User Answers

ARE THE GERMAN MESSAGES ABOUT SAUDI ARABIA REALLY MIXED?

Yesterday I suggested that Germany is sending messages about Saudi Arabia, but that the messages seem to be very mixed, and that those mixed messages go all the way to the German Chancellory itself. I also suggested, however, that the Paris attacks functioned, at least in part, as a crisis of opportunity to shape a "Europe-wide" response to the refugee crisis, and with M. Hollande's sharp response to the event by sending France's Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier - with quiet naval and logistical support from Germany - that a major corner had been turned geopolitically, and to some extent, culturally, in Europe. And we're not done yet.

For when one considers the messages coming out of Germany regarding one of the fountainheads of financial and other support for ISIS, one looks not so much at Sultan Erdogan's Ottomania, but at the regime in Riyadh. Consider these articles shared by Mr. B, Mr. S.D., and Mr. R:

German vice-chancellor accuses Saudi Arabia of funding Islamic extremism in the West

‘Time of looking away over’: Germany warns Saudi Arabia to stop funding radical Islamists

Germany Warns Saudi Arabia Over Islamist Funding

Germany 'draws up plans to prevent sharing intelligence' with Nato ally Turkey

Let's look at the last article first:

Germany has reportedly drawn up plans to prevent sharing intelligence with its Nato ally Turkey as it prepares to support international air strikes against Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil).

German Tornado aircraft are to commence reconnaissance flights over Syria and Iraq after the country’s parliament on Friday voted to deploy up to 1,200 military personnel.

Highly unsual measures have been ordered to prevent Turkey getting access to intelligence from the flights, according to Spiegel magazine.

In the light of revelations coming out that suggest that the USA or someone within its massive "military-industrial-intelligence" complex may have supplied Sultan Erdogan with the intelligence that permitted the shootdown of the Russian Su-24 last month, this revelation is a quiet bombshell. Indeed, with or without that context, it is still a bombshell, for it is a tacit admission that the NATO structure is obsolescent, as far as European security matters are concerned. But let us assume, for the sake of some high octane speculation in this regard, that some USA source did share intelligence. This would mean that Germany has concluded that any intelligence sharing with Turkey (and therefore with the USA), on its reconaissance flights might be risky, and similarly, it might be equally risky for Germany not to share with the USA. After all, even Russia, with all the current tensions between Moscow and Washington, lets Washington know when it is going to fire off cruise missiles at ISIS targets. So one may play the intelligence sharing game a different way, and this way is, I suspect, what the German government may be up to, for the indications are that it will share intelligence on a very limited way, most likely with France(a given, given its stated support for M. Hollande's actions and its determination to supply naval and space-based support to French efforts), and the USA, and probably no wider a circle than that. If there is thus a replay of a shootdown incident by Turkey involving a Luftwaffe aircraft, then it will be pretty clear whence the leak to Turkey came, and it wouldn't come from Paris. Anyway one slices it, Germany's message is clear: Enough is enough.

Or is it clear? Recall yesterday that I mentioned that the story of the BND's analysis of Saudi interventionism, its backing of ISIS, and more importantly, its disclosure of the longterm involvement of the current Saudi King (Salman) and his son and defense minster in funding terrorist organizations and activities was met with a (sharp? or not? you decide) rebuke from the Chancellory.  This brings us to the first three articles:

NBC reports the German Vice-Chancellor, Herr Sigmar Gabriel, a member of the opposition SDP party and part of Frau Merkel's coalition cabinet, as stating the following:

"We need Saudi Arabia to solve the regional conflicts," Sigmar Gabriel, the head of the Social Democrats (SPD) who share power with conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel, told the mass-circulation newspaper Bild am Sonntag.

"But we must at the same time make clear that the time to look away is past. Wahhabi mosques are financed all over the world by Saudi Arabia. In Germany, many dangerous Islamists come from these communities," he said.

Russia's RT is reporting the Vice Chancellor's remarks in almost identical terms:

Gabriel stressed that the Saudi regime has been funding mosques known for radicalizing the Muslim population, including in various communities in Europe.

“We have to make clear to the Saudis that the time of looking away is over,” Mr Gabriel, Merkel’s deputy and the head of the Social Democrats (SPD), told Bild am Sonntag newspaper. “Wahhabi mosques all over the world are financed by Saudi Arabia. Many Islamists who are a threat to public safety come from these communities in Germany.”

