The Saudi war in Iraq and lessons for Pakistan

[k_arura]

With Nawaz Sharif a brain slave of the House of Saud at the helm, good luck with that Pakistan.

If we do not keep our noses out of this, we are going to burn like Iraq and Syria. This is a racist war Pakistan must not be a part of. We are not Arabs nor Persians.

Let them kill each other.They learned nothing from the Iraq Iran war leading to a million deaths. They'll perhaps kill another million.

For Pakistan, its stay out or die! - We must bolster our internal security, look away and wait till Arabs and Persians have gotten tired of butchering each other to prove 'who's the superior race'.

It sure took you a long time to realize you are not Arabs atleast . Fear and extinction sure has a way of inducing good sense

 

[Kompromat]

It sure took you a long time to realize you are not Arabs atleast . Fear and extinction sure has a way of inducing good sense

Shut up and stop derailing this thread with your racism.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

Express Tribune

A report dated October 13 marked “Secret” has been revealed. It calls on the heads of law-enforcement agencies in Balochistan to be especially vigilant as the Islamic State (IS) is claiming to have recruited 10,000 to 12,000 followers from the Hangu and Kurram Agencies in the tribal areas. The IS has reportedly sought linkages with the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and the Ahl-e-Sunnat Wal Jamaat; and formed a 10-man strategic planning wing. The report originates from the home and tribal affairs department of Balochistan and appears to be genuine. It contains a warning that the IS plans to attack government buildings, military establishments, as well as target people based on the sects they belong to.

That the IS has surfaced in Pakistan should come as no surprise to anybody in the law-enforcement agencies or the intelligence services. With a population that is already radicalised to a large extent in Fata and parts of the settled areas of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, the IS is pushing at an open door. Six senior commanders of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan have already pledged allegiance to the self-proclaimed caliph of the IS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
Thus far, the IS has not ‘owned’ any incident in Pakistan, and its presence is perhaps, a matter of perception rather than an accomplished fact. The challenge now is to prevent perception and reality from bonding. The rise of the IS in the last year has produced a level of threat that in Western states is perceived to be as great if not greater than that presented by al Qaeda in its several franchises. The IS has considerable support in parts of Iraq and Syria, is militarily successful and seeking to expand into South Asia, and the countries of the Gulf region. Pakistan cannot assume that the IS presence is little more than an unpleasant dream. We are exactly the fertile ground it seeks and unless the IS is effectively fought from the outset, this terrorist group will flourish in populations that are tinder-dry, latent fires in search of a spark.

Punjab govt to take action against pro-IS men
As pro-IS slogans appeared on walls in several areas of Lahore, Lahore DIG Operations Dr Haider Ashraf on Tuesday registered an FIR against unidentified persons for calling for support for the militant group.
Last night, Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif ordered IG Punjab Mushtaq Ahmed Sukhera to probe into the wall-chalkings around the city which led to the registration of the case today.

The case was registered under Section 153 in Nawab Town police station.

On the DIG’s orders, SP Saddar Division constituted a team to arrest those responsible. Earlier this month, the National Counter Terrorism Agency wrote to a dozen government agencies warning them to be on guard against the IS group.
“The successes of IS play a very dangerous, inspirational role in Pakistan, where more than 200 organisations are operational,” the agency said.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

DAWN

LAHORE: Pakistani security forces have arrested a man they believe is the commander of the Islamic State group in the country as well as two accomplices involved in recruiting and sending fighters to Syria, intelligence sources said on Wednesday.

Authorities in South Asia are concerned about the rise of the jihadist group in a region already beset by home-grown insurgencies fighting to topple local governments and set up strict Islamic rule.

Three intelligence sources, who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity, said the man, Yousaf al-Salafi, was arrested in the eastern city of Lahore and confessed during interrogation that he represented IS in Pakistan.
“Al-Salafi is a Pakistani Syrian who reached Pakistan through Turkey five months ago,” said one source.
“He crossed into Turkey from Syria and was caught there. Somehow he managed to escape and reached Pakistan to establish ISIS (IS).”

The source said one of his accomplices, Hafiz Tayyab, was a prayer leader in Lahore and was involved in recruiting Pakistanis and sending them to fight alongside Islamic State in Syria, charging IS about $600 per person.
Rifts among the Taliban and disputes about the future of the insurgency have contributed to the rise of Islamic State's popularity but security sources believe there are no operational links yet between IS and South Asia.
Disgruntled former Taliban commanders have formed the so-called Khorasan chapter — an umbrella IS group covering Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and other South Asian countries — in recent months but have not been involved in any fighting.
Their leader, Hafiz Saeed Khan Orakzai, a former Pakistani Taliban commander, appeared in a video address this month urging people in the region to join the group.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

The King of Hearts
Asad Rahim Khan

The Australian musician Nick Cave, who often touches on love and death, once mused on a great man’s last rites (his own), “The motorcade will be ten miles long, the world’ll join for a farewell song … they’ll sound a flugelhorn, and the sea will rage, and the sky will storm. All man and beast will mourn. When I go.”
And so it was, if in a land far from Mr Cave’s jazz riffs: the desert sands of Riyadh. Last Friday, the world woke in panic to find Abdullah bin Abdulaziz al Saud, King of Saudi Arabia, Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, and Leading Light of the Ummah, had passed away.

