Seeking Attention Through Bloody Revenge!!!!!!!

The gunman behind at least one of the mosque shootings in New Zealand that left 49 people dead on Friday tried to make a few things clear in the manifesto he left behind: He is a 28-year-old Australian white nationalist who hates immigrants. He was set off by attacks in Europe that were perpetrated by Muslims. He wanted revenge, and he wanted to create fear.

He also, quite clearly, wanted attention.

Though he claimed not to covet fame, the gunman — whose name was not immediately released by police — left behind a 74-page document posted on social media under the name Brenton Tarrant in which he said he hoped to survive the attack to better spread his ideas in the media.

And though he portrayed himself in his writings as quiet and introverted, he livestreamed to the world his assault on the worshippers at Christchurch’s Al Noor Mosque.

That attack killed at least 41 people, while an assault on a second mosque in the city not long after killed several more. Police did not say whether the same person was responsible for both shootings.

While his manifesto and video were an obvious and contemptuous ploy for infamy, they do contain important clues for a public trying to understand why anyone would target dozens of innocent people who were simply spending an afternoon engaged in prayer.

There could be no more perplexing a setting for a mass slaughter than New Zealand, a nation so placid and so isolated from the mass shootings that plague the U.S. that even police officers rarely carry guns.

Yet the gunman himself highlighted New Zealand’s remoteness as a reason he chose it. He wrote that an attack in New Zealand would show that no place on earth was safe and that even a country as far away as New Zealand is subject to mass immigration.

He said he grew up in a working-class Australian family, had a typical childhood and was a poor student. A woman who said she was a colleague of his when he worked as a personal trainer in the Australian city of Grafton said she was shocked by the allegations against him.

“I can’t … believe that somebody I’ve probably had daily dealings with and had shared conversations and interacted with would be able of something to this extreme,” Tracey Gray told the Australian Broadcasting Corp.

Beyond his white nationalistic ideals, he also considers himself an environmentalist and a fascist who believes China is the nation that most aligns with his political and social values. He has contempt for the wealthiest 1 percent. And he singled out American conservative commentator Candace Owens as the person who had influenced him the most.

In a tweet, Owens responded by saying that if the media portrayed her as the inspiration for the attack, it had better hire lawyers.

Throughout the manifesto, the theme he returns to most often is conflict between people of European descent and Muslims, often framing it in terms of the Crusades.

He wrote that the episode that pushed him toward violence took place in 2017 while he was touring through Western Europe. That was when an Uzbek man drove a truck into a crowd of people in Stockholm, killing five. The Australian was particularly enraged by the death of an 11-year-old Swedish girl in the attack.

He said his desire for violence grew when he arrived in France, where he became enraged by the sight of immigrants in the cities and towns he visited.

And so he began to plot his attack. Three months ago, he started planning to target Christchurch. He claimed not to be a direct member of any organization or group, though he said he has donated to many nationalist groups. He also claimed he contacted an anti-immigration group called the reborn Knights Templar and got the blessing of Anders Breivik for the attack.

Breivik is a right-wing Norwegian extremist who killed 77 people in Oslo and a nearby island in 2011. Breivik’s lawyer Oeystein Storrvik told Norway’s VG newspaper that his client, who is in prison, has “very limited contacts with the surrounding world, so it seems very unlikely that he has had contact” with the New Zealand gunman.

The gunman had a long wish list for what he hoped the attack would achieve. He hoped it would reduce immigration by intimidating immigrants. He hoped to drive a wedge between NATO and the Turkish people. He hoped to further polarize and destabilize the West. And he hoped to create more conflict over gun laws in the U.S., thus leading to a civil war that would ultimately result in a separation of races.

Though he claimed not to be a Nazi, in the video he livestreamed of the shooting the number 14 is seen on his rifle. That may be a reference to the “14 Words,” a white supremacist slogan attributed in part to Adolf Hitler’s “Mein Kampf,” according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. He also used the symbol of the Schwarze Sonne, or black sun, which “has become synonymous with myriad far-right groups who traffic in neo-Nazi,” according to the center.

His victims, he wrote, were chosen because he saw them as invaders who would replace the white race. He predicted he would feel no remorse for their deaths. And in the video he livestreamed of his shooting, no remorse can be seen or heard. Instead, he simply says: “Let’s get this party started.”

Then he picks up his gun, storms into the mosque, and cuts down one innocent life after another.

When it is over, he climbs back into his car, where he has left his music playing — the song “Fire” by the English rock band The Crazy World of Arthur Brown. And right after the singer bellows, “I am the god of hellfire!” the gunman drives away.

Cyber Crime


The practice I lead at FTI provides expertise in cybersecurity resilience, prevention, response, remediation, and recovery services.

I have more than 15 years of top-level cybersecurity experience, providing incident response and preparedness planning to more than 1,000 private sector and government organizations, including over 175 Fortune 500 companies and 70 Fortune 100 companies.

