More Islamist abuses in Obama's Empire

Afghanistan would be laughable if it would not be for so much people suffering under the Neotaliban rule supported by the USA-NATO occupation force. The last brutality is the approval of a communalist law allowing Shia (but not Sunni) men to rape their wives once eavery four days (that's the kind of Torah mentality they have: all regulated, even sex - but of course women's opinions do not matter). This is sold as some sort of "multiculturalism" because it would acknowledge differences between Sunni and Shia sharia traditions.

Of course Afghan women do not buy. And have gone out to the streets of Kabul to protest in the weirdest kind of feminist parade I've ever witnessed (all them covering their heads and chanting "Allah u akbar": "God is great").

After the demo they were attacked by stone-throwing super-macho counter-demonstrators (all men) that yelled "Death to the Christians' slaves". Like if Christians had not supported the same kind of patriarchal abuses in the very recent past. I was born under a Christian fundamentalist regime, I know what I am talking about: that same kind of laws allowing rape in marriage were in effect until many years after the death of Ayatollah Franco.

What I don't think that was allowed anymore back then (fascism after all is a "modern" phenomenon, even if reactionary and spiteful) was what still happens in the favorite ally of the USA in the region: the ultra-fascist mafious tyranny known as Saudi Arabia. As you surely know the situation of women's rights in the "Muslim Vatican" (with 27 million subjects and many more foreign de-facto slaves) is worse than imaginable. But you may not know that fathers can arrange marriages for their minor daughters with whomever they want, even if these girls are still as young as 8 years old. This is the case of a young girl from an impoverished family (yes there is poor people in Saudia, indeed - and not all are outcasts with foreign passports) who has been forcibly married by her father to an 80 years old pervert. The mother appealed in court, causing some controversy in the retrograde realm, but the father's decission was upheld.

And this is the kind of abuses we are asked to watch indifferent in a world that knows no real borders anymore. In these cases I always think that a little bit of Stalinism would not be in excess in such areas. It's not bigotry: I am just appalled that human rights are smashed by superstitious ideologies (aka religions). Obviously it must be Arabs who solve Arab problems and Afghans who solve Afghan problems but some internationalist support for those fighting for the rights and dignity of Humankind is never in excess. If instead of supporting the bigots and machos there, we would arm the feminists, then at least we would know we are doing something of use. But we (our governments) arm the nazis and ignore the humanists and that has no pardon.
.

The Tel Aviv-Cairo-Riyad axis of terror

Famed research journalist Thierry Meyssan writes in Voltairenet (article available in Spanish, French and Italian - originally found in Eutsi in Spanish language) on the Gaza genocide. He does give a somewhat different viewpoint of what I have been reading so far, so guess it's worth a mention.

Meissan argues that some of the appointments of the new US President B. Obama have been recieved with dislike in Tel Aviv and that the attack against Gaza, coordinated with Egypt and Saudi Arabia, is an attempt to force Obama's hand.

It's been denounced (Petras called him the "first Jewish President") that Obama is strongly supported by the Israel Lobby, not just this last year but through all his political career. But Obama's base, the politically relevant one, does not just include Zionists but also realistic generals who are (common sense) tired of getting the US foreign policy dictated almost to the letter by Tel Aviv and who think it's about time that the inverse becomes true: that Tel Aviv is forced to make concessions in order to get peace and stability in the so-called Middle East. Some among these realists are even asking to include Syria and Iran in the Western bloc and, in order to achieve that, propose making reality the Oslo accords and giving Golan Heights back to Syria.

All this, Meyssan argues, would mean the end of the Zionist project of unlimited genocidal expansion, leaving it stuck in the 1967 borders (i.e. undoing all the de-facto gains of the last decades) and making it just another ally among many western-friendly West Asian countries. It's even possible it would be forced to get rid of its arsenal of WMD.

Meanwhile the radical Zionists, whose most important figure in the current US government is Hillary Clinton (a convert to Christian Zionism), want to consolidate the apartheid system normalizing the Israeli bantustan system for the Palestinians, who would get a formal recognition as autonomous Israeli protectorate.

In September and October 2008, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt held meetings in Cairo where they agreed that, in case of uncertainty for the Zionist project in Washington D.C., Israel would attack Gaza with Saudi financing, while Egypt would infiltrate paramilitary troops in the territory.

The Obama cabinet has ended being a mixture of tendencies: the state department is fully under Zionist control and the cabinet chief, Rahm Emmanuel, is an Israeli citizen (who with all lkehood informs Tel Aviv in real time of what happens in Washington) but the National Security Council and the ministry of defense is in the hands of Atlantist realists who are nowadays worried about uncontrolled Israeli activities causing disruption in the oil and gas supplies to the USA and Europe.

This one has been the first Israeli "war" (rather a masacre) not financed by the USA (though I can't help thinking on where did Madoff's money end) but by Saudi Arabia. This neo-medieval theocracy is worried about any kind of Islamic Fundamentalism it cannot control (read Hamas) and wants to supress it by any means at hand.

A defeat of this plot would leave Israel very much weakened anyhow, especially after two recent major defeats (Lebanon and Georgia).

On Europe, Meyssan just mentions the clear pro-Zionist partiality of Sarkozy and the typical arrogance exhibited by Tel Aviv with one of its greatest benefactors: the EU. But I can't help to consider wether this week's news of a trial by the Spanish Audiencia Nacional (political tribunal under full control of the Spanish government) against Israeli politicians and generals on massacres happened in 2002 doesn't mean that some European powers are maybe taking steps in prevision of Israel (or at least the Israeli hardliners) falling out of grace in Washington D.C. (and other capitals of the West). I seriously doubt that Spain (a middle sized power, certainly much richer than Israel but in serious economic trouble and seldom an independent player in international politics) would allow its pitbull judges to act against Israel (causing an important diplomatic row) if it was not intently moving piece in the international chessboard. This means probably that, while France is standing firmly by the Zionist bloc within NATO, Spain is showing its support for the Realist bloc instead.

