Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 14, 2017

Revealed - Saudis Plan To Give Up Palestine - For War On Iran

The tyrants of Saudi Arabia developed a plan that sells away Palestine. They see this as necessary to get U.S. support for their fanatic campaign against their perceived enemy Iran.

An internal Saudi memorandum, leaked to the Lebanese paper Al-Akhbar, reveals its major elements. (Note: The genuineness of the memo has not been confirmed. In theory it could be a "plant" by some other party. But Al-Akhbar has so far an excellent record of publishing genuine leaks and I trust its editors' judgement.)

According to the memo the Saudis are ready to give up on the Palestinian right of return. They forfeit Palestinian sovereignty over Jerusalem and no longer insist of the status of a full state for the Palestinians. In return they ask for a U.S.-Saudi-Israeli (military) alliance against their perceived enemy on the eastern side of the Persian Gulf.

Negotiations on the issue were held between the Saudis and the Zionist under the aegis of the United States. Netanyahu and Trump’s "shared personal assistant, wunderkind Jared Kushner", is the point men in these negotiations. He made at least three trips to Saudi Arabia this year, the last one very recently.

The Saudi operations over the last month, against the internal opposition to the Salman clan as well as against Hizbullah in Lebanon, have to be seen in the context and as preparation of the larger plan. To recap:

  • Last week the current front-man of the Palestinians, Mahmoud Abbas, was ordered to Riyadh. There he was told to accept whatever will be presented as U.S. peace plan or to resign. He was urged to cut all Palestinian ties with Iran and Hizbullah:
Since the warnings, which could threaten the new Palestinian unity agreement signed by Fatah and the Iranian-backed Hamas in the Gaza Strip, Palestinian media displayed a rare degree of unity in recent days by coming out against Iran.
  • On November 6 a letter by the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahoo to Israeli embassies was intentionally "leaked". In it Netanyahoo urges his diplomats to press for full support for the Saudi plans in Lebanon, Yemen and beyond. On the same day Trump tweeted:
Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump - 3:03 PM - 6 Nov 2017
I have great confidence in King Salman and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, they know exactly what they are doing....

(The tweet was heavily promoted by Saudi Twitter bots.)

  • The Saudi tyrant abducted the Prime Minister of Lebanon, Saad Hariri, and declared war on the country. The purpose of this move is to remove or isolate Hizbullah, the Shia resistance of Lebanon which is allied with Iran and opposes the Saudi plans for Palestine.
  • On November 11 the New York Times reported on the U.S. drafting of a "peace plan" but provided little detail. The chance for such a plan to succeed was described as low.

The left-wing Lebanese paper Al-Akhbar has obtained a copy of the plan (Arabic) in form of a memorandum by the Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir to the Saudi clown prince Mohammed Bin Salman (English machine translation):

The document, which is being unveiled for the first time, proves all that has been leaked since President Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia last May on the launch of US efforts to sign a peace treaty between Saudi Arabia and Israel. This was followed by information on the exchange of visits between Riyadh and Tel Aviv, the most important being the visit of the Saudi Crown Prince to the Zionist entity.

The document reveals the size of concessions that Riyadh intends to present in the context of the liquidation of the Palestinian issue, and its concern to get in return the elements of power against Iran and the resistance, led by Hezbollah.

The Saudi foreign ministry memo starts by laying out its strategic perspective:

To face Iran by increasing sanctions on ballistic missiles and reconsidering the nuclear deal, the Kingdom has pledged in the strategic partnership agreement with US President Donald Trump that any US-Saudi effort is the key to success.
Saudi Arabia's rapprochement with Israel involves a risk to the Muslim peoples of the Kingdom, because the Palestinian cause represents a spiritual and historical and religious heritage. The Kingdom will not take this risk unless it feels the United States' sincere approach to Iran, which is destabilizing the region by sponsoring terrorism, its sectarian policies and interfering in the affairs of others.

The Saudi paper describes the issues and process steps towards a deal in five points:

First: The Saudis demand a "parity of the relationship" between Israel and Saudi Arabia. On the military level they demand that either Israel gives up on its nuclear weapons or Saudi Arabia is itself allowed to acquire such.

Second: In exchange Saudi Arabia will use its diplomatic and economic power to push through a 'peace plan' between Israel, the Palestinians and Arab countries along the lines that the U.S. will lay out. Within such a peace plan the Saudis, according to the memo, are willing to make extraordinary concessions:

  • The city of Jerusalem would not become capital of a Palestinian state but be subjected to a special international regime administered by the United Nations.
  • The right of return for Palestinian refugees, who were violently expelled by the Zionists, would be given up on. The refugees would be integrated as citizens of those countries where they currently reside.
  • (No demand for full sovereignty of a Palestinian state is mentioned.)

Third: After reaching an agreement of the "main principles of the final solution" for Palestine between Saudi Arabia and the U.S. (Israel), a meeting of all foreign ministers of the region would be convened to back these up. Final negotiations would follow.

Fourth: In coordination and cooperation with Israel Saudi Arabia would use its economic power to convince the Arab public of the plan. The point correctly notes "At the beginning of normalizing relations with Israel, normalization will not be acceptable to public opinion in the Arab world." The plan is thus to essentially bribe the Arab public into accepting it.

Fifth: The Palestinian conflict distracts from the real issue the Saudi rulers have in the region which is Iran: "Therefore, the Saudi and Israeli sides agree on the following:

  1. Contribute to counter any activities that serve Iran's aggressive policies in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia's affinity with Israel must be matched by a sincere American approach against Iran.
  2. Increase US and international sanctions related to Iranian ballistic missiles.
  3. Increase sanctions on Iran's sponsorship of terrorism around the world.
  4. Re-examination of the group (five + 1) in the nuclear agreement with Iran to ensure the implementation of its terms literally and strictly.
  5. Limiting Iran's access to its frozen assets and exploiting Iran's deteriorating economic situation and marketing it to increase pressure on the Iranian regime from within.
  6. Intensive intelligence cooperation in the fight against organized crime and drug trafficking supported by Iran and Hezbollah."