The anguish spread far and wide through Muslim lands. Particularly despairing were Pakistan, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Libya, Iraq, and Syria — united only by their love for the king (and unrelated battles with terrorism).
But beyond sites of civil strife, a man is also known by his friends. George H W Bush called him a “dear friend and partner”. Israeli President Rivlin mourned that “his wise policies contributed greatly to our region and to the stability of the Middle East,” a statement that states the obvious.
Egypt’s Sisi was most earnest, “The Arab nation (has) lost a leader of its best sons.” Many noted the general’s subtle self-praise — Sisi himself was one of the king’s best sons. In bringing back the military in Cairo, the general owes much to the king. Long live his swagger stick over those Brotherhood-electing Egyptians.
And Nawaz Sharif, in agony over the King’s health, rushed to Riyadh the second time in weeks. The king had a “special place in the hearts of every Pakistani,” said Mr Sharif, and Pakistanis everywhere wept along. In the king, Mr Sharif may have seen a kindred soul: a gentle reformer with an image problem, in a land where power is shared between brothers.
The obits were, as always, unjust. They qualified the king’s reforms with feeble adjectives: the IMF called him “a discreet but strong advocate of women”. The New York Times said he “nudged” Saudi Arabia forward. And Reuters called him a “cautious” reformer.
‘Discreet’, ‘cautious’, ‘nudged’; as always, the non-Khaleeji press played it safe. CNN’s Fareed Zakaria tried the mostest — “an extraordinary figure,” he managed.

Let’s see the facts. Abdullah was crowned in 2005, but by the grace of the ailing Fahd, was running the place 10 years yore. He allowed women the vote, but forbade them from driving — a fatherly figure who knew the line between right and wrong.
Which was why justice was swift under the king. So lawful was his reign, state executioners complained they were overworked (and late in coming home to their families). A blogger was lashed 50 times, two weeks ago. And a rape victim was sentenced to 90 lashes soon after King Abdullah’s crowning.
Lo, unvarnished justice.

And with justice came accountability. When 15 schoolgirls died in a dormitory fire, because the religious police hadn’t let them escape (they weren’t appropriately dressed), the king was Significantly Upset. He went as far as sacking the head of women’s education (presumably male).

Yes, the king had his finger on the people’s pulse: even as he flew in fleets of jumbo jets, he directed that princes pay all their phone bills. He was also the first royal to be photographed visiting the shack of an impoverished Saudi citizen, such was His Majesty’s humility. No pharaoh was he: he swatted the heads of petitioners with a ‘slender’ bamboo stick, were they to attempt bowing or kissing the royal digits.

But King Abdullah was also a staunch supporter of the Bush family — the al-Sauds’ personal friends — in their crusade against Moslem terror. Following 9/11, King Abdullah famously wrote to George W., “God, in his mercy … (enables) us to transform such tragedies into great achievements.”
That great achievement proved the War on Terror: so close were their ties, the Bushies forgot 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi, and invaded Afghanistan and Iraq instead.

Yet even in a complex world, the king never forgot House Saud’s DNA: the Salafi/Wahhabi School, a doctrine rooted in warm tradition. Famous alumni (under Provost Abdullah) include the Taliban, al-Nusra, ISIS and Boko Haram, all beneficiaries of the kingdom’s vast wealth.

But many proved ungrateful. Like evil stepchildren, ISIS and al Qaeda strayed from the righteous path, and were excommunicated by the Saudi clergy. Shame on them.

Speaking of shame, Pakistan’s current leadership was equally blessed by His Majesty’s petro patronage. WikiLeaks uncovered the true extent: as of 2008, says a cable, 100 million dollar cash injections were making their way to Pakistan on a yearly basis from Saudi Arabia — for religious charities and sectarian groups in Southern Punjab. The king’s investment has since reaped rich harvests, and Southern Punjab has changed beyond recognition: an "oasis of peace" between the sects.

Forgetting the philanthropist, hard it may be, and we find Abdullah the statesman. He brought peace to tiny, troubled Bahrain, through excellent ‘military advisers’. He proposed to John ‘Waterboarder’ Brennan that terror detainees be implanted with e-chips, to track their movements via Bluetooth. It worked on horses and falcons, the king said. Brennan replied, “Horses don’t have good lawyers.”

Many laughs were had, and the USA and the KSA grew ever closer — two free nations brought together by oil, arms, and former friend Saddam Hussein.

But none of it comes close to capturing the king’s belovedness, or the universality of his admirers — from Texan tycoons to Yemeni criminals. According to Robert Lacey’s book, Osama bin Laden once told a fellow jihadi about a dream that stayed with him (Abdullah had yet to be crowned). In his dream, Bin Laden heard the sounds of celebrations and “looked over a mud wall”, to see Abdullah arriving — to the joy of cheering throngs.
“It means Abdullah will become king,” Bin Laden said. “That will be a relief to the people and make them happy. If Abdullah becomes king, then I will go back.”

Yes, Abdullah bin Abdulaziz al Saud ruled in the hearts of all: the sheikhs and the Sharifs, the Bushes and the Bin Ladens, the Israels and the Egypts.

