As I was watching the news alerts from the Paris terror attacks on Friday I was reminded of a seemingly unrelated event: the one sentence criminal profile the FBI faxed to me in 1993.
I was covering the arrest and trial of a Georgia college professor, preacher, and junior high school principal at the time. He had a proclivity for sex with little boys and I’d hit the FBI up for their criminal profile for pedophiles. The reports usually ran about 20 pages, but all I was receiving from them was the fax cover page.
After my fourth request for a resend the FBI liaison asked me if I’d actually read thany of the cover pages.
“No,” I said sheepishly. “I just assumed there was more and it wasn’t coming through.”
“There is no more this time,” she said. “It’s just a single sentence.”
I looked down at the page in my hands and the eight words under the “pedophile profile” subject line. They said “person least likely of being suspected of pedophilia.”
The terse report made me angry at first because it seemed like a cop-out, but my view quickly changed with the passage of time. After a few days I began to view it as a kind of law enforcement poetry. One which eloquently and concisely summarizd the key to getting away with any behavior capable of triggering a powerful public backlash if it became known.
The poem can be further distilled to a single word: deniability.
With that thought in mind my take on the latest round of Saudi-backed terror attacks, which killed 140 human beings and wounded more than 350 on Friday in Paris, is a little different from the mainstream news media. As you might expect.
I don’t see these attacks as part of an ongoing battle between Islam and Christianity or Arabs and the West. Instead, I view them as an attempt by the Saudis and their stooges in neighboring Qatar to transform Western democracies into repressive police states. These hereditary despots are widely believed to be bankrolling the ISIS terror group, which claimed responsibility for the Paris attacks.
Like the Saudis, ISIS is not only Sunni, but Wahhabi. That’s the Muslim hillbilly equivalent of the hillbilly Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas.
I don’t buy into the idea that the current wave of terror attacks like 9/11, which was perpetrated by the Saudi-seeded Al Quaeda, are being launched by unrelated groups of religious nuts. Instead, I see the outline of yet another manipulative global footprint by the House of Saud and their fellow monarchists in neighboring Qatar, and their lackeys.
These silver spoon mofos despise democracy and are not particularly evolved in any human activity other than making money, staying in power, and boning anything that’s still warm and not moving too fast. They turned back the clock on hereditary rulership when they took out Communism in the early 90s and now appear to be hellbent on the destruction of the free Western societies built on democracy – the favored alternative of their own repressed citizens.
That doesn’t necessarily mean blowing us up, so much as transforming us into Saudi-style police states ruled by a caste of elite citizens who do their dirty work for them.
Why?
Because police states are easier for them to manage. They also present a less attractive alternative to disenfranchised Saudis and the slave-like foreign laborers the Saudi domestic economy is built on than the freewheeling democracies which once characterized the West.
In the first 24 hours after the attacks these silver spoons had already succeeded. France – deliciously described as the birthpace of “existentialism, democracy and the menage a trois” by comedian Will Ferrell in 2006 – declared a state of emergency, closed its borders, and imposed the first curfew on the City of Light since WW II.
Existentialism is a philosophical theory emphasizing the individual person as a free and responsible agent determining their own development via their own choices. This is the exact opposite of the Islamic view that events are controlled by an all powerful diety, which is also echoed by Judaism and Christianity. As always, religious extremists take that idea to new heights in comparison with moderate members of the world’s major monotheistic faiths, atheists and agnostics.
These coordinated attacks are not about Islam versus Christianity. Any more than the Cold War which preceded them was about the U.S. versus Communism at the end.
These attacks are about the Saudi royals’ desire to retain control of the planet’s largest oil reserves and their aspiration to one day rule the entire human race as they now rule the 29 million who reside in Saudi Arabia. Like a private plantation.
These crazy, inbred jackwagons think they can do it. It’s not hard to see their reasoning given that they’ve become the wealthiest family on the planet in less than a century solely by paying others to make them money. They neither found the oil which enriched them nor pumped it out.
When we assume the Cold War was still the West versus Russia at the end we do so at our peril, because that conclusion ignores the huge shift in global wealth to The House of Saud since 1973. It also ignores the the complex and coordinated nature of the current terror attacks, onstentisbly by desert hillbillies acting alone as members of ISIS and Al Quaeda.
The U.S. sent $5.5 trillion more in inflation adjusted dollars to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia than it received from 2005 to 2014. And we buy less than 20 percent of their oil.
That means a rough estimate of the shift in global wealth to the House of Saud could be as high as $25 trillion in the past decade – nearly a third of the $78 trillion worth of goods and services on Planet Earth.
Of course, this estimate assumes the Saudi royals have somehow failed to profitably invest their huge wealth.
It would be almost impossible for them not to grow their money on Wall Street given their control of future oil prices. All they have to do is bet on those prices in our futures markets and then open or close the global spigot they control in their role as the planet’s largest swing producer.
Because of the size and scale of the Saudi investment portfolio they also have the ability to make any stock price rise or fall simply by moving their money in and out of it.
So it’s a safe bet the 2,000 or so Saudi princes now control more than a third of the wealth on Planet Earth.