The memo is signed by Adel al-Jubeir. (But who were the 'advisors' who dictated it to him?)

The U.S. plan for peace in Palestine is to press the Palestinians and Arabs into anything Israel demands. The Saudis will agree to that, with minor conditions, if only the U.S. and Israel help them to get rid of their nemesis Iran. But that is impossible. Neither Israel nor the U.S. will agree to a "parity of relationship" for Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia lacks all elements to become a supreme state in the Arab Middle East. Iran can not be defeated. 

Iran is the at the core of the Shia constituency and at the core of resistance to "western" imperialism. Shia and Sunni aligned populations in the Middle East (ex Egypt) are of roughly equal size. Iran has about four times the number of citizens the Saudis have. It is much older and cultured than Saudi Arabia. It has an educated population and well developed industrial capabilities. Iran is a nation, not a conglomerate of desert tribes like the desert peninsula under al-Saud. Its geographic position and resources make it unconquerable.

To defeat Iran the Saudis started proxy-wars in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and now Lebanon. They needed foot soldiers to win these wars. The Saudis hired and sent the only significant infantry they ever had at their disposal. Their hordes of al-Qaeda and ISIS fanatics were defeated. Tens of thousands of them have been killed on the battle fields in Iraq, Syria and Yemen. Despite a global mobilization campaign nearly all the potentially available forces have been defeated by the local resistances on the ground. Neither the colonial settler state nor the U.S. are willing to send their soldiers into battle for Saudi supremacy.

The grant plan of the Trump administration to achieve peace in the Middle East is high on hopes but lacks all the necessary details. The Saudi's promise to support the U.S. plan if the Trump administration is willing to fight their nemesis Iran. Both leaderships are hapless and impulsive and both of their plans have little chance of final success. They will be pursued anyway and will continue to create an enormous amount of collateral damage. The Zionist entity feels no real pressure to make peace. It is already dragging its feet on these plans and will try to use them to its sole advantage.

Posted by b on November 14, 2017 at 10:42 UTC | Permalink

« previous page

add to 100
You get a short summary of the conflict here.

Zanu-PF is divided through the middle with two factions namely G40 believed to be led by the First Lady Grace Mugabe and Lacoste which is loyal to Vice President Mnangagwa fighting to take over power from the ageing President. G40 has few members who participated in the liberation struggle.

General Chiwenga was recently accused by the First Lady of supporting Mnangagwa in the succession politics. Mugabe himself warned the Army last month to stop dabbling in politics and said such action was tantamount to a coup. He also announced that he was going to retire top Army generals before the end of this year and generals had tended to observe Mugabe's warning since then.

"Many lives were lost during the liberation struggle and that should give us more resolve on where we are coming from and where we are going as a country. We are facing many challenges as a people but we should not lose focus. The blood lost should not be in vain. We should continue to jealously guard our country and its sovereignty. We will never allow it to go into the hands of puppets or the whites," declared Chiwenga.

Former United States congressman Mel Reynolds who is a two time convicted felon on Monday claimed that his sources in the Central Intelligence Organisation (CIO) advised him that President Robert Mugabe is threatening to arrest General Constantino Chiwenga.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 15 2017 7:15 utc | 101


According to German media? At the moment, it is difficult to believe hegemon media unless there is a non hegemon cross reference

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 15 2017 7:16 utc | 102

add to 101

The case of Mel Reynolds is interesting in this, of course.

102 Look, all this blog does is take media sources and compare/check for bias.

There is a conscious right wing campaign against "main stream media" to spread own lies and make people uninformed and helpless.

Truth is people have to pay for good independent journalists to go to places and do the research or they will get "journalist activists".

Posted by: somebody | Nov 15 2017 7:26 utc | 103

NYT's Ben Hubbard, who earlier wrote sycophant pieces on MbS, was told to change his tone. He was given a co-author and the last graph of this "portrait" includes a coup warning:

The Upstart Saudi Prince Who’s Throwing Caution to the Winds

The State Department official, though, said that its diplomats, the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency all felt “growing alarm” that Prince Mohammed “is behaving recklessly without sufficient consideration to the likely consequences of his behavior, and that has the potential to damage U.S. interests.”

Still Hubbard insists that Hariri "fled to Saudi Arabia" because of Iranian threats. That's laughable, It contradicts several other reports. But I guess it helps to pay the bills ...

"Damaging U.S. interest" is the one sin that will get you in trouble with the U.S. overlords ... The White House is not yet on board but over time the military junta will convince Trump to agree to MbS's removal.

Posted by: b | Nov 15 2017 8:04 utc | 104

@104 -- "...agree to MbS's removal"
Paradise (and some 72 horny virgins): just one helicopter ride away.

Posted by: x | Nov 15 2017 8:42 utc | 105

b, MBS will not chop off the heads of the "corrupt" officials as that is his insurance. If anything happenes to him, the money will again start flowing to Trump opponents.
Trump just pulled off a very smart play, but MBS also has his bases covered. The game is getting very interesting.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 15 2017 8:47 utc | 106

Pardon my dreaming, but considering Syria will never get back the Golan, wouldnt it be prude of Assad to offer the Palistinians that land, and if Isreal agreed, they could take Palistine in exchange for the Golan, with possible slight adjustments, like guaranteed access to the coast...That would sort this whole mess out, and its not like anybody is using the Golan, its just a glorified buffer.

Posted by: Dan | Nov 15 2017 8:53 utc | 107

Posted by: b | Nov 15, 2017 3:04:11 AM | 104

Trump won't have to agree, Saudi will do it themselves, with or without CIA consent.

The guy to watch is the Saudi King, he might have delegated power to the prince but he still owns it.

If he concludes the prince endangers the monarchy he is the one to replace him.

If he concludes the US tried to take over the kingdom via the prince he will select someone less close to the US.

It was the king who went to Russia.