So blinding was his light, it may be greedy to wish for more of him in the world.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

France 24

How Saudi petrodollars fuel rise of Salafism
Since the 2011 Arab revolts, a loose network of underground zealots has evolved into a potent and highly vocal force. Behind the remarkable rise of Salafism lies the world’s leading producer of oil – and extremist Islam: Saudi Arabia.

By Marc DAOU
When protesters incensed by an anti-Muslim video scaled the walls of the US embassy in Cairo on September 11, tearing down the Stars and Stripes, a black flag could be seen floating above the battered compound. From Sanaa, in Yemen, to Libya’s Benghazi, the same black banner, emblem of the Salafists, soon became a ubiquitous sight as anti-US protests spread like wildfire across the Arab world. The 2011 Arab uprisings have served the Salafists well. With the old dictators gone, a once subterranean network of hardliners has sprung into prominence – funded by a wealthy Gulf patron locked in a post-Arab Spring rivalry with a fellow Gulf monarchy.

The ‘predecessors’
A puritanical branch of Islam, Salafism advocates a strict, literalist interpretation of the Koran and a return to the practices of the “Salaf” (the predecessors), as the Prophet Mohammed and his disciples are known. While Salafist groups can differ widely, from the peaceful, quietist kind to the more violent clusters, it is the latter who have attracted most attention in recent months.
In Libya and Mali, radical Salafists have been busy destroying ancient shrines built by more moderate groups, such as Sufi Muslims. Fellow extremists in Tunisia have tried to silence secular media and destroy “heretical” artwork. And the presence of Salafist fighting units in Syria has been largely documented. Less well known is who is paying for all this – and why.

‘Export-Wahhabism’
For regional experts, diplomats and intelligence services, the answer to the first question lies in the seemingly endless flow of petrodollars coming from oil-rich Saudi Arabia. “There is plenty of evidence pointing to the fact that Saudi money is financing the various Salafist groups,” said Samir Amghar, author of “Le salafisme d’aujourd’hui. Mouvements sectaires en Occident” (Contemporary Salafism: Sectarian movements in the West).

According to Antoine Basbous, who heads the Paris-based Observatory of Arab Countries, “the Salafism we hear about in Mali and North Africa is in fact the export version of Wahhabism,” a conservative branch of Sunni Islam actively promoted and practised by Saudi Arabia’s ruling family. Since the 1970s oil crises provided the ruling House of Saud with a seemingly endless supply of cash, “the Saudis have been financing [Wahhabism] around the world to the tune of several million euros,” Basbous told FRANCE 24.

Opaque channels
Not all of the cash comes from Saudi state coffers. “Traditionally, the money is handed out by members of the royal family, businessmen or religious leaders, and channelled via Muslim charities and humanitarian organizations,” said Karim Sader, a political analyst who specializes in the Gulf states, in an interview with FRANCE 24.

Until the Arab Spring revolts upended the region’s political landscape, these hidden channels enabled the Salafists’ Saudi patrons to circumvent the authoritarian regimes who were bent on crushing all Islamist groups. These were the same opaque channels that allegedly supplied arms to extremist groups, particularly in Pakistan and Afghanistan, according to Western intelligence officials.

Free education
Other, slightly less shadowy recipients of Saudi petrodollars include the numerous religious institutions built around the Arab world to preach Wahhabi Islam, as well as the growing list of Saudi satellite channels that provide a platform for radical Salafist preachers. A large share of the booty also goes to Arab students attending religious courses at the kingdom’s universities in Medina, Riyadh and the Mecca.
“Most of the students at Medina University are foreigners who benefit from generous scholarships handed out by Saudi patrons, as well as free accommodation and plane tickets,” said Amghar. “Once they have graduated, the brightest are hired by the Saudi monarchy, while the rest return to their respective countries to preach Wahhabi Islam”. According to Amghar, the members of France’s nascent Salafist movement follow a similar path.

Direct funding
Exporting its own brand of Islam is not the only item on Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy agenda. “While they see themselves as the guardians of Islamic doctrine and have always generously financed Muslim missionaries, the Saudis’ priority is not to ‘salafise’ the Muslim world,” explained Amghar. “Their real aim is to consolidate their political and ideological influence by establishing a network of supporters capable of defending the kingdom’s strategic and economic interests.”

Since last year’s Arab revolutions, these supporters have benefited from more direct – and politically motivated – funding. “With the region’s former dictators out of the way, Salafist groups have evolved into well-established parties benefiting from more official Saudi aid,” said Sader, pointing to the spectacular rise of Egypt’s al-Nour party, which picked up a surprising 24% of the vote in January’s parliamentary polls.
“The Saudis were genuinely surprised by the Arab Spring revolts,” said Mohamed-Ali Adraoui, a political analyst who specialises in the Muslim world. “Riyadh’s response was to back certain Salafist groups (…) so that it may gain further clout in their respective countries,” Adraoui told FRANCE 24.

Gulf rivalries
The Saudi strategy is similar to that adopted by its arch Gulf rival Qatar – a smaller but equally oil-rich kingdom – in its dealings with the Muslim Brotherhood, the other great beneficiary of the Arab Spring. “When it comes to financing Islamist groups, there is intense competition between Qatar and Saudi Arabia,” said Sader.