How could they control that amount of money and not rule the planet through it? Even if they didn’t want to?
It’s not possible.
When the U.S. attacked Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein in 1990 we did so to prevent the formation of an Arab Superpower without understanding The House of Saud was already an Arab Superpower. Albeit, one which wields its power largely through those it can purchase rather than its own force of arms.
Like it or not, the House of Saud is the global reincarnation of the Standard Oil Trust which took over the U.S. in the early 1900s. The Saudi ruling family is doing the same thing now at a planet-wide level, thanks largely to the evolution of a real-time global economy since the birth of Internet in 1994 with no global government to regulate it.
Whether you believe this hypothesis or not is irrelevant at this point. Because the huge sums involved have a momentum of their own.
There is no way for a single family to exercise benign control of a third of the planet’s wealth. The lackeys drawn to their treasure simply will not allow it.
I believe the campaign-style terror attacks we’ve seen since the end of the Soviet Unon in 1991 – which have now hit the U.S., Britain, France, and Spain – are part of a coordinated effort to make democracy go away as a viable alternative to the hereditary rulership of the House of Saud. That’s it.
Sure, this conspiracy theory seems disproportionate. Even preposterous. Just like the idea that a college professor, junior high school principal, and church pastor would derive sexual satisfaction from paddling his young students until they had to be hospitalized. But the painful truth is that preposterous things occur from time to time.
In this case, the theory assumes the Saudis would inflict disproportionate damage to the rest of the world to maintain their grip on power at home, which allows them to exercise such incredible influence over world events.
That kind of thing is in no way a departure from past Saudi behavior. They are one of the worst regimes on the planet from a human rights standpoint, with more beheadings than any other. They treat their own women like prison inmates and still jail people for witchcraft.
The Saudis still practiced slavery openly until JFK forced them to give it up in the early 60s and continue to abuse their indentured servants today as if it never ended.
This ruthless regime has already demonstrated their willingness to stay in power. They embraced the most radical forms of their already radical Wahhabi faith after the 1979 attacks on the Grand Mosque in Mecca by homegrown religious extremists. They turned back the clock on women’s rights and modern education, and turned their own people into caged, unproductive, imbeciles.
Just look around. The huge, costly and coordinated terror attacks they’ve helped orchestrate have become so routine sinec the Fall of the Soivet Union that Facebook actually is cashing in on them now. Its created a new function that allows people in the targeted areas to let their online friends know they’re OK.
As in: “Dear mom and dad, I’m still alive. Will pickup some bread and milk on the way home.”
Who benefits from this climate of constant fear?
That’s the question I’m asking which is leading me to these conclusions. It’s also one of the first questions to ask in any analysis.
Case in point, who benefits from the low oil prices now undermining the shale oil and oil sands drillers here in America, and the shift to green alternatives such as wind and solar?
I think the beneficiaries are the same human parasites who pushed prices down the last time we were in this situation in the late 1970s. That’s when we first installed a 55 mph speed limit in this nation, put solar panels on the roof of the White House and began building electric cars.
It all went away when oil prices fell and the Texas oil barons aligned with the Saudis put Reagan/Bush in the White House. Who could do such a thing – manipulate global oil prices and orchestrate the election of a friendly presidential regime? Well, the most likely candidate would be a cartel – because that’s what cartels like the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries do.
The Saudis founded OPEC in 1960 and continue to control it. The group describes itself as a cartel and routinely establishes global output ceilings and targeted trading ranges for oil prices for its 12 members. These are designed to frustrate the free trading and free market economics championed by democratic nations.
The current terror attacks on Western democracies and their police state response to them is not a question of winning or losing. Because it’s not really a military contest.
It’s a contest of ideas about the way the human race should live. Whether the species should live in a white collar slave plantation controlled by the Saudis and their lackeys or in a democracy that respects individual choices, establishes one set of rules for everyone regardless of the group they’re born into, and celebrates freedom.
That’s why we lose as a species the moment democracies embrace the police state tactics needed to safeguard themselves from future terror attacks. As the U.S. has done since 9/11 by creating a climate of surveillance in which its own citizens are afraid to speak freely on social media. There are cameras everywhere now and new laws that permit our own government to enter our homes, arrest us for peaceful protest and loyal dissent, and clear the way for wealthy donors to anonymously influence our elections.
We’re increasingly living in a nation where the same rules do not apply to the rich. One that has embraced special exemptions for religious organizations, which have been given large amounts of tax dollars to perform social functions previously executed by our own government and its employees.
The Saudis know this. Because they’ve already used these tactics to control their own and stifle internal dissent, while carving out a different world for themselves above the crowd. Like ISIS, they even employ religious police.
The same dynamic is now at work here in the U.S. as silver spoon mofos like the Kochs and Rumps create a world in which they are not subject to the same rules as the rest of us.
We also err when we view the religious extremists undertaking these terror attacks as being members of unrelated stand-alone organizations and categorize them as Muslims.
That’s not what this Saudi terror campaign is really about.
It’s not about religion. It’s about greed and tyranny and it’s about one family who is willing to do anything to rule their fellow humans instead of allowing us to rule ourselves. Again.
Figure it out.
