Growing up in a Jewish family, I knew all too well that many people harbored HATRED in their hearts for my people.
I remember my dad telling me that we were the world’s Scapegoat. I asked him why. He said that we were hated on the earth for so many centuries, but he didn’t know how to explain it.
It became something that I just accepted, but it made me sad and worried that one day people would attempt to harm my family. I was a tomboy, and played QB on an all boys football team in our neighborhood. No one could through a spiral pass like me.
So the boys fought over who would have me on their team. In the midst of these boys were some who showed blatant hatred for Jews. I was called dirty Jew – Kike- Christ killer, and the list went on and on.
I would give a warning to any boy who would call me and my family these names. I gave one warning and told the boy that if he said it again, I would beat him to a pulp. I was always a very skinny kid – but wiry and strong.
Naturally, the boy would shout out another slur against me, and then I had to make good on my threat. Invariably, the boy would run home to tell his mama that “the Jew girl” beat him up. The mother would come marching out of their house towards me, waving her finger at me and calling me the Jew hater names. I figured that these kids had to learn this despicable behavior in their homes.
The bigoted mother would yell at her son “Don’t play with that Jew girl.” I would yell back “Tell your son not to call me names, and then I’ll stop beating him up!”
Fast forward to the 1990’s
All of our neighbors surrounding our home are Catholics, except for one atheist family. I remember talking to our next door neighbor one day and she pointed at a very large car in another neighbor’s driveway. She called it a “Jew Canoe.” I told her that I was Jewish and that I did not appreciate her remark.
She watched herself after that.
One day, this woman’s son came knocking at our door wanting to play with the kids. I let him in and then was shocked as I looked at his jacket and saw a shining swastika. I looked him square in the eyes and asked “Do you know what that is on your jacket?” He responded quickly that it was a swastika and he wore it out of his love for Hitler. I want the reader to know that I am NOT embellishing these stories.
I proceeded to lecture him on the satanic evil of Adolph Hitler. He told me that his parents had a bookcase filled with books about Hitler. He told me that he was taught by his parents that Hitler was a good man. I told him that he would NEVER be welcomed into our home wearing a swastika. He went home and never again tried to befriend my children.
Why I am telling you these stories
QUOTE FROM STEVEN BERG ON FACEBOOK:
The following quote is from a FB member, Steven Berg. I was accused of being the source of this quote. ANYONE who knows me, knows that I am a staunch Conservative Republican!)
“This is one of the scariest clips I have ever seen. It is a rally held in 1939 in support of the Nazi Party. 20,000 people attended. Where was it held? Madison Square Garden!!!
Everyone is telling us Jews we are being paranoid about the resurgence of antisemitism in America. That Congresswoman Omar just misspoke and did not mean to question our loyalty to America. Yet she kept repeating the refrain in different venues. Jews have learned to take someone at their word.
The questioning of our loyalty in a country has ALWAYS been the first step. I was hurt by Speaker Nancy Pelosi explaining away Representative Omar’s questioning our patriotism as “she just didn’t understand what she was saying.
I believe that Omar knew exactly what she was saying. Adolf Hitler made the same claims in Mein Kampf accusing us of dual loyalty. Then he killed 6 million of our brothers and sisters.
That sacrifice was questioned by Majority Whip Jim Clyburn earlier this week. I do not recognize the Democratic Party anymore and find myself deeply hurt. I say this as an elected Democrat, member of the Democratic County Committee and a life long Democrat. I don’t know that I can in good conscience stay within a party that is suspect of my loyalty to this amazing country.
My children’s grandfather fought in the US Army. I have loved and worked to build this country all of my life. I spent years training Police Officers to do their job in a more tolerant and kind way. I feel for the first time in my lifetime that perhaps “my kind” is not wanted here anymore. The hurt runs deep. I hope the Democratic Party can come to its senses and understand that when someone like Congresswoman Omar comes for the Jews, we are only her first stop.” ~ Steven Berg from Facebook.
I want to show the reader some shocking videos which were shared with me recently. This gathering of 20,000 Nazi sympathizers took place at Madison Square Garden! You will see Nazis beat up a Jewish man who came to protest.
The chilling night when 20,000 Americans celebrated the rise of Nazism
Nazism was a phrase that came about in the 1930s. When the National Socialist German Workers Party was on the horizon. Today is associated with Hitler and the terrible things he did with the lead up to and during World War 2.
America: Freedom of Speech
America was founded in 1776, with the deceleration of Independence. This was after the war with Great Britain, thus started the American Revolution. Freedom of speech and expression is protected by the constitution of the United States. The Bill of rights limits the power of the federal government. The citizens of the United States have the right to speak their mind and voice their opinion. Knowing this, many citizens feel they can protest against the government and the press can print freely.
Hitler was a soldier for Germany in the first World War. He was very angry about the after math of the War and how Germany was treated. He slowly made his way into politics and joined the Nazi Socialist German Workers Party. In 1933 he was elected as leader and won, he was now Prime Minister of Germany. Hitler, now in power wanted to get pay back for how Germany was treated after World War 1. He spoke out against the Jews, and how he wanted to cleanse Germany. He wanted to regain territory that the Germans lost during World War 1. Hitler said that Germany’s problem was the Jews.