He has several sons to choose from. The Wikipedia article I link to has a nice photograph from his youth - what he looked like before the West discovered Wahhabism as the best weapon against communism.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 15 2017 8:57 utc | 108

BTW, since Mugabe draws all his support from veterans, he is powerless without the support of the military. He is their man. They have been mutually loyal since the revolution, in fact it was the veterans that hoofed the whites out, santioned by Mugabe. This seems to me to be infighting over Graces power grab, sponsered by the usual suspects...

Posted by: Dan | Nov 15 2017 9:00 utc | 109

Posted by: Dan | Nov 15, 2017 3:53:52 AM | 107

The Golan is owned by the Druze - both sides of the Golan.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 15 2017 9:12 utc | 110


Golan, and there is only one "side" of Golan, and that belongs to the syrian state, no one else.

Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 15 2017 9:20 utc | 111

Posted by: somebody | Nov 15, 2017 2:15:14 AM | 101

I'm well aware of all of this but left it out because zimbabwe is so off topic in this thread. I just wanted to make the point that there are bigger more crucial situations developing parallel to the annual "Iran is a goner" rumblings. As I said if you had bothered to read what I posted rather than go off half cocked, the military interference may be above board but there is simply no way of telling from here. The mere fact that western media including the german neolib shitrags appear to be defending the military interference doesn't bode well.
It may be the army has the best intentions but even that means sfa if usuk who have undoubtedly been preparing for this for a long time, have one or more well placed saboteurs/greedy megalomaniacs set to drive a wedge and take over.

Who can forget the way that those greed soaked wannabe capitalists destroyed socialism in PRC within hours of Mao karking it?

Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 15 2017 9:54 utc | 112

Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 15, 2017 4:20:39 AM | 111

A "state" would represent the people on the ground, no?

Posted by: somebody | Nov 15 2017 10:40 utc | 113

112 Sure, but nobody "Western" probably knows on what traditional principles Zimbabwe is run. Or able to judge if it is a good thing or not. Which you did.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 15 2017 10:42 utc | 114

Great insights from Meyssan on recent developments President Macron snubbed by Saudi Arabia

Having hastily organised a detour via Saudi Arabia in order to repatriate the Lebanese Prime Minister, who is being held prisoner with his family there, President Emmanuel Macron had to swallow an unprecedented public affront. Although the French and Western Press did everything they could to camouflage the events, Arab public opinion could not help but note the staggering loss of French prestige and influence in the Middle East.

President Macron (here with « MBS ») is not the only one responsible for the humiliation he suffered at the hands of the King of Saudi Arabia. He is paying for the crimes of his predecessors as much as his own incapacity to determine a new policy for the Middle East.

The resignation of the Sunni Prime Minister of Lebanon and his televised anti-Persian speech did not provoke the expected conflict in his country. Worse, his perennial adversary, Chiite Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, general secretary of Hezbollah, offered himself the luxury of speaking in Hariri’s defence, revealing that he was being held prisoner in Riyadh, and denouncing Saudi interference in Lebanese political affairs. Within a few hours, Hariri’s religious community began to worry for their leader. The President of the Republic, Christian Michel Aoun, spoke of « kidnapping » and refused to recognise this forced resignation unless his Prime Minister came to present it to him in person. Although certain leaders of the Future Movement, Mr. Hariri’s party, assured that he was free and in good health, the Lebanese people as a whole stood together to demand his release. They all understood that Saad Hariri’s brief journey to the Emirates and his few public appearances were no more than a sideshow, while his family was being held hostage at the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Riyadh with hundreds more imprisoned personalities. At the same time, they realised that by temporarily refusing his Prime Minister’s resignation, Michel Aoun had acted as a Statesman, and had retained the only means of pressure which might eventually obtain his liberation.

France is the ex-colonial power in Lebanon, which she occupied, and basically ruled the roost, until the Second World War. Today, France uses Lebanon both as an antenna in the Levant and as a fiscal paradise. Lebanese personalities have been mixed up in every French politico-financial scandal of the last thirty years.

President Emmanuel Macron, acting as the protector of Lebanon, evoked the necessity of the return of the Prime Minister to his own country.

By chance, Macron’s agenda had slated him for a journey to Abu Dhabi on 9 November in order to inaugurate the Louvre, so he could not avoid taking the initiative. But it so happens that, following in the footsteps of « Jacques Chirac the Arab », « Nicolas Sarkozy the Qatari » and « François Hollande the Saudi », President Macron had not missed the opportunity, during his electoral campaign, to express all the bad things he had to say about Doha and Riyadh. Although he has displayed no particular sympathy for the Gulf, he was nonetheless close to the Emiratis by default.

The Elysée palace attempted to organise a stop-over by Emmanuel Macron in Riyadh to repatriate Saad Hariri. But King Salmane refused to receive the little Frenchman...

The Russian value the author highly What Russian TV is saying about Thierry Meyssan’s book

Posted by: PeacefulProsperity | Nov 15 2017 10:48 utc | 115

Very interesting: Medvedev shared his impressions of communication with Trump

..."I met for the first time at such an event with the current president of the United States. <...> Donald Trump was sitting next to me," he told reporters...

The Prime Minister called the American leader an open and benevolent person, with whom one can talk on various topics. He noted that they discussed the history of bilateral relations of states and talked about the Second World War...

Another topic related to Meyssan's revelations from few months back:

In Paris, a search was conducted at the headquarters of Lafarge

In Paris, a search was conducted at the headquarters of the Lafarge group after some representatives of its leadership confessed to financing terrorist groups, including the DPAA, in Syria.

Investigators search the offices of the group's management, published a statement by the press service of Lafarge agency Agence France Presse, adding that they can not comment on this investigation, which began in June 2017.

Posted by: PeacefulProsperity | Nov 15 2017 11:24 utc | 116


The authority is with the state. Not which ethnic group happen to live there are the moment.

Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 15 2017 12:15 utc | 117

@94, @73, @88, LNGMan, Joe, Grieved

Some good background on Qatar gas (LNG vs pipeline), and indications of costs of other Arab gas development.

