When I read this New York Times op-ed piece shared by Mr. H.B., I was floored, for the Times, as one of the USA's so-called newspapers of record and of the establishment, seems to be corroborating my high octane speculation that the (out)house of Saud may indeed be "on the menu," by which I mean that the usual behind-closed-doors-discussions are being had in the corridors of western power about what is to be done with (or to) the odious regime of Riyadh, and its well-known, though quiet, sponsorship of terrorist groups. Consider this article carefully:

A few quotations from the article should suffice to argue this point:

It is rare for an American president to skewer a friendly government publicly. But that’s what President Obama did last week in presenting a well-considered analysis of troubles in the relationship with Saudi Arabia.

Mr. Obama has long regarded Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Arab countries as repressive societies whose strict interpretation of Islam contributes to extremism. In a blunt and lengthy discussion with Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic, Mr. Obama included the Saudis among other “free rider” allies that ask the United States to fight their battles for them and “exploit American ‘muscle’ for their own narrow and sectarian ends.”
(Emphasis added)

The idea that Mr. Obama's analysis is "well-considered" and that the (out)house of Saud is a "free rider" exploiting American military muscle for sectarian ends is about as close an admission of the failure of American foreign policy in the region since 9/11 as one can come, for of course, the "Bush doctrine" with its denunciation of terrorism and its promise to seek out and destroy any state sponsor of terrorism made one very significant exception with respect to the desert kingdom, rendering the whole "war on terrori" a rather hypocritical moot point.

Then there's this:

The Saudis promptly fired back. Writing in the Arab News, Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former Saudi intelligence chief, argued that Mr. Obama does not appreciate all his government has done, including sharing intelligence in the fight against terrorism. But the fact is, this decades-long partnership, born of antipathy to the Soviet Union and an American reliance on Saudi oil, is growing increasingly brittle.
(Emphasis added)

Whatever the wishful thinking of Prince Turki might be, the fact remains that Germany, France, Jordan, Egypt, Russia, Israel, and even the Taliban(!) attempted to warn the USA of the impending 9/11 attacks. Notably lacking in the list of "warners" was Saudi Arabia, unless, of course, such warnings were issued via unofficial channels via the close contacts between the Bush family and the (out)house of Saud. That possibility is, of course, almost too horrible to contemplate, for it raises the stakes considerably on the various interpretations of 9/11 within the 9/11 "truth movement."

But the real stunners in the Times' op-ed piece are the final three paragraphs:

As far back as 2002, Mr. Obama, in a speech, referred to Saudi Arabia and Egypt as America’s “so called” allies and said they needed to stop suppressing dissent and tolerating corruption and inequality. More recently, according to Mr. Goldberg’s article, Mr. Obama has also asserted that there can be no comprehensive solution to Islamist terrorism until Islam comes to terms with the modern world. Unfortunately, the Saudi royal family, now in the hands of a shaky new leadership team, and with the Saudi economy stressed by falling oil prices, shows no serious interest in enlightened renewal.

Mr. Obama has now forced a behind-the-scenes conversation about the Saudi-American relationship into the open. Is there anything Washington can do to encourage transformative reforms? Apart from expressing critical views, even Mr. Obama, who will visit Saudi Arabia for a meeting with Gulf leaders next month, has felt a need to maintain the alliance largely along traditional lines.

There is little time left in the president’s term to rethink how the United States and Saudi Arabia can move forward together. That task will largely belong to his successor.(Emphasis added)

There it is in black and white: the N.Y. Times is suggesting that there are such behind closed doors discussions, and those discussions are apparently admitting what has long been publicly known: the regime in Riyadh is not only medieval, murderous, odious, but malodorous, and that Mr. Obama's successor will have to take on the problem, which means that a "solution" has already been discussed.