Madison Garden 1939
Madison Square Garden located in New York City was a place where they held a rally for allegiance with the Nazi Party in February 1939. The man speaking says even in America cleanse the people. Be rid of the Jews, who control the media and the business world. There needs to be one race in the US. These statements sounded exactly like Hitler was saying in Europe.
A country that has so much freedom of speech can have repercussions. There can be so much speech of hate that goes on, right under the nose of the government. But these protesters know , that they are protected by the bill of rights, the constitution of the United States. source
“More children from the fit; less from the unfit—that is the chief issue of birth control” ~–Margaret Sanger, Birth Control Review
Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, has an ignoble legacy as a racist who addressed the Ku Klux Klan and initiated a Negro Project to reduce the population of poor, uneducated African Americans whom she considered unfit to reproduce themselves. This Margaret Sanger—the real Margaret Sanger—is completely whitewashed in Parenthood propaganda, which deceitfully portrays Sanger as a champion of reproductive “choice.”
Sanger wanted to make it look like the sterilizations were voluntary. In a 1932 article, Sanger called for women to be segregated from the larger community onto “farms and homesteads” where they would be “taught to work under competent instructors” and prevented from reproducing “for the period of their entire lives.” If the women didn’t want to live this way, they could get out of it by consenting to be sterilized.
The other progressive solution was “euthanasia,” which basically involved killing off the sick, the aged, and the physically and mentally disabled. One of Sanger’s colleagues, the California progressive Paul Popenoe, called for “lethal chambers” so that large numbers of “unfit” people could be systematically lined up and killed.
The Nazis learned about these American programs, and enthusiastically adopted them. As Edwin Black documents in his book The War Against the Weak, the Nazi sterilization law of 1933 and the subsequent Nazi euthanasia laws were both based on blueprints drawn up by Sanger, Popenoe and other American progressives.4
In fact, the “lethal chambers” the Nazis employed using carbon monoxide gas to kill off “imbeciles” and other undesirables were the first death camps. Later these very facilities were expanded into Hitler’s “final solution” for the Jews, using many of the same medical personnel who manned the euthanasia killing facilities.
Sanger’s close associates Clarence Gamble, who funded Sanger and spoke at her conferences, and Lothrop Stoddard, who published in Sanger’s magazine and served on the board of her American Birth Control League, both knew about the Nazi sterilization and euthanasia programs and praised them. Stoddard traveled to Germany where he met with top Nazi officials and even secured an audience with Hitler. His 1940 book Into the Darkness is a paean to Hitler and Nazi eugenics.
Sanger too was on board. In 1933, Sanger’s magazine Birth Control Review published an article on “Eugenic Sterilization” by Ernst Rudin, chief architect of the Nazi sterilization program and mentor of Josef Mengele, the notorious Nazi doctor at Auschwitz. Sanger’s magazine also reprinted a pamphlet that Rudin had prepared for British eugenicists.
Writing in 1938, when the Nazi program was in full swing, Sanger urged America to follow Hitler’s example. Using the language of Social Darwinism—the same language that Hitler uses in Mein Kampf—Sanger wrote, “In animal industry, the poor stock is not allowed to breed. In gardens, the weeds are kept down.” America, Sanger concluded, must learn from the Nazis and carry out nature’s own mandate of getting rid of “human weeds.”
Hitler never quotes Margaret Sanger, but he was inspired by the writings of two of her associates, Leon Whitney of the American Eugenics Society and Madison Grant of the New York Zoological Society. During the 1930s, Whitney on one occasion visited Grant to proudly show him a letter he had just received from Hitler requesting a copy of Whitney’s book The Case for Sterilization.
Not to be outdone, Grant pulled out his own letter from Hitler, which praised Grant for writing The Passing of the Great Race, a book Hitler called his eugenic “Bible.”7 This incident shows how progressive eugenicists in America were well aware of their impact on Hitler and proud of their association with him.
Another example of progressive enthusiasm for Hitler involves Charles Goethe, founder of the Eugenics Society of Northern California, who upon returning from a 1934 fact-finding trip to Germany, wrote a congratulatory letter to his fellow progressive Eugene Gosney, head of the San Diego-based Human Betterment Foundation.
“You will be interested to know,” Goethe’s letter said, “that work has played a powerful part in shaping the opinions of the group of intellectuals who are behind Hitler in this epoch-making program. Everywhere I sensed that their opinions have been tremendously stimulated by American thought, and particularly by the work of the Human Betterment Foundation. I want you, my dear friend, to carry this thought with you for the rest of your life.”
If Planned Parenthood and the Left today want to get away from this sordid history, they must stop denying it. Rather, they should repudiate and distance themselves from Sanger and her fellow progressives, who were not only racial bigots but also inspired some of the worst atrocities of the twentieth century.