And RT adds a significant comment and analysis of its own:

The allegations against Saudi Arabia have been around for some time, but it is rare for a Western politician to speak out against it, as the Gulf State remains a key western ally. (Emphasis added)

This sentiment is echoed by Great Britain's Daily Telegraph, widely regarded as the newspaper of choice of the British Conservative Party:

The allegation that Saudi Arabia has funded mosques with links to Islamist terrorism in the West is not new. But it is highly unusual for a Western leader to speak out so directly against the West’s key Arab ally.

So, is Berlin sending mixed messages, or not? Against the backdrop of the growing discontent in Germany against Merkel's open borders refugee policy, (and against the backdrop of picture-photo ops of the smiling if somewhat uncomfortable-looking Chancellorin and the Saudi king), perhaps so. But personally, I suspect not, and return to my high octane speculation that I have been advancing over the past few weeks that Saudi Arabia is "on the menu," i.e., that it has been very quietly, very discretely, but very definitely moved from the "friend" column to the "foe" column by at least some of the west's deep state leadership. Frau Merkel has, if one looks back over her tenure in the Chancery, a unique pattern of allowing her cabinet ministers to make controversial statements, and in this respect it is worth recalling German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeir's remarks last year that Germany's foreign policy must assume a more militaristic stance commensurate with the size of the Germany economy and its economic global stature. We recall, as well, the remarks of German Defense Minister von der Leyen last year, indicating that Germany had fewer than ten operational aircraft that could meet a NATO emergency in case of the (fairy tale) of a possible Russian intervention in force in the Ukraine or the Baltic States. Notably, the Luftwaffe seems suddenly to have found enough operational aircraft for reconaissance flights in Syria, not to mention that space-based military satellite capabilties have suddenly been scraped up by which to lend assistance to the French effort there.  These, I submit, are the types of things that make one go "Hmmm...."  But the bottom line is that a major leader of a major western nation has finally stood up, and gone on record as saying that the time that the West will "look away" from Saudi Arabia, is over, and this implies that the time of looking away from its record of support for terrorist activities, plus the nature of the regime itself, are over. Indeed, Herr Gabriel's remarks is really a rebuff to the predictable Saudi response and denials that they're behind any terrorism whatsoever. In effect, Herr Gabriel has said "we're no longer even pretending to believe you."

The bottom line here is that something is, indeed, afoot in Europe, when one of its major nations is no longer willing to share intelligence with an ostensible ally(Turkey), and is fingering the ultimate source of the problem, and saying openly, what most people have known for a long time. This is most definitely not the end of a process, but the beginning of one.

And notably, all of it has followed Mr. Putin's intervention in Syria, and his allegations that the war against ISIS have, up until that time, been something of a sham.

See you on the flip side...

17 thoughts on “ARE THE GERMAN MESSAGES ABOUT SAUDI ARABIA REALLY MIXED?”

  1. Robert Barricklow

    Can’t really think of Germany w/o the Nazi International influence. The muslim/Nazi connections goes far back.
    How are they playing that out on the geopolitical chessboard?
    SA must be where some of those hardcore connections exist.
    Is this migration being purposed by the international? Is the international also being played by some international organizations as well?
    Perhaps most of these international organizations are one on this purposed migration – until… ? It does, I admit, seem counterintuitive to their goal of weakening sovereignties. Yet, I can’t see this happening w/o strong international involvement.

    1. Robert Barricklow

      Unless of course it’s to form Economic/political “Blocs”: a EU block; The America’s block[Canada, U.S., & Mexico]; a BRICSA block; and others, that are soon coming or joining, down this futures’ orchestrated “bloc” pipeline[drawn-up long ago].
      The borders of the geopolitical “blocs” would be tight; but not as tightly controlled for the countries within the said bloc.

    2. Robert you rightly raised the question: what ever happened to S. Africa and its gold and diamond mines? And nearby Namibia (former German South-West Africa), which provides 10% of the world’s uranium? They say that no news is good news and a glance at the headlines seems to show that the mining industry is pretty healthy down there. S. Africa has apparently become a “paradise” of political and racial harmony and, by the way, none of that nasty terrorism despite a multi-cultural milieu. Then there are also flourishing nuclear and space programmes…

  2. Frankly, Donald Trump’s response to the Saudi Prince Alaweed’s criticizing Trump as Benji Netanyahu did for opposing Muslim immigration to America,is telling and correct.

    Trump tweeted

    “@Michael2014abc: @Alwaleed_Talal @realDonaldTrump Has your country, Saudi Arabia, taken ANY of the Syrian refugees? If not, why not?”