So what's my high octane speculation? We've seen the quick Russian withdrawal from Syria, and Russian moves to pledge support for a permanent Japanese seat on the UN security council. We've also seen the Obama administration negotiate with Iran to bring an end to Iranian sanctions. While the latter deal has been roundly denounced in certain American domestic political circles, in the long term, the arrangement makes sense, for nor stabilization of the region can occur if Iran is not heard, and if there is no direct contact between Washington and Tehran. And the strategy of UN sanctions, and of US covert sponsorship of "Islamic" organizations, can just as easily be applied to Riyadh, and can just as easily shift from Suni organizations like ISIS to Shia organizations like Hezbollah.

Time will tell if such strong actions are taken, but the mere fact that Mr. Obama gave the interview means, in my opinion, that the Powers That Be gave him the green light to put the subject on the table for discussion and to bring it out into the light.

And that, in my opinion, means that Riyadh is on the menu. But Mr. Obama has also addressed Tehran in a kind of backhanded way as well, by pointing out that it's time to "come ot terms with the modern world."

I don't often agree with Mr. Obama, as readers here know, but in this case, I have to give him due credit for stating what everyone with a mind and conscience has been thinking, and for addressing directly the egregious hypocrisy of left-over policies from the dreadful Bush family.

See you on the flip side...

Posted in

Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".


  1. goshawks on March 31, 2016 at 3:08 am

    “Your comment is awaiting moderation.” Out of ‘prison’ in 5 days or so…
    goshawks – March 31, 2016 at 3:05 am.

  2. goshawks on March 31, 2016 at 3:05 am

    To me, the following two articles best explain Obama’s current ‘stance’, as noted above (to the extent that he has any real power):

    thesaker dot is/fundamentalism-on-the-rise-a-sunni-jewish-convergence/

    thesaker dot is/after-the-prophet/

    Interesting times…

  3. T.J. on March 31, 2016 at 12:44 am

    The New York Times >Editorial< to which Dr. Farrell refers is "A Presidential Rebuke to the Saudis" by the NY Times Editorial Board at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/21/opinion/a-presidential-rebuke-to-the-saudis.html. Not just an "OpEd piece." Very significant…

  4. T.J. on March 31, 2016 at 12:33 am

    The Saudi d-Ruler will soon no longer drool, and Erdogan will soon be Erdo-Gone.

  5. zendogbreath on March 27, 2016 at 11:07 pm

    b and g, i’ve been wondering about that since 2001. there were immediately so many layers to so many lame stories thrown forward by corporati media and then alt media after alt media.

    that took way more money and effort to project all these lame stories as well as the plausible ones. not just money but time and coordinated troll work on a completely unprecedented scale.

    at the same time, it took the usual outstanding effort, time and money to knock down and/or stall off the more obvious and more likely versions of reality.

    so for 15+ steady years an organization has devoted itself to an effort that dwarfs to pyramids to keep everyone’s interest and to keep various layers of lies and truth mixed and moving. that’s one heck of a big beach ball to keep in the air for so long.

    think about it gents. how many different lame stories did they lay on jfk’s death? before arlen specter came up with his single bullet theory? then they trotted out as many stories as they wanted to keep a shred of credibility alive.

    now days the kids laugh at the lameness of all the stories. they’re incredulous at how stupid their govt must think them to be to even try such spamware on them. generation on generation has produced a mass of bill hicks’.

    so please throw some most likely scenarios out there to ponder. are we to have our own orange revolution with a trump/ventura ticket indignantly going after the bush/saud family/families? that’d make their economic crashing of amurica plausible to us technologically challenged backwoodsians who still believe that we’re all dependent for our everything from limited and collapsing supplies of saudi oil.

    • goshawks on March 28, 2016 at 3:39 am

      ZDB, a Trump/Ventura ticket? Brilliant! I’d pay good money to see that in action. It would even be good ‘life insurance’ for The Donald…

    • basta on March 29, 2016 at 8:37 am

      Hi zdb,

      Yes there’s been more time and effort spent on obfuscation as the planning and execution of the original 911 op. And frankly if they wanted to be more convincing in their crime, they should have done the reverse.