Brethren, I wrote this article to help those who are discerning the times, to connect the dots. I wrote it to show Americans the horrific EVIL which permeated the minds of so many Americans in 1939. Remember – History repeats itself.
And most of all, I wrote this as a warning: Ilan Omar is so DANGEROUS to our nation. She is the face of Third Reich in these times. Her hatred of Jews matches the hatred seen in Hitler’s Germany AND in America before WWII broke out.
TRUE Evangelicals MUST vote in 2020!!! Do you see? Can you understand what is at stake?? I pray that this article finds its way to many “sleeping” Christians. If they’re coming for the Jews – they are coming for the Remnant of believers as well!
Did you know that The Supreme Court has said a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being? In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the court described “secular humanism” as a religion.
And in 2005, a Federal court deemed “Atheism” a religion.
Decides 1st Amendment protects prison inmate’s right to start study group
A federal court of appeals ruled yesterday Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmate’s rights because they did not treat atheism as a religion.
“Atheism is [the inmate’s] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being,” the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said.
The court decided the inmate’s First Amendment rights were violated because the prison refused to allow him to create a study group for atheists.
Brian Fahling, senior trial attorney for the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy, called the court’s ruling “a sort of Alice in Wonderland jurisprudence.”
“Up is down, and atheism, the antithesis of religion, is religion,” said Fahling.
The Supreme Court has said a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being. In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the court described “secular humanism” as a religion. source
But if a person has the audacity to mention “God” or “Prayer to Him” in public; in this case in front of a Christian ministry by the HEAD of NASA – the reaction of the atheists is anger and of course citing the “Wall of Separation of Church and State. So, the employees of NASA are attempting to take away a person’s freedom of speech because it will make them look bad – you know, guilt by association.
Let’s get something straight before I post about the Left’s response to the head of NASA (who happens to be a Christian).
You will not find “Separation of Church and State” anywhere in our Constitution. The Left will tell you it’s there, but that’s a lie. This lie has been repeated so many times that the average person believes it.
So, where did the saying originate?
Satan is a liar and the father of them. He is also the author of confusion. He took our First Amendment and twisted it, just as he does with God’s Holy Word.
Here is the First Amendment of our Constitution:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Do you see in the First Amendment the verbiage “Separation of Church and State?”
Neither do I.
We don’t see it because it is NOT there. The First Amendment was given its place of prominence because our Founding Fathers wanted to insure that the government would never establish a “religion” that would be forced upon the American people; and that we would always have freedom of speech.
Then why do we hear this clause so much?
In 1802, a group of Baptist ministers from Danbury, CT wrote to Thomas Jefferson. They were concerned about the possibility that the State would impose a denomination and their freedom to worship as Baptists might be in jeopardy.
Here is Thomas Jefferson’s response to these CT pastors:
Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury BaptistsThe Final Letter as sent:
To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.
“The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should“make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.” (Emphasis mine)
Jan. 1. 1802.
In the past 100 years, the phrase “Wall of Separation between Church and State” (taken from Jefferson’s letter) has been misconstrued to mean that anything to do with Religion must be separate from State or Federal Government.
First of all, as I said before – the phrase “Separation of Church and State” is found no where in the Constitution. God-hating individuals have repeatedly used this statement (which was to PROTECT the Christians) so many times, that the average person on the street will tell you that this is part of America’s Constitution.
And don’t forget that this man (Jim Bridenstine) was addressing a Christian Ministry – NOT an audience filled with NASA employees!
Brethren, you should print this article out so that you can speak truth to a person who is parroting the lie that this clause is found in our Constitution!
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand the First Amendment. Or maybe, after the spat over a speech by NASA’s Jim Bridenstine, it does. Thanks to the double standards of secularism, public officials can’t even talk about faith without making headlines. It’s no wonder, then, that when the head of America’s space program gave remarks at a Christian ministry, even he had trouble finding signs of intelligence in the criticism that followed.
Capitol Ministries, the organization that Jim has supported for years, is hardly controversial. Nine of the president’s 15 cabinet officials are sponsors of the ministry — whose aim is simple: influencing government with biblical teachings. During his talk, Bridenstine even talked about the importance of that goal and what it means in the context of these times. “I love what Ralph said earlier: We’re not trying to Christianize the U.S. government. We believe in an institutional separation, but we also believe in influence. And that’s a big distinction and an important distinction, and that’s why I love this ministry.”
Jim couldn’t have been more clear: No one in the Trump administration is trying to create a theocracy. They just want the same freedom to bring their personal views to bear on public policy that liberals have. Still, secularists like Business Insider’s Dave Mosher, seem intent on dragging Bridenstine through the mud for daring to talk about actual NASA history — like Buzz Aldrin’s communion on the moon and the Apollo 8 astronauts’ Bible reading in orbit.