I agree that LNG is the Trump foreign policy driver. He indicated this was really the Mission. Massive supplies from the US will eventually be used (several years of facility development and ship building) to dominate a subservient vassalage in EU.

Of course, that means "controlling" Qatar-Iran and containing and shrinking Russia as competitors.

This Trump "Business Plan" as foreign policy thus necessitates and invigorates the need for "war" in all forms against the competitors.

Don't forget that Israel has a huge Leviathan field that needs developing and a big market.
How that fits into the target market of EU is not indicated.
But, assuredly, destroying Qatar-Iran will be in Tel Aviv's business plan.

Posted by: Red Ryder | Nov 15 2017 13:07 utc | 118

Juicy details in Fisk's article

Posted by: Mina | Nov 15 2017 13:13 utc | 119


I thought explosives contain their oxydants? Why would they need oxygen
to explode? These high up flares look like electric discharges more akin
to nukes behavior.

Posted by: CarlD | Nov 15 2017 13:45 utc | 120

French MoD is expected in Riyadh and both French and Egypt govs have made declarations to condemn Iran's interference in Arab affairs. A lot is boiling because of the necessity to restart talks between Syria and rebels...
At the same time, Aoun, who knows the (poor) value of French friendship towards the Levant Christians throws the gantlet
But it's not only MPs who are having a hard time in the Arab world. Making a joke about the Nile can cause you trouble (especially if you belong to the subspecie, i.e. women).

Posted by: Mina | Nov 15 2017 13:50 utc | 121


I concur wholly with the idea that provoking war between SA and Iran fits
the commercial interests of the US of A. It will make shale gas more
sellable as the other supplies will dwindle.

It will also provoke greater oil trade between Russia and China because
the latest needs to replace the oil that would issue from the Gulf. So in
that sense, it plays into the interests of Russia both in terms of quantity
and price.

The countries with more to loose are SA and Iran

Israel will laugh all the way to the bank and will probably pocket the whole
of Palestine, the Golan and at least a good chunk of Lebanon.

Posted by: CarlD | Nov 15 2017 13:59 utc | 122

I like this

Posted by: PeacefulProsperity | Nov 15 2017 14:01 utc | 123

Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 15, 2017 7:15:15 AM | 117

If you live in a monarchy, yes. If you live in a post US/French revolution state, no.

The definition of a monarchy is that it is hereditary, I suppose?

Posted by: somebody | Nov 15 2017 14:57 utc | 124

KSA and other ‘Arab’ states have never defended / accepted Palestinians in any serious way.

They made up pious sob stories for their poor public with speechy BS support and sat on their hands for cash (> other..) and gleefully betrayed their ‘muslim - arab’ (shorthand) brothers and sisters.

Even wiki, super atlantacist and zionist controlled, heh! writes:

“ … Saudi Arabia. An estimated 240,000 Palestinians are living in Saudi Arabia. They are not allowed to hold or even apply for Saudi citizenship, because of Arab League instructions barring the Arab states from granting them citizenship; the only other alternative for them is to marry a Saudi national. Palestinians are the sole foreign group that cannot benefit from a 2004 law passed by Saudi Arabia's Council of Ministers, which entitles expatriates of all nationalities who have resided in the kingdom for ten years to apply for citizenship. (…)

(…) The Arab League has instructed its members to deny citizenship to original Palestine Arab refugees (or their descendants) to avoid dissolution of their identity and protect their right to return to their homeland…”

Neat excuse, heh? As nothing was ever done to negotiate for, promulgate, support, etc. "Palestine" and the right of return, giving it up or trading it in (from KSA now as in b's post) is meaningless.

Posted by: Noirette | Nov 15 2017 15:12 utc | 125

james@78 and Debsisdead@81

Thank you both for the reply. I suspect it may have been the url I trying to link to since the message w/o the url link went through.

Posted by: Tacitus | Nov 15 2017 15:19 utc | 126

In the midst of the ongoing turmoil, Assad gave an important speech at the Arab Forum for Confronting the Zionist-US Reactionary Alliance and Supporting the Resistance of the Palestinian People in Damascus on the essential importance of Pan-Arabism during the 21st Century. Adam Garrie does a good job of distilling Assad's key points from the provided speech transcript. IMO, it was given to provide an essential rebuttal to the Saudi's announcement of their abandonment of the Palestinian Cause, whereas that Cause is an essential component of Pan-Arabism--which is to accuse the Saudis of working to further the Outlaw US Empire's Imperialism and the Zionist occupation: That Saudi Arabia can no longer be considered an Arab nation.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 15 2017 16:34 utc | 127


Perhaps you consider some regions of Germany belonging not to Germany anymore but to Arabs just because there are arab people living there? Ethnic groups dont "own" regions.

Denying that Golan belongs to Syria is one of the tactics Israel use. Perhaps you deny Israel occupy Golan too?

Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 15 2017 16:51 utc | 128

Of importance yet OT, Pepe Escobar mixes a recap of the Iraqi situation with an interview with Iraq's PMU deputy commander, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, which is very informative. You'll discover the idea of Pan-Arabism transcends Syria.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 15 2017 17:01 utc | 129

"@Just sayin, perhaps you could spell it out for me then, but if all you got is name calling maybe you should stfu, kindly that is

Posted by: Joe | Nov 14, 2017 7:38:35 PM | 83"

I've a much better idea: Considering I have been over this several times already with numerous different "It's the pipeline, stoopid!" eejits, and am frankly tired of this nonsense, I reckon the burden of proof should be on those making the claim. That's YOU in this instance. (just in case you were wondering).

Why don't you name the pipeline you are referring to, and then bring me evidence of contemporaneous news-reports, wherein they report on the signing of contracts for these alleged pipelines, and any timetable for commencement announced.

You are the one making the claim, so: provide the evidence.

Posted by: Just Sayin' | Nov 15 2017 17:30 utc | 130

"@Just sayin, perhaps you could spell it out for me then, but if all you got is name calling maybe you should stfu, kindly that is

Posted by: Joe | Nov 14, 2017 7:38:35 PM | 83"

I've a much better idea: Considering I have been over this several times already with numerous different "It's the pipeline, stoopid!" eejits, and am frankly tired of this nonsense, I reckon the burden of proof should be on those making the claim. That's YOU in this instance. (just in case you were wondering).