      The real culprits will never be brought to justice. It goes to high and deep and would throw the US and Israel into complete chaos. The Saudis are an easy mark though, a convenient and easily demonized scapegoat, and were not the brightest bulbs in the chandelier to sign on as junior partners in this particular op.

      So the Saudis will take the fall, the red herring of the 28 pages salted by Zelikow and the neocons who orchestrated the domestic side of the op will “prove” their culpability, and another ME nation will be laid waste for kosher lebensraum. And so it goes.

  6. goshawks on March 27, 2016 at 9:56 pm

    In addition to the 9/11 ‘pressures’, I could see two other reasons for the Saudis to be on the chopping block:

    First, there may be pressure from the frakking side. The ‘small peanuts’ are the frakking industry, who are collectively going into bankruptcy with the low oil prices. The big guns are the banks, who made perhaps trillions of dollars of derivative ‘gambles’ on the success of the frakking industry. I have heard analyses that those derivatives ‘coming due’ could wipe out whole banks. (Yay, yay, yay!) So, the Saudis could be ‘served-up’ due to pressure from that angle.

    Second, Saudi Arabia is about the last ‘whole’ Arabic nation, regardless of their values. A certain rogue Middle East nation might have decided that the Saudi nation’s time for Balkanization and minimization is at hand. That way, ANY threat, however implausible, to the rogue nation’s expanding its boundaries would be gone.

    (On a greater playing field, I also wrote an article – STILL in moderation for almost four days – about how TPTB are greatly-fearing Putin’s reelection in 2018, and the subsequent near-certain ‘purging’ of their ‘foreign’ Central Bank and related figures. So, ‘anything goes’ in the run-up to that election…)

    • goshawks on March 27, 2016 at 9:59 pm

      A new record! I now have three Comments under moderation in three separate Articles! I must be getting close to something: “The heaviest flak is over the target.” (grin) goshawks –
      March 27, 2016 at 9:56 pm.

    • goshawks on March 30, 2016 at 2:48 am

      My Comment is out of moderation. Enjoy! (Just above this one.)

  7. DownunderET on March 27, 2016 at 4:05 pm

    If Saudi Arabia is in the cross-hairs, and if they realize that “OIL” will be their downfall, what will it take to make these beheading wombats to cease?
    I believe that “all” repeat “all” of the worlds major countries must start serious dialogue to bring Saudi Arabia to the table, and in no uncertain terms tell SA to
    1) Reform their outdated Islamic religion, and
    2) Start behaving like a modern society, I mean it’s 2016 FCS !!
    Will they listen, maybe not, but when their bank balances start to go down, maybe then they will listen, because that’s all they care about.

  8. marcos toledo on March 27, 2016 at 10:34 am

    The Saudis are not the only ones on the chopping block. Is Turkey also to be dispose of as well maybe the restoration of the Byzantines to power in this may you live in interesting times World is any crazy fantasy really off the table. And where the link to the article.

  9. basta on March 27, 2016 at 6:09 am

    Mr. Obama included the Saudis among other “free rider” allies that ask the United States to fight their battles for them and “exploit American ‘muscle’ for their own narrow and sectarian ends.”

    Gee, I’d sure like to see that list…

    How about a good old-fashioned purgative, the geopolitical equivalent of taking black walnut extract, and getting rid of ALL the Middle Eastern parasites?

    Yeah, didn’t think so.

    The Saudis are being moved, with all the subtlety of an elephant caparisoned with cymbals, to take the fall for 9/11. Someone’s getting nervous, apparently.

    • goshawks on March 27, 2016 at 9:34 pm

      basta, agree totally. The good news is that it means ‘conspiracy theorists’ are getting some valid arrows in. Otherwise, the Saudis would not be served-up as a countermeasure…

Help the Community Grow

Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.

Upcoming Events