With Saudi Arabia’s execution of Shi’ite cleric Nimr al-Nimr, perhaps the final shot heard ’round the Islamic world was fired directly across the bow of Iran’s government, which for years had warned that they would punish the Saudis for any such action. But not only was this Riyadh’s means to “biting their thumb” at Tehran, it was, explains Foreign Policy, a well-deserved slap in the face of the Obama administration.
What Riyadh just did was remind the president that proceeding with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran (a.k.a. “Iran nuclear deal”) will have destabilizing consequences for the entire region. And what the president “forcefully” foreshadowed after penning his own damning Email from September 14, 2012 to then Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was another political hostage snafu to protect against those who the president declared would “violate the values that undergird our faith.”
(Below is the entire Email.)
While President Obama’s father is remembered as a Shi’ite born in Kenya, his stepfather Yolo from his years in Indonesia was very much a Sunni. There is therefore no doubt that in Obama’s life spanning nearly 55 years, his Islamic roots, heritage and faith has deep, intrinsic ties to both warring factions, enabling him to easily play off both sides against the other.
Saudi Royalty Severs Diplomatic Ties with Iran; French Ambassador to U.S. Informs Obama “Iranians Obliged to React” with Attack on Saudi Embassy
Dan Friedman of the Washington Examiner reported January 2, 2016 that French Ambassador to the U.S. Gerard Araud tweeted that Tehran was “obliged to react” to the Saudi’s execution of a prominent Shiite cleric earlier in the day, only later to delete the tweet.
Luckily, that tweet was captured in the above screenshot.
Employing what he describes as a personal Twitter account, Amb. Araud responded Saturday to one critic who said the burning and storming of the embassy in Riyadh undermined arguments that the Iranian government behaves rationally. Responding perhaps a bit perturbed, “I don’t see why,” replied Araud. “Iran was obliged to react. Burning an embassy is spectacular but not war.”
It certainly is more substantial than how the president and Hillary Clinton reacted in the wake of the September 11, 2012 sacking of the Benghazi compound under orders of then-Egyptian leader Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, as well as the rioting in the streets of Cairo outside the U.S. Embassy.
But there are forces at work which few ascertain amid their gravity. And still less have been revealed by the domestic media. Because the manufacturing of the Islamic State which merged sometime in April 2013 near the Golan Heights of Jordan, Syria and Lebanon was a collaborative effort according to both Russian and the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) dossiers which were declassified in the first instance by the new Egyptian leader Abdel Fatah el-Sisi in August 2013; the latter, by way of Judicial Watch’s successful lawsuit via the Freedom of Information Act.
Regardless, Saudi Arabia severed diplomatic relations with Tehran in response to the incident.
Courtesy of Eman Nabih: The CIA Report Revealed by Russia to turn Egypt and Arab Region into a Civil War Zone
In August 2013, intelligence dossiers revealed by Russia detail in some 5,000 pages of a plan under orders of the Obama administration for the CIA to transform the entire Middle East (including Egypt, where Nabih resides) into “a civil war zone”. And what the world continually reads in fact verifies Nabih’s reporting is in fact, accurate.
Below is the first image of many to come revealing in 2013 much of what has already come to pass, including the rise of the Islamic State, by 2015.
While her personal translation is at times rough given her primary language is Arabic, it is mostly clear to understand. The root designs behind the Arab Spring are far less transparent in terms of the Obama administration’s motivation. Its ends, even now, are being met with precision and success at the costs of millions of lives both in the past and soon to come.
Among the myriad countries affected during the Arab Spring was Yemen. At present, it is mired amid its most severe crisis in years as competing forces fight for control of the country. The BBC asserts that while “Impoverished but strategically important, the tussle for power in Yemen has serious implications for the region and the security of the West.” In recent months, the nation has descended into conflicts on divergent fronts between several different groups intent to push it as the BBC asserted in ironically the same terms as did the Russian document, “to the edge of civil war” according to the UN’s special adviser.
Yet the main fight rages between forces loyal to beleaguered President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi, and those allied to Zaidi Shia rebels known as Houthis, who forced Mr Hadi to flee the capital Sanaa in February.
To understand the stakes between the Iranians is to learn about the Arab Spring’s events in Yemen. Following the mass protests and rioting in both Tunisia and Egypt that led to the downfall of their respective governments, a major demonstration of over 16,000 Yemenis followed suit in the nation’s capital Sanaa January 27, 2012, demanding that Ali Abdullah Saleh (president for more than 30 years as of 2012) to resign and step down. Saleh responded, announcing he would not run for reelection in 2013 nor even pass down power to his son. As more people protested against the government in what is termed in the Arab world as a “Day of Rage”, the regime offered interminable talks and promised concessions before threatening and engaging in a violent crackdown against protesters. This slaughter in Sanaa caused a schism within both the ruling General People’s Congress (GPC), and President Saleh’s Sanhani clan, at which time senior politicians resigned, thus forming the centrist Justice and Development bloc.
Below is video of that protest, provided ironically by Iran’s Press TV state media.