In a 2,000-word rant about the faith of Trump’s team, Mosher insists that “Some ethics and legal experts outside NASA have expressed concern over Bridenstine’s speech. They believe it ran afoul of the establishment clause of the First Amendment, which outlines a separation of church and state, and might have also violated ethics rules for federal executives.” Quoting people like Virginia Canter of Citizens for Responsible Ethics, Mosher tries to paint Bridenstine as a typical Establishment Clause abuser. “One’s personal beliefs must be respected, but when appearing in an official capacity, you have to adhere to certain ethical standards,” Canter explained. “One is not to give the impression that you are officially endorsing any products or service or enterprise.”
Funny, where was Mosher when Barack Obama was headlining political fundraisers for Planned Parenthood? Or worse, invoking God’s blessing on the abortion giant? Everyone from Hillary Clinton to Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have not only endorsed the group’s “service” — but funneled hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to it. No one seemed to care when they appeared in their official capacities to preach the gospel of abortion. But put a Christian on the stage from the Trump administration — encouraging something as innocent as prayer — and they’re a walking ethics violation! This is NASA, for crying out loud. What are they worried about? Jim sending astronauts to evangelize the galaxy?
If secularists are upset about Bridenstine’s speech, then they should have been shaking the White House gates over the last administration’s agenda for the space agency. How quickly we forget those shocking comments in 2010 when President Obama told NASA administrator Charles Bolden that his new mission should be “to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations…” If you’re looking for a textbook abuse of public office, I’d say start with the Obama administration. After that, giving a few remarks at a charity function seems like small potatoes.
But hypocrisy is the name of the Democratic game. Like Secretary Mike Pompeo and countless other Trump officials before him, Bridenstine is just the latest target of an intolerant Left whose only goal is purging faith from public life and history. If activists can’t get Christians to stay quiet, then they’ll try to drive them out of government altogether. That will be tough to do in this administration, thanks to the fearless leadership of Trump. If his team has learned anything, it’s how to stand up to bullies. That shouldn’t be hard for a man Jim Bridenstine. He was already light years ahead of the opposition. source
I say WELL DONE to the head of NASA! He is not ashamed of our Lord Jesus before men, and neither will Jesus be ashamed of him before His Father!
“But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 10:33).
“Brethren – Think about the Evil of this world, and how quickly it is growing. I’ve never seen anything like this. Satan is in a rage.”
This morning. after reading that CA schools were teaching their students that pedophilia is just another sexual orientation – I was sure that I was reading fake news.
But then I saw that my friend and brother in Christ, Alex Newman, had been interviewed about this. Alex is a writer of TRUTH. I could hardly breathe when I realized that what I was reading was accurate.
So brethren, think about this. Laws mandate that a woman can kill her child up to the day of delivery, and now children can legally be used sexually by pedophiles.
This is like a horrible nightmare. But there is no waking up and being thankful that it was merely a dream and not reality. This is our new REALITY.
Can you imagine what the wrath of God will be like during the Tribulation? Can you feel His anger?
Pedophilia Being Taught As “Sexual Orientation” in California Schools
Government school officials in California think it is “really important” to teach children about pedophilia and pederasty in the classroom because it is a “sexual orientation.” That is according to a top official for California’s Brea Olinda School District, who admitted to parents that it was being done — and that it would continue, despite the outrage. The implications are mind-blowing.
The stunning admission came after a parent-information meeting last month for the Brea Olinda Unified School District (BOUSD). Stephanie Yates, founder of Informed Parents of California, asked school officials why they were “teaching pedophilia in school to 9th graders.” But instead of a denial that such an atrocity was taking place, a top school official confirmed it was happening and acted like there was nothing wrong with it.
“This is done because we are talking about historical perspectives of how gender relations and different types of sexual orientations have existed in history,” said BOUSD Assistant Superintendent of Curricula Kerrie Torres in a matter-of-fact way, sounding almost oblivious to how the bombshell might sound to normal people.
Horrified, the mother turned activist expressed shock at Torres’ admission. “So sex between a man and a boy is a sexual orientation?” she asked. Torres did not deny it. “It’s something that occurred in history, and so this is really important for us to include,” the assistant superintendent said, implying that yes, sexual relations between a man and a boy — properly considered rape under the laws of every state — is a “sexual orientation.”
Of course, if simply having “occurred in history” means something merits inclusion in school curricula, then one might ask why the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ or the full text of the Mayflower Compact are never mentioned in government schools. Obviously, there is more to the story than simply having to teach children about such perversions merely because they “occurred.”
Indeed, the comments may be one of the most shocking admissions from an education official in recent memory. And the implications go even beyond simply normalizing one of the most disgusting and abominable crimes that can be perpetrated.
Consider: With “sexual orientation” increasingly becoming a legally protected category across almost half of the states already — with Congress working on it too — the implications of defining pedophilia and pederasty as such are hard to overstate. For instance, in California, “discrimination” based on “sexual orientation” is prohibited. If pedophiles simply have a different “sexual orientation,” does that mean schools are required to hire them?
Establishment propaganda outlets disguised as news organizations such as Salon and Slate have also been working to normalize and redefine pedophilia and pederasty as a “sexual orientation.” LGBT movement hero Harvey Milk, who is celebrated in California’s fake “history” textbooks as a great figure, was known for raping minor boys, at least one of whom later committed suicide. There seems to be a trend here in California.