Why don't you name the pipeline you are referring to, and then bring me evidence of contemporaneous news-reports, wherein they report on the signing of contracts for these alleged pipelines, and any timetable for commencement announced.

You are the one making the claim, so: provide the evidence.

Posted by: Just Sayin' | Nov 15 2017 17:30 utc | 131

@127 karlof1

Yes, that's a milestone speech by Assad, and reverently treated by Garrie, with useful background. I agree it counterweights all current propaganda and perhaps too it takes the wind out of the sails of the upcoming extraordinary meeting of the Arab League, if that's still on.

You're offering a totally compelling phrase, "That Saudi Arabia can no longer be considered an Arab nation". This would be an excellent equation to arise at this time, with Assad's clear reminder that Arabism means the Palestinian cause and rejection of colonial occupation, and there can be no compromise with this principle of throwing off colonialism and still be Arabist.

I look forward to seeing more of this concept at work among the ME nations.

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 15 2017 17:54 utc | 132

@karlof1 129

Excellent article.

"Baghdad has been able, almost simultaneously, to pull off two major game-changers; a military victory in Mosul and a political victory in Kirkuk. If Iraq stabilizes, erasing the Daesh death cult, so will Syria. As al-Jebouri notes, “now every community must have a cut of the cake.” At least 7 million jobs and pensions are paid by Baghdad. People want the return of regularly paid salaries."

""It’s a sort of state-building mechanism springing out of a resistance ethic. As if the ominous Daesh threat, which may have led to as many as 3.1 million IDPs, shook up the collective Iraqi subconscious, awakened the Iraqi Shi’ite proletariat/disenfranchised masses, and accelerated cultural decolonization. And this complex development couldn’t be further from religious bigotry."


Stephen Gowans has a new book out ‘Washington’s Long War on Syria’ which is recommended by Eva Bartlett.

“”If there were any references in Western media to the Assad government’s commitment to the Ba’ath Arab Socialist Party’s values of freedom from foreign domination, state direction, planning and control of the economy, and working toward the unity of the Arab nation, I’m not aware of them.””

“”The thesis of this book is that Wall Street’s war on Syria was motivated by the same aim: the de-Ba’athification of Syria and the elimination of secular Arab nationalist influence from the Syrian state, as a means of expunging the Arab nationalist threat to U.S. hegemony.””

Posted by: financial matters | Nov 15 2017 18:36 utc | 133

Just Sayin’ @ 131:

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wrote a concise article on the Syrian war as competing pipeline plans:

The Armed Forces Journal has always known that pipelines were at the root of the "Syria problem."

Although, control of Syrian hydrocarbons in general has been on the AAZ Empire’s “to-do list” for decades:

CIA documents show they'd planned this out since the mid-1980s (following the failed 1980-1982 collaboration between CIA/MI6 and the Muslim Brotherhood).

CIA coup attempt planned in 1949, activated 1957, but failed:

Posted by: Daniel | Nov 15 2017 18:51 utc | 134

@127 karlof1.. thanks for the link on assads speech on what it means to be an arabist...

Posted by: james | Nov 15 2017 19:01 utc | 135

Kingdom of Saudi are descend of Jewish tribal.
They have nothing with islam and they play a theater

Posted by: Ray | Nov 15 2017 19:05 utc | 136

French media announcing that Hariri is coming to France soon. In exile probably. I would suggest he owes his scalp to Aoun.

Posted by: Mina | Nov 15 2017 20:37 utc | 137

Posted by: Daniel | Nov 15, 2017 1:51:56 PM | 134

None of what you posted is anything like what I asked for.

I made 2 simple and uncomplicated requests: I asked that someone

  • a) name the alleged pipeline being referring to, and
  • b) bring me evidence of contemporaneous news-reports of [the alleged events]

What you presented was a load of waffle, (ridiculously veering off to 1957 at one point) spouted by bobble-heads like some US Military Major (seriously? LOL) and some minor Kennedy.

Luckily, your US Major *(lol) friend provided the clue: it was obviously a reference to the imaginary Qatari-Saudi alleged "joint"-pipeline. Couldn't be any other pipeline, it's always that one you "Pipelines" people never stop bullshitting about.

    "In 2009, Qatar proposed to run a natural gas pipeline through Syria and Turkey to Europe." says your US Military Major (lol) friend

So where are the contemporaneous news-reports, of this alleged proposal and alleged rejection by Assad?

You, and everyone else spouting this pipeline story , curiously never seem to have any examples of contemporaneous news-reports, of this alleged proposal.

Nor any contemporaneous news-reports, of "The Dicktater" Assad's alleged rejection of this alleged Qatari proposal.

Please supply contemporaneous news-reports of the alleged 2009 Qatari proposal and alleged rejection by Assad,


do the world a favour by not regurgitating further, this utter horse crap ,

Thanks in advance.

Posted by: Just Sayin' | Nov 15 2017 20:38 utc | 138

I refer you to a comment left here months back, . . . .
"Actually, where your "Syria War = pipeline war" theory is concerned, Gareth Porter [refuted it a long time ago]

Porter writes:

”That claim has no credibility for a very simple reason: there was no Qatari proposal for Syria to reject in 2009. It was not until October 2009 that Qatar and Turkey even agreed to form a working group to develop such a gas pipeline project.

He showed that Syria didn't block any pipelines from Qatar because no pipeline from Qatar would have made it across Saudi Territory, and for those like Oui who appear ignorant of even the most basic knowledge of Middle East geography: any pipeline heading Syria-ward from Qatar would first have to cross Saudi territory.

Porter writes:

And Middle East geopolitical analyst Felix Imonti reported at in 2012 that Qatar had been forced to abandon the pipeline idea in 2010 because Saudi Arabia had not agreed to have it built across its territory.

Simple to understand, easy to check fact there.

