejad can tell his people that the West is against Iran's national interest and rally people to his cause," argued Ebadi. "But if the West presses also on its human rights record, he will find himself in a position where his popular base is getting weaker and weaker by the day."
Obama declared that "the voice of the people needs to be heard," she continued, "but he needs to repeat the statement again and again, so that people in Iran hear him."
Are you curious? What is this Layalina Productions, Inc.? Who are these people?

Layalina Productions, Inc. was inaugurated in March 2002 as a §501(c)(3) non-profit, private sector corporation. Layalina develops and produces informative and entertaining Arabic and English language programming for licensing to satellite and cable television networks throughout the Arab Middle East and North Africa.

Layalina's programming consists of debate, drama, entertainment, and educational shows that forthrightly address the most controversial issues affecting U.S.-Arab relations. Produced in the United States and throughout the Arab world, our shows air in primetime on pan-Arab free-to-air satellite television networks. Layalina's programming reaches a target audience of tens of millions of viewers.

We recruit top talent from the U.S. and the Arab world. Our Academy® and Emmy® award-winning writers, producers, and directors work alongside Arab and American television broadcasters and industry leaders to ensure that our shows are culturally appropriate.

Layalina's efforts represent the first private sector initiative to establish new lines of communication and dialogue with citizens and key opinion leaders throughout the Arab world.

Layalina is funded solely through tax-deductible donations from individuals and corporations, and through grants by foundations based in the U.S. and the Arab world.

OK ready? Here's the Board of Counselors:

President George H.W. Bush
Honorary Chairman of the Board

Tarek Abdul-Meguid

David M. Abshire

Richard V. Allen

George L. Argyros

Thomas Ludlow Ashley

James A. Baker, III

Samuel R. Berger

Wayne L. Berman

Reginald K. Brack

Zbigniew Brzezinski

John E. Chapoton

Walter L. Cutler

Lawrence S. Eagleburger

Richard Fairbanks

A.H. Farouki

Marc Charles Ginsberg

Lee H. Hamilton

Carla A. Hills

Henry A. Kissinger

Maura B. Morey

Sam Nunn

Paul A. Russo

Alejandro Santo Domingo

James Schlesinger

Brent Scowcroft

George P. Shultz

Damaris Skouras

Jeffrey H. Smulyan

Carl Spielvogel

Robert S. Strauss

John C. Whitehead

Frederick B. Whittemore

Daniel Yergin

Ezra K. Zilkha

UPDATE: "Saudi-backed, anti-Iranian" means CIA and Mossad

Peter Chamberlin commentary:
[The White House Feigns ignorance of some CIA programs, in order to maintain its deniability. There has never been even one anti-Iranian operation anywhere that was not controlled or monitored by the CIA. Even if it was true that the Jundullah outfit that attacked in Iran was really not a Pakistani group, even though it was based in S. Waziristan, the CIA knew of their actions and aims beforehand and chose to let them happen, just the way they "let 911 happen." Every Sunni terrorist outfit, especially all those described as being "al Qaida related" are CIA sponsored, using Saudi money, under ISI direction, facilitated by the Mossad.]
His commentary is on this piece from the Asia Times: Saudi-Iranian hostility hits boiling point

This brings us to Saudi Arabia, whose relations with Iran are passing through a period of mutual antipathy bordering on hostility....Saudi newspapers with links to the establishment have carried in recent months extremely vituperative attacks against the regime in Tehran, often at a personal level directed against the Iranian leadership. They have almost gone into mourning now that the turmoil on Tehran's streets following the disputed presidential election has receded.

...Saudi Arabia has two great worries over Iran. First, that Obama is pressing ahead with the normalization process with Tehran - a "thaw" was visible at the Geneva talks on October 1- and Tehran has begun responding to US overtures. The worst Saudi nightmare is coming true.

King Abdullah, who had refused to visit Damascus, landed there two weeks ago on a three-day visit in a desperate attempt to bring Syria into the Arab fold and to "isolate" Iran. Riyadh is worried that Iran's status as a regional power will get a massive boost if the normalization process with the US advances, and that can only be at the cost of Saudi Arabia's pre-eminence in the region. Riyadh helplessly watches a beeline of other Persian Gulf states reaching out to Tehran for accommodation.

In other words, Riyadh has a vested interest, which is no less than Israel's, to disrupt the US-Iran nuclear talks.
Maybe Riyadh's interests and Israel's interests look so similar because it's really all one big happy family, hmm?