There was a time when exposing children to far more mild obscenities was a crime. Now it is considered “education.” Informed Parents of California has waged a noble battle to expose the perversion and evil that is being forced on the state’s children. However, that is not enough. Parents who love their children must protect them from this evil now — and that means getting them out!
What is wrong with the people in California? There has to be something seriously wrong with them. Children should NEVER be subjected to the perversions of pedophiles!
There are times that I just want to scream! That wouldn’t do anything except make those around me certain that I’ve lost my mind. But I have NOT lost my mind!
I find it ironic and disturbing that on the same day that I saw Alex’s article, I also read that Joe Biden is now officially in the race for the presidency. I call him Creepy Joe Biden. Why? This next video will show you why. I believe that he demonstrates the heinous deeds of pedophiles:
I am yearning for the Lord’s appearing to rapture us away from this horribly wicked place. I am also yearning for the time when God punishes evil men and women for their reprehensible deeds!
“And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, “Behold, the tabernacle of God iswith men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.
“Then He who sat on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.” And He said to me, “Write, for these words are true and faithful.
And He said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts. 7 He who overcomes shall inherit all things, and I will be his God and he shall be My son. But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death” (Revelation 21:3-8).
I wrote this article nearly a year ago. Many told me that I was wrong about this. There was a news report today that Saudi Arabia beheaded 37 people, mostly minority Shiites, convicted of terrorism Read story HERE.
Somehow, this story does not add up.
And let us not forget the gruesome murder and dismemberment of a reporter last year. Read the story here The Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman ordered this grisly murder.
I felt that it was a good time to bring this piece out once again:
Do NOT be fooled.
Saudi Arabia is the largest funder of Islamist Terrorism on the planet. Did you know that most people (including President Trump) believe that the Saudis were behind 9/11?
With all of their riches and uninhabited property – including tents which have electricity and running water (they house up to 1 million people) which are only used during the yearly Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca; do you think that Saudi Arabia offered to take any Muslim refugees? Nary a one. And their excuse? The government claims that their contribution to the migrant crisis is to build mosques in all of the “host” countries. They have built 200 mosques in Germany alone.
I gather that they pay the salaries of imams in these mosques to insure radicalization of the migrants.
Very well thought out, don’t you think?
So why is Saudi Arabia being presented to the world as a kingdom of righteousness?
Because of their oil.
See Raheem Kassam – close friend of Tommy Robinson who is being jailed in the UK for 13 months for “speaking” about Muslim rape gangs in the UK. Raheem is the voice of reason. Listen to what he says around the 2:00 mark about Saudi Arabia funding the building of thousands of mosques around Europe:
In the beginning of President Trump’s speech in Saudi Arabia, he spoke of FDR and his relationship with the Saudi leader, King Abdel Aziz Ibn Saud. He should have done his homework and taken a closer look at this relationship. Things went south in a big way, and the Saudis have never forgotten it:
PRESIDENT BUSH and his closest advisers would hardly be surprised at the strain that’s developed between the United States and Saudi Arabia if they were students of the relationship between the two countries.
The fact that prominent individuals in that entourage, including the president, are oilmen makes it even more surprising that they are surprised.
Oil is about the only thing that Saudi Arabia and America have in common. America consumes a lot of it, and Saudi Arabia produces a lot of it. Culturally, socially, politically and religiously, America and Saudi Arabia are poles apart, no matter how many people in America are Muslims and no matter how many Saudis come to America to be educated.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the first president of the United States to meet a king of Saudi Arabia, certainly noticed this. But he made a promise to the Saudi that would be broken within a couple of years by his successor. And the king of Saudi Arabia and his successors never fully recovered.
Roosevelt spelled out this promise in a letter to King Abdel Aziz Ibn Saud on April 5, 1945:
“Your Majesty will recall that on previous occasions I communicated to you the attitude of the American Government toward Palestine and made clear our desire that no decision be taken with respect to the basic situation in that country without full consultation with both Arabs and Jews. … [D]uring our recent conversation I assured you that I would take no action, in my capacity as Chief of the Executive Branch of this Government, which might prove hostile to the Arab people.”
That promise was soon to be broken. (emphasis added)
The earlier meeting Roosevelt referred to may have been one of the most bizarre of his presidency. Oil was the concern, Saudi Arabia’s untapped potential was the attraction. The Roosevelt administration and the American oil interests working to establish American primacy in Saudi Arabia over the British had been heaping money on Ibn Saud.
The meeting took place in February 1945 aboard the USS Quincy, a destroyer, in the Great Bitter Lake of the Suez Canal, where Roosevelt stopped on his way home from the Yalta Conference with Churchill and Stalin.
Ibn Saud was brought to the rendezvous aboard the USS Murphy, a cruiser, along with an extraordinary cargo, though not nearly as strange as it might have been if the king had had his way. Ibn Saud had arrived at the dock with an entourage of about 200 men, plus quite a few women from his harem.