Porter then wonders from where this ridiculous notion of Syria rejecting a Qatari pipeline originated:

Kennedy’s article asserts, “In 2009, according to WikiLeaks, soon after Bashar Assad rejected the Qatar pipeline, the CIA began funding opposition groups in Syria.”

But the article links to a Washington Post news report on the WikiLeaks cables on Syria that doesn’t support that charge at all

Again, a simple to understand, easy to check fact there.

The axiom was whether pipelines play a role in the warfare of the Near East, etc

No it wasn't - you personally made a clear claim that the Syria War was because of Assad's refusal to accommodate a Qatari pipeline - (pls don't try and pretend you didn't, because that would just be dishonest) - and Porter does a pretty convincing job of demonstrating the falsity of that claim.

Theory-wise, the pipeline nonsense all seems a little convoluted to me, tbh.

Doesn't have much in the way of explanatory-capacity once you realise that the Saudis NEVER agreed to any pipeline crossing their territory.

Posted by: Just Sayin' | Nov 15 2017 20:50 utc | 139

@120 CarlD

Yes, CHNO explosives do contain oxygen but almost never do they come with a fully balanced oxygen supply.
Examples for negative oxygen balance: TNT -74%, PETN -10%, RDX -21%, HMX -21%
Additionally military compositions come with stabilizers, phlegmatizers, plasticizers and , quite often, metallic fuel to burn. Most stabilizers, phlegmatizers and plasticizers, though, feed on oxygen supplied by the energetic compound and, thus, further lower the oxygen balance of the composition.
These flares are not electrical discharges, rather, they stem from secondary explosions of munitions thrown into the air by the primary event.
Most people mistakenly believe that the 'lightnig channels' frequently observed in early nuclear tests originate from electrical discharges. As far as I know, this is wrong. Back in the day they used smoke trails of sounding rockets in pre-defined distances to point 0 to measure shockwave propagation.

Posted by: Hmpf | Nov 15 2017 20:52 utc | 140

Grieved @132, financial matters @133--

Please note how Pan-Arabism and Ba'ath Party ideology mesh together. It's the inherent socialism within both and Islam that caused "Arab Nationalism" to be added to the Outlaw US Empire's Anti-Communist Crusade, which continues today renamed as the War OF Terror. Ponder for a moment the shared qualities of the Libyan, Syrian, and Iraqi polities--all were socialistic to some degree and enjoyed a modicum of independence from the international financial system--then recall the actual reasons for ousting Gadhafi and pillaging the Libyan nation.

Yes, the #1 Arab Cause is Palestinian Justice; but the #1 promoter of that cause are the Persians, not the Saudi Wahhabbiyas--they are no longer Arabs, but Wahhabbiyas, since they now promote the goal of Zionism: the other radical, illegitimate, belief system within the region.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 15 2017 21:22 utc | 141

@22 I was also wondering if there was any chance of meaningful rebellion from within Saudi Arabia from Shia, Lebanese, perhaps other minorities. Nobody seems to bring up the idea that the Saudi Government could possibly be toppled during a war with Hezbollah / Iran. At all possible?

Posted by: Jason | Nov 15 2017 21:59 utc | 142

At all possible?

Posted by: Jason | Nov 15, 2017 4:59:53 PM | 142


Posted by: Just Sayin' | Nov 15 2017 22:08 utc | 143

"Baghdad has been able, almost simultaneously, to pull off two major game-changers; a military victory in Mosul and a political victory in Kirkuk. If Iraq stabilizes, erasing the Daesh death cult, so will Syria. "
I rather liked that quote from 133. It's very true. By a sudden coup, no doubt an agreement with the Talebani faction in Sulaimaniyya, the situation in Iraq has been completely turned around. Yesterday Masdar reported an agreement for KRG to withdraw its declaration of independence. Is the Talebani faction now in power? We haven't heard that. Otherwise, Baghdad has won its interests. Doesn't look good for the US in Iraq.

I wouldn't take too seriously an effect upon Syria, which is a different country, with different interests.

Posted by: Laguerre | Nov 15 2017 22:56 utc | 144

Just Sayin' (a perfect screen name for you, I might add).

Did you read RFK Jr's article?

I added the Armed Forces Journal article to note - as I WROTE - that pipelines have been an issue regarding AAZ and Syria for a LONG time. Similarly, I provided CIA documents showing their plans to "regime change" Syria going back decades. I guess historical perspective is unnecessary for certain ideologies.

The two competing pipeline issues are both for the North Pars natural gas field lying between Qatar and Iran. As Porter notes, Saudi Arabia never OK'd a pipeline through their country. This is because - besides some passage fee - it would be of no benefit to KSA, and would actually compete with them and their overall energy goals.

Hence, Qatar has been sidling up to Iran. No doubt, that's a big part of the alleged "feud" between Qatar and KSA. Do you doubt that KSA would LOVE to take over that gas field, and shut out Iran?

It is the pipeline from that gas field, through Iran that would go into Syria. Qatar and Iran both want it badly. Russia probably does not, because that would compete with their natural gas sales to Europe. Hence, Syria has never OKd a pipeline either.

See? The world does make sense if you open your eyes. Now, the pipeline is hardly the only, or I would say even the primary reason for our "regime change' operation in Syria. But pretending that pipelines are not an issue is just plain bizarre.

Posted by: Daniel | Nov 16 2017 0:16 utc | 145

Jason @142. KSA is in the midst of brutally crushing a Shia resistance right this minute. Their BFFs in Bahrain have been running a brutal repression of Shia there for over a decade. So yeah. There are sizable numbers of dissenters who'd love to "liberate"all that royal wealth and power.

Posted by: Daniel | Nov 16 2017 0:22 utc | 146

Just Sayin' just said:

"I refer you to a comment left here months back, . . . ."

Wait. Who the hell are you "just saying'" to? You seem to be more confused than I thought you were.

Posted by: Daniel | Nov 16 2017 0:25 utc | 147

@141 karlof1 Agreed but I would propose Iranians and not Persians, a demoted colonialist appellation..