Telegraph
August 2014

Qatar and Saudi Arabia have ignited a "time bomb" by funding the global spread of radical Islam, according to a former commander of British forces in Iraq.

General Jonathan Shaw, who retired as Assistant Chief of the Defence Staff in 2012, told The Telegraph that Qatar and Saudi Arabia were primarily responsible for the rise of the extremist Islam that inspires ISIS terrorists.

The two Gulf states have spent billions of dollars on promoting a militant and proselytising interpretation of their faith derived from Abdul Wahhab, an eighteenth century scholar, supposedly based on the Salaf.

But the rulers of both countries are now more threatened by their creation than Britain or America, argued Gen Shaw. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria has vowed to topple the Qatari and Saudi regimes, viewing both as corrupt outposts of decadence and sin.

So Qatar and Saudi Arabia have every reason to lead an ideological struggle against ISIS, said Gen Shaw. On its own, he added, the West's military offensive against the terrorist movement was likely to prove "futile".

"This is a time bomb that, under the guise of education, Wahhabi Salafism is igniting under the world really. And it is funded by Saudi and Qatari money and that must stop," said Gen Shaw. "And the question then is 'does bombing people over there really tackle that?' I don't think so. I'd far rather see a much stronger handle on the ideological battle rather than the physical battle."

Gen Shaw, 57, retired from the Army after a 31-year career that saw him lead a platoon of paratroopers in the Battle of Mount Longdon, the bloodiest clash of the Falklands War, and oversee Britain's withdrawal from Basra in southern Iraq. As Assistant Chief of the Defence Staff, he specialised in counter-terrorism and security policy.
All this has made him acutely aware of the limitations of what force can achieve. He believes that ISIS can only be defeated by political and ideological means. Western air strikes in Iraq and Syria will, in his view, achieve nothing except temporary tactical success.

When it comes to waging that ideological struggle, Qatar and Saudi Arabia are pivotal. "The root problem is that those two countries are the only two countries in the world where Wahhabi Salafism is the state religion – and ISIS is a violent expression of Wahabist Salafism," said Gen Shaw.

"The primary threat of ISIS is not to us in the West: it's to Saudi Arabia and also to the other Gulf states."

Both Qatar and Saudi Arabia are playing small parts in the air campaign against ISIS, contributing two and four jet fighters respectively. But Gen Shaw said they "should be in the forefront" and, above all, leading an ideological counter-revolution against ISIS.
The British and American air campaign would not "stop the support of people in Qatar and Saudi Arabia for this kind of activity," added Gen Shaw. "It's missing the point. It might, if it works, solve the immediate tactical problem. It's not addressing the fundamental problem of Wahhabi Salafism as a culture and a creed, which has got out of control and is still the ideological basis of ISIS – and which will continue to exist even if we stop their advance in Iraq."

Gen Shaw said the Government's approach towards ISIS was fundamentally mistaken. "People are still treating this as a military problem, which is in my view to misconceive the problem," he added. "My systemic worry is that we're repeating the mistakes that we made in Afghanistan and Iraq: putting the military far too up front and centre in our response to the threat without addressing the fundamental political question and the causes. The danger is that yet again we're taking a symptomatic treatment not a causal one."

Gen Shaw said that ISIS's main focus was on toppling the established regimes of the Middle East, not striking Western targets. He questioned whether ISIS's murder of two British and two American hostages was sufficient justification for the campaign.
"Isil made their big incursion into Iraq in June. The West did nothing, despite thousands of people being killed," said Gen Shaw. "What's changed in the last month? Beheadings on TV of Westerners. And that has led us to suddenly change our policy and suddenly launch air attacks."

However, Gen Shaw's analysis is open to question. Even if they had the will or intent, the rulers of Saudi Arabia and Qatar may be incapable of leading an ideological struggle against ISIS. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia is 91 and only sporadically active. His chosen successor, Crown Prince Salman, is 78 and already believed to be declining into senility. The kingdom's ossified leadership is likely to be paralysed for the foreseeable future.

Given that Saudi Arabia and Qatar almost certainly cannot do what Gen Shaw believes to be necessary, the West may have no option except to take military action against ISIS with the aim of reducing, if not eliminating, the terrorist threat

 

[TalibanSwatter]