    1. Yeah, Trump (or anyone else for that matter) could point out the fact that the Saudi’s built a fortified border barrier along its northern border with Iraq. It was proposed in 2006, and constructed in 2014. Curious that it roughly coincided with the rise of ISIL. Was it built to keep the barbarians out?

  3. I see two motives for Germany’s ‘mixed signals’: (Actually, with a third – nobody likes being powerless, and eventually has to do some form of ‘resistance’, however seemingly-futile.)

    First, Saudi Arabia has kind of shot itself in the foot by halving the world price of oil in one fell swoop. People, including the European governments, have been drip-fed the ‘reality’ of oil price increases over the decades. There had been an ‘assumption’ that these reflected the price-of-production going up. So, no resistance. Now, with this dramatic decrease – and SA showing no real pain – everyone ‘gets it’ that they have been taken for an exorbitant ‘monopoly’ ride. They have been screwed-over-royally (half grin) with energy costs, with the Saudi princes pocketing the massive-difference between production costs and selling costs. So, anger #1…

    Second, the Germans have been fervent archaeologists for that part of the world (the Fertile Crescent) for a century and a half. They have dug up and protected ancient cities and artifacts. To have ‘terrorists’ come in and brazenly-destroy irreplaceable artifacts from early civilizations must be raising their ire. (I know it does mine.) Then, to have it become known that Saudi kings/princes (and their handlers) are giving these groups money and marching orders, might put certain German ‘powers-that-be’ over the top. Anger #2.

    I might look-forward to some hidden-but-significant ‘backlash’ against the Saudi ruling-class (and hopefully their handlers) in the near-to-medium future…

    1. I hear you there. I’ve wondered about her appearance on the cover of Time….someone is trying to burnish a rather horrible career regarding Germany and and German people. She’s hauling water for the New World Order group/European Union and I suspect after she leaves, she will go to a poshy position at the UN.

  4. Anybody else simply tired of Merkel? Seems like she has been top dog in Germany forever. Don’t they ever have elections there?

  5. The Saudis may be driving Rolls Royce’ now but what happens when the inevitable “new energy technology arrives”. We don’t know what that new energy technology might be, but it’s coming. So the “white nights” might see their bank accounts take a dive, and none too soon, as these so-called “Royal” families behead their own people by the bushel. It is sickening to watch these royalists fund organizations who kill people in the name of god, they wouldn’t know god if he turned up in the flesh. So Allah, take a bow, you’ve been a very naughty boy in Saudi Arabia haven’t you?

    1. Yes I do think we are on the verge of a great energy shift, and perhaps this is being anticipated where of course great pools of capital investment will be worthless…..so maybe this collapse in oil prices is a phlebotomy to bleed the system

      My bet on who will emerge with the new energy breakthrough is Blacklight Power, the process discovered Randell Mills.

  6. First question is how old is Wahhabism and who created it. Is there a European hand behind it’s creation. And second it Was Germany for it twisted foreign policy that gave birth to the Islamic terrorist towards the end of the nineteenth century. So has it and the Arabian monocracies outlived their usefulness for the time being. Are they to be throw out or put on ice for the time and might be brought back some time in the future.

      1. Wayne Madsen is a first rate investigative journalist. I am a member to his website Wayne Madsen report.

  7. With its close links to Turkey, dating back 130 years, and the presence of the large Turkish population in Germany – it is impossible to believe that they have not exploited this from the intelligence viewpoint – none of the Daesh business has every had any mysteries for them.
    As you predicted, Germany is more clearly expressing its own policy stance, though this stance does not necessarily bode well for the rest of Europe. Merkel seems to represent the power group who allowed and indeed fostered the massive “Syrian” immigration (many of whom were not Syrians) while at the same time utilizing this immigration as a club to castigate other countries, such as Greece and Italy, for “not doing enough” about immigration. Or for condemning Hungary, which actually did “too much”. Now the result is the setting up – though the details are not yet clear – of a “European” border police allowing Brussels bureaucrats (with German permission of course) to intervene in “weak” parts of the EU borders. For Greece, this could mean adding and actual German military occupation force to the current financial occupation forces.
    The question is, will the Europeans – including the Germans themselves – be able to break the austerity shackles of the Bundesbank-ECB lobby, to ensure greater prosperity for all, or will they continue to be duped in the globalist trap by both real and artificial “terror” threats?
    Russia could still prove to be the wild card on the globalist gaming table…

  8. Any “Early Move(s)” away from ‘going along with foul SA wishes’ is predicated on a lessening of oil as the primary global energy source going forward…I believe that part of the drop in oil is reflecting ‘insider knowledge and moves’ resulting from such…

Comments are closed.