In any case I have to say that this is the first independent analysis that puts any hopes in Obama and his team regarding the Zionist problem. Nearly everything else I have read basically understands that Obama is not just another Zionist US president but maybe the most boot-licking one of all. I wonder if Meyssan is blind or if he has actually found some discrepancies in Washington. Of all what I see, very few signs could support at the moment a turning point of the Atlantic Empire in regard to Israel.

But certainly the Realist bloc, if it actually exists, should have very great concerns regarding the absurdly problematic "clash of civilizations", fed basically by Israel and Saudi Arabia for their own goals (apparently opposed but efefctively in agreement). Meyssan is one of the persons that most strongly have denounced the 9/11 scam, so he must know all that. Maybe there is some real Realist bloc within the USA and NATO, that is extremely concerned that, without a change of policy regarding Israel, the farce could become true and actually challenge the Western interests in the region.

In any case it is still weak. And Obama's independent foreign policy is even weaker. I hold some hopes on this guy not just being another figurehead but a real Machiavellan "prince", i.e. a true statesman, but this hope is mostly based on astrology, not on real facts by the moment. Astrologically thinking, Obama could be even stronger than Putin, with whom he shares some traits, but we can't forget that the main weakness of a Leo is always his vanity.

We'll see. Meanwhile the people of Gaza and all Palestine continue being treated worse than cattle while the world governments remain outragingly silent.
.

Most senior Saudi judge calls for killing 'immoral broadcasters'

In another surrealistic 'fatwa' epysode, the most senior judge of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Al-Luhaydan, declared in a radio interview that killing the owners of 'immoral' satellite TVs is legitimate. In response to an audience question he said:

It is legitimate to kill those who call for corruption if their evil cannot be stopped by other penalties.

So far he has not been dismissed nor it seems it will be the case unless some international uproar forces the fat and corrupt Saudi monarch to act.

Fanaticism is a major problem and should be solved somehow. In my opinion only an "Albanian solution" is possible. Enver Hoxa might be whatever you want but made Albania agnostic and secular.

Even if you do not agree with my sympathies for the Maoist solution to fanaticism, you will surely agree that supporting fundamentalism regimes like Saudi Arabia is stupid and suicidal.

_______________

Update: Just read the Al Jazeera version of the same news.

Azzam Tamimi, the director of the Islamic Institute of Political Thought, told Al Jazeera: "You cannot just license the killing of people in this way.

"If I were in his place, I would criticise the people who licensed the channels in the first place and these are the rulers of his own country."

Saudis who financed Al Qaeda declared immune in USA

Believe it or not, specially considering how 9/11 attacks have served as pretext for nearly any kind of wrongdoings and abuses, a US court has declared four Saudi aristocrats immune from prosecution in spite that they donated large ammounts to a "charity" that financed Al Qaeda in the eve of the New York drama.

The court ruled that they cannot be prosecuted because Saudi Arabia has not been designed as "terrorist state" by the US State Department.

This rulings, of course, appears gives even stronger backing to those who think that the whole 9/11 affair was a covert operation by US secret services and their puppet organizations in the Muslim World.

The most brutal Patriarchy... under US protection.

Human Rights Watch has released a report on how the human rights of women (specially) just do not exist in Saudi Arabia. Under the barbaric Saudi laws, Arab women are denied even the most nimious right, always needing the approval of their male guardian (father, husband...) for absolutely everything.

The report emphasizes that Arabian women lack of right to education, right to employement, right to health, equality under the law, freedom of movement, etc.

Of course such a brutal tyranny, probably one of the most backward and despicable of the whole planet (it also ranks highest in executions per capita, for instance), that has financed and promoted Islamic Fundamentalism all around the World, that is ruled autocratically by an aristocratic gang of fat polygamous men, seconded by an SS-like religious police...

... such a fascist regime is supported by the USA in the name of democracy.

I would laugh wouldn't I be about to cry, sincerely.

Why tolerate Saudi Arabia?

Just the last abhorrent crime of the fundamentalist regime of Saudi Arabia: an illiterate woman is going to be killed on witchcraft grounds after a process that has nothing to envy to the methods of Torquemada or De Lancre.

Why is Steven Spielberg silent? Why the so-called "western democracies" don't boycott the machista realm of inquisition? Why Muslims aren't boycotting the pilgrimage to Mecca this year in protest? Why are you still driving?

...

In the same line it's worth mentioning that a couple of days ago it was news that the Arab League had decided to impose major curbs on freedom of speech to Arab satellite TV channels. The agreement was obviously concerned about criticism to Arab leaders, national and religious symbols. Only Qatar (seat of Aljazeera) and Lebanon opposed. The few other presumed Arab democracies, like Iraq, the Palestine National Authority or Mauretania said not a word. And a real problem is that in all the Arab world most regimes are totalitarian, ranging from absolute monarchies like Saudia, single party regimes like Syria or Tunis, to fake controlled pseudodemocracies like Egypt, Morocco or Jordan. In most of these countries there is no sort of real freedom of speech, with maybe the partial exception of troubled Lebanon. Satellite channels as well as the Internet threaten that obsolete concept of total control and this declaration is actually a major expression of deep fear by the dictators of this part of the world.

Edit: read Aljazeera's reaction.