DAWN
Irfan Husain

THIS last week witnessed the gathering of the great and the good in Riyadh to pay their respects to the recently departed King Abdullah, and to suck up to King Salman, the newly crowned monarch.
Next month, many of these same worthies will meet in Washington to discuss measures to counter terrorism.
How many lives have to be lost before Western leaders finally connect the dots between the Wahabi/Salafi ideology being pumped out by the desert kingdom and the killing fields of Iraq, Syria, Nigeria, Afghanistan and Pakistan?
It was no coincidence that many of the 9/11 suicide bombers and planners, as well as Osama bin Laden, happened to be Saudi citizens. Over the years, a large body of evidence has been built up by diplomats, journalists and intelligence agencies pointing to the nexus between jihadi terror and extremist elements in Saudi Arabia. And yet King Abdullah’s death is being considered a huge loss.
In his tribute, President Obama went so far as saying of Abdullah’s deeds: “They will outlive him as an enduring contribution to the search for peace in the region.” Really? Since when has the architect of a project that has destabilised much of the Muslim world deserved such accolades?
Saudi support has blocked change in the Middle East.
In 1924-25, Ibn Saud, the founder of the current Saudi dynasty, defeated the Hashemites and seized control of Saudi Arabia with the help of the British. According to contemporary accounts, over the next seven years or so, tens of thousands were killed, many more had a limb amputated and up to a million fled Saudi Arabia.
So when we deplore the actions of the Islamic State, we need to remember who provided them with a model for conquest. And when we are repulsed by their public beheading of prisoners, we need to keep in mind the fact that on Fridays, those given the death penalty by Saudi Arabia’s opaque and draconian legal system are decapitated in public squares.
In a Faustian pact, the Saudi monarchy is left unchallenged by the country’s ultra-conservative clergy, provided it does not try and bring the country out of the 7th century. Meanwhile, millions of dollars are sent from private and public sources to madressahs in mostly poor Muslim countries.
Saudi Arabia, among some other Arab states, also funds mosques in Western cities where many clerics, whose salaries are reportedly paid by Riyadh, preach hate against the West and non-Wahabi sects. While the official Wahabi clergy stick to a literalist, joyless interpretation of Islam, they overlook the injunctions against rule by despots. They have thus provided the Saudi royal family with a spurious legitimacy in exchange for the tight control they wield over internal social policy. The royal family and the clergy are in a symbiotic embrace that has made them a barrier to change.
With an army of some 7,000 princes to keep in style, the House of Saud has a strong incentive to maintain a lucrative status quo. This creates their leverage with Washington, London and Paris: with the world’s biggest oil reserves, Saudi Arabia has been ensuring a steady supply of oil to the global markets.
The other factor that keeps leaders like Obama and Cameron onside is the rich market for arms the kingdom has become over the years. These purchases, often accompanied with allegations of vast bribes, generate jobs as well as obscene profits.
Finally, the ‘stability’ repeatedly evoked in the recent eulogies to Abdullah refers to his role in leading the fight to roll back the Arab Spring. From Egypt to Bahrain, it has been Saudi money and political support that has blocked change. Simultaneously, however, Saudi Arabia has also reportedly financed extremist rebel groups in Syria.
But there are signs that the Saudis are losing some of their leverage in Washington. When Obama decided against launching an attack on Syria, it was a big setback for Riyadh. For King Abdullah, it was a humiliating reminder that his country is no longer the highest American priority.
Another reality check came when Obama refused to be led into an Israeli-inspired attack on Iran to destroy its nuclear programme and ambitions. A senior Saudi had been quoted in a leaked US diplomatic cable urging the Americans to “cut off the serpent’s head”.
But Saudi support for General Sisi has been directly helpful to Israel as Egypt has acted vigorously against Hamas, shutting down virtually all the tunnels that had been a lifeline for the beleaguered Palestinians virtually imprisoned in the tiny enclave of Gaza.
Thus far, the Saudi government has bought off its people by giving them huge subsidies and many free services. But with falling oil prices, it may not be able to forever bribe the young to stay quiet. Its Shia population in eastern Saudi Arabia is growing increasingly restless under unending discrimination and repression. And no system, even one as backward as Saudi Arabia’s, stays static forever.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

Express Tribune

NEW YORK: The only al Qaeda plotter convicted over the 9/11 attacks has told American lawyers that members of the Saudi royal family had donated millions to the terror group in the 1990s.
French citizen Zacarias Moussaoui, dubbed the “20th hijacker,” made the revelations in court papers filed in a New York federal court by lawyers for victims of the attacks who accuse Saudi Arabia of supporting al Qaeda.
He said he created a digital database of al Qaeda donors, including members of the royal family such as former intelligence chief Prince Turki al Faisal and Prince Bandar bin Sultan, who was Saudi ambassador to United States for 22 years until 2005.

Moussaoui said he met in Afghanistan an official from the Saudi embassy in Washington DC to discuss al Qaeda’s plots to attack the United States, and that he was supposed to meet the same man again in Washington for help on a plot to shoot down Air Force One.

He also claimed there were direct dealings between senior Saudi officials and bin Laden, saying he traveled to Saudi Arabia twice to deliver handwritten letters between the al Qaeda mastermind and senior Saudis, including Prince Turki.
The Saudi embassy in Washington DC denied the allegations.

“The September 11 attack has been the most intensely investigated crime in history and the findings show no involvement by the Saudi government or Saudi officials,” it said in a statement.

Moussaoui, who was found criminally responsible at his trial in 2006, pled guilty to plotting the deadliest terror attacks in US history and is incarcerated at a supermax prison in Colorado.

Across 127 pages of transcript, Moussaoui said the money from wealthy Saudi donors was “crucial” to al Qaeda in the late 1990s.
He talked about donations of two to three million dollars and said top-ranking officials were close to bin Laden through social connections.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

AFP

Cairo, Feb 20 (IANS/EFE) The Islamic State (IS) Sunni radical group Friday began distributing educational material for six subjects to schools in the areas under its control in Syria, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) reported.