Posted by: Lozion | Nov 16 2017 6:32 utc | 148

Latest news are that Hariri is coming to Paris without family and on his way to Lebanon.
Will he get cash and a few French passports?

Posted by: Mina | Nov 16 2017 8:34 utc | 149

A Rare Sight: Christian Priest Visiting Saudi Arabia Openly Wears a Cross

Posted by: PeacefulProsperity | Nov 16 2017 10:42 utc | 150

Re: Posted by: Just Sayin' | Nov 15, 2017 3:50:31 PM | 139

You are quite right, the Syrian War has nothing to do with any pipelines.

Remember the fundamental truth of war - "All Wars are Banksters Wars".

It is the Western Banksters who fomented and have fueled the Syrian War in its entirety.

Same as it ever was.

Posted by: Julian | Nov 16 2017 12:16 utc | 151

Looks like a small predicament here ... who's blinking first?

"Israel will stop at nothing to contain Iran, even if it has to act alone, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said. . . . .

Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday that both the Iranian and Russian military presence in Syria was “legitimate… at the invitation of the lawful government.”

Posted by: x | Nov 16 2017 13:53 utc | 152

@ 22

I'm not so sure. I think we're so used to the power of the neo-cons in the Post-911 era and the rise of Likud and their relentless propaganda campaign to portray everything as a fait accompli. Israel will either make peace with it's neighbours and that requires at least the recognition and creation of a Palestinian state (Pushing the Palestinians into Jordan and Syria will one day mean powerful political influence of their descendants in those countries.) or renouncing the Jewish character of the state (1 state solution). Otherwise Israel will be destroyed or decay when the day comes that the lobby fades from influence in Washington. (And again, that time comes closer every day, they haven't made any friends from their good behaviour, when the dam breaks like with sexual assault in Hollywood, the pitchforks will be out for them, they treated everyone with disrespect all the time.)

Posted by: Altai | Nov 16 2017 14:11 utc | 153


I agree with your comments on the language of the agreement.

As for accusations of Hezbollah engaging in drug dealing, I have seen that before, and while I am mostly positive toward Hezbollah, I do wonder if it might be true. Underground organizations of this sort obviously frequently engage in such activities. (That would includes groups the Saudis have supported.)

For example, this Russian analyst makes the claim that Hezbollah is involved in some drug trafficking:

One is to eliminate the regime of Assad. And with that eliminate the "fabulous" organization Hezbollah. We don't regard Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. It's a Lebanese Shi'ite organization, which is truly global. For example: one of the key centers of the Hezbollah is the region of Iguazu Falls. Anyone know where Iguazu Falls is? In South America. It's the border area of Paraguay, Uruguay and Brazil. There is a huge number of tourists there. Al-Qaida, Hezbollah and Hamas have made themselves a little nest there. But the main thing is that the Lebanese diaspora is there. When we hear "diaspora" we think of the Jewish diaspora, the Armenian diaspora. But the Lebanese diaspora is no less sizable, it's just quieter. They don't make a lot of noise. 100 years ago the Lebanese began to establish themselves in Africa, South America. They moved into the part of Africa where diamonds are mined: Sierra Leone, Liberia, and a few in Angola. In this border area, where the Lebanese diaspora is, along with Hezbollah and other organizations, they buy cocaine and transfer it on submarines to Western Africa. Previously they used submarines sold by Ukrainians. Now those submarines are out of commission and others are used. The cocaine is transferred to Sierra Leone, where it is exchanged for diamonds. With the diamonds they purchase arms. This triangle - Hezbollah, Syria, Iran - gets in the way of the Americans. They take the view, correctly, that eliminating Syria as an Arab partner of Iran, whether relations with Iran are good or bad, Iran will be weaker, and it will be easier to get an agreement with them. The removal of the Assad regime therefore became objective No.1 for the Americans. Likewise for Saudi Arabia and Israel.

I have no idea how accurate these claims are.

Posted by: RudyM | Nov 16 2017 20:54 utc | 154

Handing round a collection box after prayers is simple and effective form of money laundering. No priest asks for a slip attached to the money to trace where it came from.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 16 2017 21:46 utc | 155

Palestinians are the lowest of the low, they are non-people.

It might be interesting to list what different 'ME' countries have done to help, provide material aid, accept as 'refugees', integrate, fight for, champion, embrace, Palestinians as ppl, or their cause at some higher level(s).

Heh, overall, between nothing at all and worse, far worse, imho.

World ... Counter-examples? Analysis? Remarks? Anyone? Have you taken up the Pal. cause, or sheltered / aided / a Pal. person or family? Or politicked for them? I guess I'll have to wait.

I find it amazing that Westerners (5 eyes specially) simply assume there is 'sympathy for the Palestinian cause' and that there is 'somewhere' some support for them in other countries, which is not so.

Being the target of USA_Isr means death, slow or violent, extermination. Other countries and forces, associations, may make stumbling hesitant noises but will never go beyond the words and banners, as they risk their lives.

Imagine if Macron suddenly came out and said he loved the Palestinians, was for local communities such as these, was in general for self-determination. Ranted against colonial ownership of territory. Condemned Isr. brutality, oppression, killing, torture; vociferated against the totally inadmissible apartheid on 'race/religion' criteria, and stated he would be on the side of all oppressed Pals. who would be welcome in France.

He might as well go on the internet to pick out a cheap white coffin and a black Vuitton mantilla veil for his wife.

Posted by: Noirette | Nov 18 2017 16:43 utc | 156

From The Saker:
"Of course, the very notion that the Saudis could give up Palestine implies two outright outlandish notions: first, that the KSA has not already sold out the Palestinians many times over and, second, that the Saudis could somehow “deliver” Palestine to the Zionist Entity."

Posted by: Bob Beal | Nov 20 2017 12:12 utc | 157

Bob Real - Yeah well the Saker is right on for once.