The Justice and Development bloc, which formed following the unification of Yemen in May 1990 and prior to a popular referendum on a draft of the constitution, is a broad coalition of northern-based conservatives declared the formation of the Yemeni Grouping for Reform, or Islah. While rivals, such as the Yemeni Socialist Party (YSP) and al-Haqq (Zaydi political party), alongside some journalists accuse it of being fundamentalist and extremist, the Islah Party is very different from other cohesive Islamist parties around the Muslim world such as Jordan’s Islamic Action Front, Egypt’s classical model for the Muslim Brotherhood and Morocco’s Justice and Development Party. In the words of two scholars on Yemeni politics, the Islah Party forms a “broad church” that includes groups sharing a wide range of interests and opinions running the gamut from rejection to all parliamentary forms of government to constitutional pluralism.
It is an alliance of tribal personalities, moderate and radical Islamists, and businessmen. Scholars and observers discern two features that characterize the politics of Islah: strong links with the ruling party (the General People’s Congress, GPC) and conservative social objectives. As its origins are traced again to the common theme behind the Arab Spring and the rise of the Islamic State, it is yet another Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated group (the Islamic Front) manufactured during the late 1970s in North Yemen supported by the northern Yemen Arab Republic (then headed by Ali Abdullah Saleh) to combat a Marxist group (the National Democratic Front) patronized by the People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen to the south. The Islamic Front regrouped following unification of Yemen in 1990 beneath the banner of the Islah Party with the backing of Wahhabi elements in Saudi Arabia, perhaps tied to the fledgling Al-Qaeda outfit.
To this day, Islah maintains strong connections with Saudi Arabia, Its official website summarizes its foreign policy agenda includes “strengthening our country’s relations with sister Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council.” As several founding figures of Islah, such as Sheikh Abdullah al-Ahmar and Sheikh Abd al-Majid al-Zindani, were financially and ideologically influenced by the Saudi regime, Islah has historically supported the Gulf Cooperation Council’s (GCC) initiative headed by the Saudi king to transfer power to a new leadership in Yemen while granting former Saleh immunity from persecution.
In characterizing its opponents, the Islah leadership continually employs the official Saudi line, accusing the Shia forces of the Houthis to the north and the Southern separatist movement Harak of serving as Iran’s fifth-column in implementing the Tehran’s agenda.
Key Sanhani military commanders sided with the people, as did the leading family of al-Hashid (the most effective tribal confederation), potential rivals to Saleh’s sons for the presidency. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC; comprised of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates), supported by the West, stepped up efforts to negotiate a solution, involving a phased transitional process and an amnesty for the president and his close circle. But Saleh refused to sign the plan.
Militant Islam arose in Yemen as a result of substantial Saudi funding. At present, both the Houthis and the Saudi elements of Yemen are under attack by the Obama-supported Islamic State. Islah asserts that those thinking of fighting for the Yemeni government against the Houthis should instead keep out of the war in order to overthrow its current pro-Western government.
Al-Islah is bitterly opposed at present to an amendment to the Yemeni constitution that could allow the president to run for life. The party was also involved in organizing demonstrations for the 2011 Yemeni protests, supported by the West as well as the GCC.
How the Obama Administration and Muslim Brotherhood Defy the Iranian Imperative
Above are two very important maps which at present, are currently proposed. At the top is one which Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, formulated after establishing the organization in 1928. The bottom is by the Islamic State.
Its historic emblem (but not the only one) is below.
The Obama-Clinton backed Muslim Brotherhood regime under Mohamed Morsi was briefly represented by the Freedom and Justice Party (below).
The Al-Nour Party served as the Salafist political base in Egyptian politics, and was formed in 2011. Initially in support of the Morsi regime, the Al-Nour Party began to distance itself from the FJP after January 2013, and in July that year, it aided Gen. Abdel Fatah el-Sisi and his supporters in overthrowing Morsi.
From a school of thought that had shunned politics for decades, the Al Nour Party entered the political arena after the 2011 revolution, and experienced rather unexpected success in the popular elections. But while the party initially allied with the Muslim Brotherhood, it soon distanced itself after securing an Islamist-leaning constitution from the floundering group. The Al Nour Party by the time of the July 3rd coups d’etat of Morsi, shrewedly positioned itself as the lone Islamist representative in the military-backed government.
The Al Nour Party’s emblem is below.
The following emblems, which will include the familiar Obama ’08 campaign slogan, demonstrate the eery similarity between all Muslim Brotherhood-linked emblems, including that of Al Nour, which is tied to the Salafist government of Saudi Arabia.
The emblem at the bottom right-hand corner is the most troubling, given it is the proposed design to replace the current one employed by the U.S. Army according to USA Today.
Finally, the entire initiative behind isolating Syria is geared towards the greater imperative with Iran and ultimately, Russia. However, this has failed on a disastrous scale. The entire reason behind the formation of the Islamic State by the U.S., NATO and GCC states in collaboration with the Muslim Brotherhood is detailed in the following declassified Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) dossier procured by Judicial Watch last April via the Freedom of Information Act.
Those nations which the DIA revealed to be involved are below, which include Saudi Arabia.
Thus, the plot has been set since at least August 2012 under its current conditions. It has been successfully achieved in each phase except for isolating Assad’s Syrian regime that is friendly to Iran and Russia.