SOHR noted that the main subject of the programme is monotheism, the manual of which has 179 pages and highlights the messages of Mohammed Abdel Wahab, an Islamic scholar from the Arabian Peninsula and founder of Wahhabism, who explains the basis of believing in one god.

The rest of the subjects are Arabic, English, mathematics, geography, and physics and chemistry.
Furthermore, the group listed Saturday as a normal school day, limiting the weekend to Friday only.
The IS forced teachers from schools in the parts it controls in Syria, especially in the provinces of Deir Al Zur and Raqqa, to swear allegiance to the terrorist organisation or quit their jobs.

Last June, the IS proclaimed a "caliphate" in areas it controls in Syria and Iraq.
-

 

[haviZsultan]

AFP

Cairo, Feb 20 (IANS/EFE) The Islamic State (IS) Sunni radical group Friday began distributing educational material for six subjects to schools in the areas under its control in Syria, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) reported.

SOHR noted that the main subject of the programme is monotheism, the manual of which has 179 pages and highlights the messages of Mohammed Abdel Wahab, an Islamic scholar from the Arabian Peninsula and founder of Wahhabism, who explains the basis of believing in one god.

The rest of the subjects are Arabic, English, mathematics, geography, and physics and chemistry.
Furthermore, the group listed Saturday as a normal school day, limiting the weekend to Friday only.
The IS forced teachers from schools in the parts it controls in Syria, especially in the provinces of Deir Al Zur and Raqqa, to swear allegiance to the terrorist organisation or quit their jobs.

Last June, the IS proclaimed a "caliphate" in areas it controls in Syria and Iraq.
-

As I thought. All militants have an ideologue or mentor? That mentor is Ibn Abdul wahab who spread terror and tyranny across the middle east, ripping womens feotus's from their bodies, murdering children and even desecrating the prophets grave. These people are worse than animals.

They want to give jihadi education to children. We need to destroy the ISIS as well as the Pakistani Taliban, the short sightedness of these militant groups is taking us thousand years back.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

Agreed. But lets recognize that it is the Saudis who promoted and funded Abdel Wahab's ideology whether by funding madrassas or groups like ISIS and Laskhar e Jhangvi across the region. Given the Al Saud's 200 year old alliance with the Wahhabis, it is not clear if the Saudis will voluntarily change course anytime soon.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

John Boyd

ISIS isn't the long term problem, Saudi Arabia is

Here's a new way to think about something that should be obvious...
To the politicians in DC and financiers in New York, Saudi Arabia is an island of stability in a sea of chaos. A reliable ally, willing to keep the oil flowing, year in and year out. A place that's not vulnerable to the instability that routinely guts the countries around it.

Of course, that line of thinking is utterly misguided. The opposite is true.
In reality, Saudi Arabia is extremely fragile and much of the chaos we see in the Middle East is due to the way Saudi Arabia avoids falling to pieces. Worse, we are largely to blame for this. We go along with this charade, and our willingness to play along is doing much of the damage.

Saudi Arabia is a particularly expensive dissipative structure because it is extremely rigid, anachronistic, and unchanging. To maintain this archaic structure despite the titanic forces of globalization trying to pull it apart, it must export an incredible amount of disorder (entropy) into the surrounding region. Disorder such as:

• A corrosive fundamentalist ideology. The KSA's Wahhabism fuels both ISIS and al Qaeda and it's spent billions spreading it around the world.
• Thousands of violent zealots. The vast majority of the hijackers during 9/11 were Saudi as well as thousands of ISIS members. People it can't control are sent abroad.
• Billions in destabilizing financing. Saudi Arabia provided the start-up funding for both al Qaeda and ISIS. It even "invested" $10 billion in the current Egyptian military dictatorship.

Obviously, this Saudi entropy has damaged everyone in the world. It spreads violent instability throughout the world, from the terrorism of 9/11 to the violent ascent of ISIS in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Pakistan...

Worse, the damage being done by Saudi Arabia is increasing with each passing year, as it attempts to defy the inexorable gravitational attraction of a fluid, dynamic, and tightly integrated global system.

This means that even if ISIS is defeated in the next couple of years, Saudi Arabia's dysfunctional system will produce something worse soon thereafter

 

[TalibanSwatter]

DAWN

Federal Defence Minister Khawaja Asif in the National Assembly elucidated Pakistan's role in the Yemen conflict, saying Pakistan has only pledged to safeguard the territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).

He stressed on Pakistan's role as 'facilitator' to end the conflicts in the Muslim world.

"Instead of aggravating the situation by participating in it, Pakistan should do what it can to prevent it ─ for the alliance and unity of the Muslim world," the defence minister said. "Pakistan is ready to adopt whatever role is needed in order to facilitate the termination of conflicts in the Islamic world."
"We will not take part in any conflict that could result in differences in the Muslim world, causing fault-lines present in Pakistan to be disturbed, the aggravation of which will have to be borne by Pakistan," he asserted.
The request from Riyadh comes at a time when the Pakistan military is engaged in an operation against terrorists in North Waziristan. Asif's reference to 'fault-lines' hints at Pakistan's widespread sectarian conflict, as a result of which Shia and other religious minorities are targeted in tit for tat killings by extremist groups.
The defence minister's statement comes a day after Saudi Arabia said that Pakistan will join its operation against Iran-backed Shia Houthi rebels in Yemen, for a conflict that is rapidly escalating into a murky civil war. The minister's announcement today apparently rules out Pakistan's immediate participation in the Yemen conflict.
"We want this issue to be resolved in a common forum where the Muslim world or Arab League is involved," said the defence minister. "The need of the hour is alliance and solidarity, not division."