The captain of the Murphy was appalled. He warned the king’s entourage of problems that might arise with women aboard a naval vessel manned by a crew that had been at sea and at war for a long time. The women were left behind. The king brought a retinue of 48, including coffee servers, cooks and six huge Nubians with swords.
Why the cooks? Muslim tradition calls for all meat to be fresh. The Saudis would not eat Navy food, so they brought their own sheep to slaughter on board. King Ibn Saud was 6 feet 6 inches tall. He would not sleep in a ship’s cabin, so he and his entourage slept on deck, on carpets.
The Roosevelt administration, before and during World War II, had been doing everything it could – usually in secret and sometimes close to illegally – to help advance American interests in the Saudi Arabian oil development.
Saudi Arabia was not central to America’s war effort, but in 1943, Roosevelt was persuaded that paying Ibn Saud was essential, even if a lot of the money was going to pay for his wives, slaves and concubines. So he ordered Lend-Lease money diverted to Saudi Arabia, asserting that, “I find the defense of Saudi Arabia is vital to the defense of the United States.”
Oil – or its potential – was the only thing Saudi Arabia had to offer, and it was not in danger of being occupied by the Axis powers. Had Roosevelt been interested, he might have learned that the regime in Saudi Arabia – “vital to the defense of the United States” – was not much different than the Taliban regime knocked off recently by the United States in Afghanistan.
Ibn Saud had conquered most of the Arabian peninsula and consolidated it into one kingdom with the help of the fanatically religious Wahhabi Bedouins, who believed, among other things, that dying in battle was a ticket to paradise, that all images, from pictures to statues, had to be destroyed, that drinking and smoking and singing and dancing were sins punishable by whipping, and so forth.
Sound familiar? Many of the rules are still in effect in Saudi Arabia. Some speculate that Osama bin Laden was a Wahhabist. Ibn Saud had been a great and fierce warrior. He loved to sit around talking of great battles he had won and how he had personally killed his enemies. Possibly most important to him after his devotion to God was his honor and his belief that a man’s word was his honor.
So when Roosevelt made this promise about Palestine, it never occurred to Ibn Saud that another president could come along and break that promise.
But Roosevelt died a week after sending the letter to Ibn Saud. (emphasis added – isn’t amazing how the Lord works?)
Harry S. Truman, Roosevelt’s successor, came to office suddenly and unexpectedly.
Truman placed the United States forcefully and decisively in support of the partition of Palestine and the creation of a Jewish state in 1948. The sentiments of the king of Saudi Arabia were not considered important.
“I’m sorry, gentlemen,” Truman explained to worried Arabists. “But I have to answer to hundreds of thousands of people who are anxious for the success of Zionism. I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents.” – source
Saudi Arabia funds and exports Islamic extremism: The truth behind the toxic U.S. relationship with the theocratic monarchy
The little-told history of the U.S.-Saudi “special relationship” is a story of blood, oil & violent fundamentalism
“Everybody’s worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there’s a really easy way: stop participating in it.” So advised world-renowned public intellectual Noam Chomsky, one of the most cited thinkers in human history.
The counsel may sound simple and intuitive — that’s because it is. But when it comes to Saudi Arabia, the U.S. ignores it.
Saudi Arabia is the world’s leading sponsor of Islamic extremism. It is also a close U.S. ally. This contradiction, although responsible for a lot of human suffering, is frequently ignored. Yet it recently plunged back into the limelight with the Saudi monarchy’s largest mass execution in decades. (emphasis added)
On Jan. 2, Saudi Arabia beheaded 47 people across 13 cities. Among the executed was cleric Nimr al-Nimr, a leader from the country’s Shia religious minority who was arrested for leading peaceful protests against the regime in 2011-12.
Sheikh al-Nimr was known throughout the Islamic world for his staunch opposition to sectarianism. The outspoken Saudi dissident firmly insisted that Sunnis and Shias are not enemies, and should unite against the sectarian regimes oppressing them. “The oppressed should unite together against the oppressors, instead of becoming tools in the hands of the oppressors,” he declared.
By executing a dissident who challenged sectarianism, the Saudi monarchy was only further fomenting it.
Human rights organizations condemned the executions. Amnesty International said the Saudi regime is “using the death penalty in the name of counter-terror to settle scores and crush dissidents,” sentencing activists “to death after grossly unfair trials.” Amnesty called this “a monstrous and irreversible injustice.”
Yet atrocities like the mass beheadings are by no means new in Saudi Arabia. What is new is the global attention to them.
Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, the nephew of the murdered cleric, was arrested at age 17 for attending a peaceful pro-democracy protest in 2012. He was allegedly tortured, before being sentenced to death by beheading and crucifixion.
Saudi Arabia is one of the last places on the planet where crucifixions are still practiced — ordered by the government itself. (emphasis added)
In recent years, the Saudi monarchy has also arrested at least two other peaceful teenage pro-democracy activists and sentenced them to death.