Posted by: Noirette | Nov 20 2017 16:10 utc | 158

Posted by: Daniel | Nov 15, 2017 7:16:29 PM | 145

Oh lordy, the retardation is strong in this one.

there never was a viable pipeline plan in the first place, since the Saudis killed it way back in 2010. The more astute observers here will note that 2010 was before the war started in Syria. Remember?

That is the war you idiots are claiming was started in order to build this pipeline - the one that was dead as a viable project back in 2010.

So you are maintaining that a dead pipeline plan, which was dead in 2010, between two nations who could not agree on said pipeline, is the reason the Syrian war, which started a year later in 2011, was started??


What you are peddling is a false theory of the Syrian war which requires either a time-warp or a time-machine in order to make some sort of logical sense, however meagre.

"Hilariously stupid" is about the nicest thing one could say about it.

Your complete inability to provide any actual evidence of any actual Qatar-Saudi-Syria pipeline proposal and rejection says everything that needs to be said.

You, and all the other retards spouting this pipeline story , curiously never seem to have any examples of contemporaneous news-reports, of this alleged proposal, nor any contemporaneous news-reports, of "The Dicktater" Assad's alleged rejection of this alleged Qatari proposal.

Seems a very strange proposition indeed that Mr Porter should be able to report that the Saudis couldn't agree on the simple matter of a Qatari pipleine crossing Saudi territory, but yet you "pipeline" idiots still insist that though they could not see eye-to-eye on the pipeline, the Saudis somehow decided to agree with Qatar on the much more complicated arrangement of supplying an army of proxies to achieve murder,mayhem and Syrian regime change which, according to the theory being espoused above, to facilitate this Qatari-Saudi pipeline which we know from Porter's reporting, the Saudis already said they weren't going to facilitate.

Its somewhat astounding that so many idiots like yourself can continue spouting such obvious bullshit for so long, and when challenged to provide some evidence that any of the alleged proposal and rejections events ever actually happened, all the idiots do is link to other equally idiotic people who also provide no evidence whatsoever that any of these events ever happened at all.

Simply chanting "historical perspective " over and over again do nothing to disguise you complete lack of evidence and just makes you look even more stupid than I previously thought you were.

Unless you are able to provide contemporaneous news-reports of these alleged events please do the world a favour and stop spreading such obvious horseshit.

Thanks in advance.

Posted by: Just Sayin' | Nov 20 2017 21:28 utc | 159

From Porters article - which you clearly never even bothered to read:

    " Middle East geopolitical analyst Felix Imonti reported at in 2012 that Qatar had been forced to abandon the pipeline idea in 2010 because Saudi Arabia had not agreed to have it built across its territory

Posted by: Just Sayin' | Nov 20 2017 21:38 utc | 160

Pepe Escobar, the idiot who invented this "pipelinistan" bullshit, between 2009/2010 when these events were alleged to have taken place, wrote the sum total of ZERO news reports reporting on the alleged Qatar-Saudi pipeline "proposal or the alleged (i.e.: imaginary) Syrian "rejection".

If the idiot who who invented the phrase "pipelinistan" didn't even bother write about these imaginary Qatar-Saudi-Syria "pipelinistan" events, at the time they were alleged or imagined to have occurred, I think it's a safe bet that they are indeed imaginary events peddled by idiots and liars in service to the US War machine

Posted by: Just Sayin' | Nov 20 2017 21:55 utc | 161

Comment posted at this website on Aug 7, 2017:

This 'Pipelineistan' [Bullshit?] conspiracy:
The war in Syria has never been about gas
Paul Cochrane
Wednesday 10 May 2017 10:57 UTC

The pipeline hypotheses do not stand up to the realities of how energy is transported through the Middle East in the 21st century

3. No Qatari offer to Damascus

The pipeline narrative, from 2013 onwards, also makes much mention of Damascus rebuffing an alleged Qatari offer in 2009 to build a pipeline. This part of the story hinges around statements by unnamed diplomats in a 2013 Agence France-Presse article about a meeting between Russia's President Vladimir Putin and Saudi Arabia's Bandar bin Sultan.

Qatar's then-Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani (R) and First Lady Sheikha Mozah bint Nasser al-Misned (L) welcome Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his wife Asma at Doha airport in January 2010 (AFP)

The report says: "In 2009, Assad refused to sign an agreement with Qatar for an overland pipeline running from the Gulf to Europe via Syria to protect the interests of its Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas."

But Dargin says:

    "There are no credible sources that show that Qatar even approached Syria in 2009 and was rebuffed in the process. I am not saying it definitely did not occur, rather there is no evidence supporting this claim."

Syrian experts also support Dargin's rebuttal, highlighting the burgeoning economic and political ties between Doha and Damascus.

    'An important aspect that we don't talk about is the Syrian government never said the Qataris were fighting for a pipeline' - Jihad Yazigi, Syria Report

Yassin-Kassab says: "The absurdity is that relations between the Assad regime and the Qataris were excellent until summer 2011. Assad and his wife and the Qatari royal couple were also being portrayed as personal friends."

Although Assad may have repeatedly criticized Qatar since late 2011 onwards for supporting "terrorists," he has never publicly stated that Qatari support for the rebels was over a future pipeline.

4. The Moscow-Tehran connection

Then there's the other part of the Pipelineistan puzzle – the Iran-Syria pipeline, also known as the Islamic Pipeline.

Yazigi explains: "The Islamic pipeline has been talked about for years. There were pre-contract memorandums of understanding, but until July 2011, there was no formal signing [between Syria and Iran]. You can't argue this is a serious reason to destroy the whole country."

While the project was politically expedient, it ignored economic and energy realities. First, the project was estimated to cost $10 billion, but it was unclear who would foot the bill, particularly as Tehran was – and still is – under US and international sanctions, as is Syria, since 2011.

Second, Iran lacks the capabilities to export significant amounts of gas. Sanctions mean it cannot access the advanced US technology that would allow it to exploit gas from the South Pars field that borders Qatar.

Posted by: Just Sayin' | Aug 7, 2017 11:39:59 AM | 90


Posted by: Just Sayin' | Nov 20 2017 22:48 utc | 162

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.