"Division on the basis of religion or sect is rising in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. Instead of conflagration or proliferation ... It should be contained," he added.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

DAWN

The rapid advances made by the coalition of the Shia Houthi militia and the forces loyal to former president Ali Abdullah Saleh meant that in addition to Sana’a, it is also now in (at least) partial control of Aden. In marching on to Aden the coalition has clearly crossed what was considered a ‘red line’ by the Saudis.
Against this backdrop, the ambiguous Pakistani statement fuelled more concerns than it addressed at home and, if the social media was an accurate indicator, anxiety began to mount that the country was once again rather mindlessly jumping headlong into a foreign conflict.
Defence Minister Khawaja Asif’s clarification was as clear as any could have been.
Adding to this anxiety was the assertion carried by many international media organisations, not least some Gulf-based channels among them, quoting Saudi sources, that Pakistan had committed forces (or was interested in doing so) to the rapidly escalating conflict.

Therefore, when Defence Minister Khawaja Asif stood up to make a statement in the National Assembly many eyes were on him. His clarification was as clear as any could have been. Khawaja Asif (reported in detail on the news pages in today’s paper) said there had been no decision to despatch troops to Saudi Arabia.

He did, however, reiterate the position of the country’s civil-military leadership that any threat to Saudi territorial integrity would not be tolerated. But he didn’t specify how far Pakistan would go to defend it.
With no imminent threat of any element involved in the Yemen strife advancing towards Saudi Arabia, the whole question of Pakistani participation becomes hypothetical. There are still worries. For example if there was an uprising in the kingdom’s eastern region where there is a sizeable Shia population, how would Pakistan react?
One hopes that the ‘coalition’ the Saudis have put together/are putting together will help check any ambition, if at all, that the Houthi-led forces may have harboured towards Saudi soil. The aerial firepower at the command of the Saudis would make any such exercise suicidal at best.

Whatever the case, Khawaja Asif was very perceptive in arguing that Pakistan would do nothing in the conflict that could further accentuate fault lines in Pakistan, in an obvious reference to the targeting of Shias by terrorists hostile to their ideology, that of the latter seen as aligned to the one propagated by the Saudis.
Despite the fact that our civil-military leaders’ track record in such areas, notwithstanding their public declarations, inspires little confidence, that Khawaja Asif was prepared to share the leadership’s thinking behind a decision seemed to be a first positive of its kind.

It has been suggested in these columns and with even greater vigour elsewhere by others that Islamabad is very well placed as Iran’s neighbour and one of Saudi Arabia’s closest allies to try and mediate in the disputes between the two rather than take sides in any conflict between the two.

The Saudis are understandably nervous with what they see as their encirclement by Shia Iran across the Gulf in the east and Iraq across the north-eastern border, coupled with the Houthis in the south. The Saudis’ quick and brutal response to assist the king in quelling pro-democracy protests by Bahrain’s Shia majority was indicative of what makes it edgy.
On the other hand, there are now real prospects that Iran’s long international isolation may end, with its negotiations with the US-led P5+1 on its nuclear programme in a decisive phase. This can’t be a source of any comfort to Riyadh.
Today’s geopolitical reality is so different from the time when first Saddam Husain’s, then US-controlled, Iraq on the one hand and the Taliban’s Afghanistan and a (barely) neutral Pakistan on the other were all breathing down Tehran’s neck and the Saudis were sitting pretty.

Over the years Iran has built and consolidated its influence in the region. What started as an ideological alliance with Lebanon’s Hezbollah and the Syrian Ba’athist Assad regime has now expanded to include a lead role in Iraq’s fightback with the self-styled Islamic State.

The brutal, bloody conflict in Syria is nowhere near a conclusion whichever way you look at it.
Many an observer is warning that in the short-term the Iranian-backed Shia militias and elements of the Iraqi army may have had some successes against the IS but their offensive, with a halt in the US air campaign, now seems stalled and could potentially trigger more sectarian strife in Iraq.

The Saudis have long exported a toxic ideology which has caused so much havoc mostly in the Muslim world. Now Iran may have overstretched itself by openly backing the Houthis in Yemen and spooking the Saudis — so much so that there is talk of Saudi-Israel cooperation in a possible airstrike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Any such eventuality will have horrible, bloody consequences and it is unlikely any country in the region will remain unaffected. Therefore, Pakistan should not wait for the largely impotent Arab League or other such fora but use its good offices to mediate between the two.