Furthermore, a Palestinian poet was sentenced to death by Saudi Arabia in November for renouncing Islam and criticizing the royal family.
In 2015, the Saudi regime executed 158 people, largely by beheading. On average, approximately half (47 percent) of people executed in Saudi Arabia are killed for drug-related offenses, according to Amnesty International. Every four days, then, on average, the Saudi monarchy executes someone for drugs — while its own princes are caught with thousands of pounds of drugs at foreign airports.
Journalist Abby Martin devoted an episode of her show “The Empire Files” to exploring the Saudi-U.S. relationship. The episode, aptly titled “Inside Saudi Arabia: Butchery, Slavery & History of Revolt,” displays the brutality of the monarchy in excruciating detail.
“If the Saudi kingdom were an enemy of the U.S. government, we’d be shown these images and facts every day on the mainstream media,” Martin observes.
The internal repression and human rights abuses inside Saudi Arabia is one thing. Perhaps even more troubling, however, is the monarchy’s support for violent religious extremism. It is here that Chomsky’s advice on stopping terrorism becomes so important. By continually aligning itself with the Saudi regime, the U.S. is fueling the very fire it is fighting in the so-called War on Terror.
Saudi support for extremism
Saudi Arabia is a theocratic absolute monarchy that governs based on an extreme interpretation of Sharia (Islamic law). It is so extreme, it has been widely compared to ISIS. Algerian journalist Kamel Daoud characterized Saudi Arabia in an op-ed in The New York Times as “an ISIS that has made it.”
“Black Daesh, white Daesh,” Daoud wrote, using the Arabic acronym for ISIS. “The former slits throats, kills, stones, cuts off hands, destroys humanity’s common heritage and despises archaeology, women and non-Muslims. The latter is better dressed and neater but does the same things. The Islamic State; Saudi Arabia.”
“In its struggle against terrorism, the West wages war on one, but shakes hands with the other,” Daoud continued. “This is a mechanism of denial, and denial has a price: preserving the famous strategic alliance with Saudi Arabia at the risk of forgetting that the kingdom also relies on an alliance with a religious clergy that produces, legitimizes, spreads, preaches and defends Wahhabism, the ultra-puritanical form of Islam that Daesh feeds on.”
Since the November Paris attacks, in which 130 people were massacred in a series of bombings and shootings for which ISIS claimed responsibility, the West has constantly spoken of the importance of fighting extremism. At the same time, however, the U.S., U.K., France, and other Western nations have continued supporting the Saudi regime that fuels such extremism.
Saudi political dissidents like Turki al-Hamad have constantly argued this point. In a TV interview, al-Hamad insisted the religious extremism propagated by the Saudi monarchy “serves as fuel for ISIS.” “You can see [in ISIS videos] the volunteers in Syria ripping up their Saudi passports,” al-Hamad said.
“In order to stop ISIS, you must first dry up this ideology at the source. Otherwise you are cutting the grass, but leaving the roots. You have to take out the roots,” he added.
In the wake of the November 2015 Paris attacks, scholar Yousaf Butt stressed that “the fountainhead of Islamic extremism that promotes and legitimizes such violence lies with the fanatical ‘Wahhabi’ strain of Islam centered in Saudi Arabia.”
“It has been an ongoing challenge to persuade Saudi officials to treat terrorist financing emanating from Saudi Arabia as a strategic priority,” wrote former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a leaked 2009 cable.
Supporters of the Saudi monarchy resist comparisons to ISIS. The regime itself threatened to sue social media users who compared it to ISIS. Apologists point out that ISIS and Saudi Arabia are enemies. This is indeed true. But this is not necessarily because they are ideologically different (they are similar) but rather because they threaten each other’s power.
There can only be one autocrat in an autocratic system; ISIS’ self-proclaimed Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi refuses to kowtow to present Saudi King Salman, and vice-versa. After all, the Saudi absolute monarch partially justifies his rule through claiming that it has been blessed and ordained by God, and if ISIS’ caliph insists the same, they can’t both be right.
Some American politicians have criticized the U.S.-Saudi relationship for these very reasons. Former U.S. Sen. Bob Graham has been perhaps the most outspoken critic. Graham has called extremist groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda “a product of Saudi ideals, Saudi money and Saudi organizational support.”
Sen. Graham served on the Senate Intelligence Committee for a decade, and chaired the committee during and after the 9/11 attacks. He condemned the illegal U.S. invasion of Iraq, which he deemed a “distraction” from the U.S.’s real problems, and has warned that Saudi Arabia may have played a role in the 9/11 attacks that left almost 3,000 Americans dead.
This is not in any way to suggest that there was a conspiracy, and that the U.S. government was involved in the attacks; such a notion is preposterous, and can be refuted with even rudimentary knowledge about the Middle East and a basic understanding of history. There was no “inside job”; the conspiracy theory is absurd. Rather, critics like Sen. Graham have suggested that the U.S. government sees its close relationship to Saudi Arabia as so critical that it may have downplayed potential Saudi involvement in the attacks.
Of the 19 Sept. 11 attackers, 15 were citizens of Saudi Arabia. Zacarias Moussaoui, a convicted 9/11 plotter, confessed in sworn testimony to U.S. authorities that members of the Saudi royal family funded al-Qaeda before the attacks. The Saudi government strongly denies this.
The 2002 joint House-Senate report on the Sept. 11 attacks has 28 pages on al-Qaeda’s “specific sources of foreign support,” but this section is classified, leading Graham and others to suggest it may contain information about potential Saudi involvement. The 9/11 Commission insisted in its 2004 report, however, that it “found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded” al-Qaeda.
Sen. Graham has nevertheless insisted that the possibility that elements of the Saudi royal family supported the 9/11 attackers should not be ruled out. In his 2004 book “Intelligence Matters: The CIA, the FBI, Saudi Arabia, and the Failure of America’s War on Terror,” Graham further argued these points, from his background within the U.S. government.
The independent, non-partisan Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania has detailed the allegations and possible evidence — or lack thereof — of Saudi ties to the 9/11 attacks on its website FactCheck.org.
Whatever its role, what is clear is that Saudi Arabia’s support for violent extremist groups is well documented. Such support continues to this very day. In Syria, the Saudi monarchy has backed al-Nusra, al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate. The U.S. government has bombed al-Nusra, but its ally Saudi Arabia is funding it.
Yet despite its brutality and support for extremism, the U.S. considers the Saudi monarchy a “close ally.” The State Department calls Saudi Arabia “a strong partner in regional security and counterterrorism efforts, providing military, diplomatic, and financial cooperation.” It stated in September 2015 it “welcomed” the appointment of Saudi Arabia to the head of a U.N. human rights panel. “We’re close allies,” the State Department remarked.
In order to understand where this intimate relationship came from, and why it is so important to the U.S., it is important to look back at history.
FDR meeting with King Ibn Saud on Feb. 14, 1945 (Credit: Public Domain/Wikimedia Commons)
The U.S.-Saudi relationship has its origins in the early 20th century. It was at this time that Saudi Arabia was discovered to have what were believed to be the world’s largest oil reserves. The largest oil reserves are now known to actually be in Venezuela, but Saudi Arabia has the second-largest. And when Saudi Arabia is combined with neighboring Gulf states Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, it is by far the most oil-dense region of the planet. – source
Muslim scholars teach that Muslims should generally be truthful to each other, unless the purpose of lying is to “smooth over differences” or “gain the upper-hand over an enemy”
There are several forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, the best known being taqiyya (the Shia name). These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause of Islam – in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them
Qur’an (16:106) – Establishes that there are circumstances that can “compel” a Muslim to tell a lie.
Qur’an (3:28) – This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to “guard themselves” against danger, meaning that there are times when a Muslim may appear friendly to non-Muslims, even though they should not feel friendly.
Qur’an (9:3) – “…Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters…” The dissolution of oaths is with pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway. (The next verse refers only to those who have a personal agreement with Muhammad as individuals – see Ibn Kathir vol 4, p 49)
Qur’an (66:2) – “Allah has already ordained for you the dissolution of your oaths…”
Qur’an (40:28) – A man is introduced as a believer, but one who had to “hide his faith” among those who are not believers.
Qur’an (2:225) – “Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts”
Qur’an (3:54) – “And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers.” The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means ‘deceit’. If Allah is supremely deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30and 10:21)
Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be “compelled” to deceive others for a greater purpose. – source
I support the leadership in America and I am overjoyed that we do not have Hillary Clinton in our White House.
I am also very happy about the support that our President is giving to Israel, and his declaration that Jerusalem is the undivided Capital of Israel. Also, the moving of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem was such an historic event.
But truth is truth, and people deserve knowing it.
As a writer of truth, I feel a responsibility to research and vet my findings and write about them. Saudi Arabia has been and continues to be behind much of the Islamist terrorism in the world. That is a fact.
I know that Saudi Arabia is not listed as one of the countries which attack Israel in the Ezekiel 38-39 war. I know that the Word states that they even ask if those attacking Israel are coming to take a spoil.
Could it be that Saudi Arabia will fund a great deal of the weapons used against Israel, but not physically take part in the war? Only God knows.
Whatever the case, we know that our God will defend Israel against her attackers and will stun the world!
”For in my jealousy and in the fire of my wrath have I spoken, Surely in that day there shall be a great shaking in the land of Israel;
“So that the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the heaven, and the beasts of the field, and all creeping things that creep upon the earth, and all the men that are upon the face of the earth, shall shake at my presence, and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground.
“And I will call for a sword against him throughout all my mountains, saith the Lord God: every man’s sword shall be against his brother.
“And I will plead against him with pestilence and with blood; and I will rain upon him, and upon his bands, and upon the many people that are with him, an overflowing rain, and great hailstones, fire, and brimstone.
“Thus will I magnify myself, and sanctify myself; and I will be known in the eyes of many nations, and they shall know that I am the Lord” (Ezekiel 38:19-23).