And if Islamabad reaches the conclusion it has no mediatory role to play in the conflict, then it should quietly stay away from it. Self-preservation demands that.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

The Nation

In the wake of the worsening crisis in Yemen and Saudi Arabia’s decision to secure its influence through air strikes on the former, Pakistan became part of the story. The news about Pakistan’s possible participation in the air strikes against Yemen created ripples at home and for the right reasons. A quiet observer would have noted the initial almost unanimous public disapproval from a cross-section of Pakistan’s intelligentsia, civil society and political groups.
The overwhelming concern came from both Sunni and Shia communities, considering the Yemen-Saudi conflict is rooted in the regionalization of Yemen’s local politics, fostered by the predominantly Sunni Saudi Arabia in its battle for influence over the region vis-a-vis Shia Iran.An overwhelming majority of strategists and experts in Pakistan rejected the idea of partaking in the conflict owing to the country’s own diverse sectarian populace and armed Deobandi groups already massacring Shia minority in different parts of the country. Any support for a particular side would have a lethal impact on the ongoing anti-Shia terrorism at home.

This came before The Guardian reported on March 26, “As Saudi Arabia began pounding the rebels with airstrikes, countries from the Middle East to Pakistan were said to be prepared to commit troops for a ground assault”. The news item went on to report, referencing Saudi TV channel Al-Arabia, “…the kingdom had lined up 150,000 soldiers in preparation for a ground offensive, with Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan and Sudan also ready to commit troops”. The government of Pakistan kept denying the dispatch of its troops or aircrafts as part of the Saudi-led offensive.
Meanwhile, speaking on the floor of the House in National Assembly, Pakistan’s Defense Minister said Pakistan was committed to the defense of the land of Hijaz and the home of two Holy Mosques. Similar sentiments were later reiterated by the Co-Chairperson of the supposedly ‘liberal’, progressive, pro-minorities and anti-sectarian political party, Pakistan Peoples Party. His statement came after lobbyists of Pakistan Muslim League as well as those of the military establishment started parroting arguments in favour of the Saudi strikes, and why Pakistan’s participation was necessary for its own long-term goals.

The surprise came from Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf head Imran Khan – the otherwise considered a ‘poster boy of the establishment’ – who said in no uncertain terms that jumping in the wars that are not ours would harm Pakistan’s interests further as they have done in past. A similar statement came from the Quaid of MQM who alongside criticizing the proposal of partaking the offensive, reminded of Pakistan’s own sectarian pressures and host of internal problems that needed attention rather than poking nose in foreign battles. With no reference (thankfully) to the ‘defence’ of the holy cities, Imran Khan and Altaf Hussain made themselves conspicuous among the rest of the rusted political lot and the establishment fraught with self-serving interests rooted in Saudi Arabia.

The ‘defence of the Holy Mosques’ argument, propagated by the lobbyists of ruling elite – comprising military establishment, its surrogate politicians and the political groups who have been hostage to the antics of former two and are kowtowing them as survival tactics – is as preposterous and farfetched as possibility of a democratic system in the Kingdom. To date there has not been any statement of intent by the rebellious groups (which are not only Houthis) of Yemen to invade the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or to inflict any harm to the two Holy Mosques. Moreover, there is no apparent threat to the ‘territorial integrity’ of the Kingdom as yet, for which the PMLN, the PPP and the military establishment are having sleepless nights.

If someone was happy and satisfied with the reports about Pakistan’s possibility of joining the Saudi-led coalition forces to attack Yemen, it was Pakistan’s Deobandi, takfiri, anti-Shia militant organisations like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) and Ahl-e-SunnatWalJamaat (ASWJ). Going by the official social media accounts of ASWJ, they were praising the government and the military for taking the ‘right decision’ for saving the territorial integrity of the Holy Land as well as for ‘teaching the lesson’ to Shias who they think should be excommunicated from Muslim ummah.

The pro-establishment and pro-Saudi lobbyists have been giving a host of arguments in favour of the attack on Yemen including remittances from Pakistani laborers in Saudia whose fate depends upon how happy the Saudis are with Pakistan. References have been given of huge remittances that come from Saudia to the tune of $17 billion. One did not hear any reference to the conditions of Pakistani labor in the Kingdom that showan utter disregard of any veneer of human rights. No reference is given to Saudi princes’ disdain for Pakistan’s law that prohibits hunting of endangered species. The way they bribe Pakistan’s law enforcing set up and manipulate legal process in their favour is another story that needs separate discussion.

Despite repeated cries from rights activists about the violation of human rights and absence of labor laws or any framework that safeguards the interests of the workers, neither the otherwise too-sensitive-about-human-rights West nor the Pakistan government has ever followed up on the issue with the Saudi authorities. I still have to see official initiative from Pakistan to negotiate either the extradition of Pakistanis on death row in Saudi Arabia, or at least the due process of law for them with right to fair trial and adequate counsel. Pakistani laborers, it seems, are just a means of extracting money as remittances, for our state that is not much bothered about their rights and living conditions.
Another ridiculous argument given by Asif Ali Zardari was his party was committed to democracy and since Yemeni rebels had obstructed a democratic system, the Saudi government was probably rightly attacking them militarily. Such an intelligent thought. The democrats of PPP supporting democracy in Yemen through military strikes led by the ‘democratic’ Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Really? One expected better from PPP.

Those who were irked by a trending hash-tag on social media about renting an army might be a little relaxed now. This is not an army available for rent. It is an entire country with a highly self-centered and self-serving ruling elite that is available on cheap rent.