I maintain operational knowledge of more than 60 criminal and national security cyber threat sets and have extensive practical expertise researching, designing, developing, and hacking complex technical applications and hardware systems.

Prior to joining FTI, I served as Director for Cyber Incident Response at the U.S. National Security Council at the White House where I coordinated U.S. response to unfolding domestic and international cybersecurity crises and issues. I led the development and implementation of Presidential Policy Directive 41 – United States Cyber Incident Coordination, the U.S. Government’s national policy guiding cyber incident response efforts.


Russia to pull plug on Nuclear Arms Pact After US Does The Same – AP

Following in the footsteps of the US, Russia will abandon a centerpiece nuclear arms treaty but will only deploy intermediate-range nuclear missiles if Washington does so, President Vladimir Putin said Saturday.

US President Donald Trump accused Moscow on Friday of violating the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty with “impunity” by deploying banned missiles. Trump said in a statement that the US will “move forward” with developing its own military response options to Russia’s deployment of banned cruise missiles that could target Western Europe.

Moscow has strongly denied any breaches and accused Washington of making false accusations in order to justify its pullout.

The collapse of the INF Treaty has raised fears of a repeat of a Cold War showdown in the 1980s, when the US and the Soviet Union both deployed intermediate-range missiles on the continent. Such weapons were seen as particularly destabilizing as they only take a few minutes to reach their targets, leaving no time for decision-makers and raising the likelihood of a global nuclear conflict over a false launch warning.

After the US gave notice of its intention to withdraw from the treaty in six months, Putin said that Russia would do the same. He ordered the development of new land-based intermediate-range weapons, but emphasized that Russia won’t deploy them in the European part of the country or elsewhere unless the US does so.

“We will respond quid pro quo,” Putin said. “Our American partners have announced they were suspending their participation in the treaty and will do the same. They have announced they will conduct research and development, and we will act accordingly.”

The US has accused Russia of developing and deploying a cruise missile that violates provisions of the pact that ban production, testing and deployment of land-based cruise and ballistic missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometers (310 to 3,410 miles).

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the treaty would terminate in six months unless Russia accepts US demands that it verifiably destroy the cruise missiles that Washington claims are in violation. NATO allies have strongly backed Washington and urged Moscow to save the treaty by returning to compliance.

But Russia has categorically rejected the US claims of violation, charging that the missile, which is part of the Iskander-M missile system, has a maximum range of 298 miles. Russian officials claimed that the US assertions about the alleged breach of the pact by Moscow were intended to shift the blame for the pact’s demise to Russia.

Putin has argued that it makes no sense for Russia to deploy a ground-based cruise missile violating the treaty because it has such weapons on ships and aircraft, which aren’t banned by the pact.

Speaking Saturday in televised meeting with his foreign and defense ministers, Putin instructed the military to work on developing new land-based weapons that were previously forbidden by the INF treaty.

Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu reported to Putin that they would include a land-based version of the Kalibr ship-based cruise missile and a new hypersonic intermediate-range ballistic missile.

Putin emphasized that such new weapons won’t be deployed unless the US does so.

“Russia will not station intermediate-range weapons in Europe or other regions until similar US weapons appear in those regions,” he said.

At the same time, the Russian leader said he would like to review the progress on building other prospective weapons that don’t fall under the INF treaty, including the intercontinental Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle and the Poseidon underwater nuclear drone.

He noted Shoigu’s report that a key stage in testing of the Poseidon was completed several days ago.

The Russian leader last year unveiled an array of new nuclear weapons, including the Avangard and the Poseidon, saying that they can’t be intercepted.

Putin also noted during Saturday’s meeting that he would like the military to prepare a response to the possible deployment of weapons in space.

The Pentagon’s new strategy unveiled last month calls for a new array of space-based sensors and other high-tech systems to more quickly detect and shoot down incoming missiles.

Putin instructed the military to make sure the research and development works on new weapons don’t swell military spending. He said the military must reconfigure the existing defense budget to find money for the new weapons.

“We must not and will not be drawn into a costly arms race,” he said.


Watch: Israel attacks Iranian targets in Syria — video from both sides

In a surprising statement, the Israeli military confirmed on Monday that it attacked Iranian military positions in Syria . 

The Israeli Air Force released video early the same morning of what it said was IAF fighter jets attacking “several Syrian air defence batteries after they fired overnight”. 

Among the targets were munition storage facilities, an intelligence site and a military training camp, Israeli authorities said. 

Such admissions from Israel are rare — the country has in the past refrained from commenting on its covert military operations in Syria.  

The statement came after Israel carried out a daylight air raid near the Damascus International Airport, according to AP. 

Israeli missile defences intercepted what they said was an Iranian rocket fired over the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights, in the wake of the airport raid. 

“We have started striking Iranian Quds targets in Syrian territory,” the military statement said. 

“We warn the Syrian Armed Forces against attempting to harm Israeli forces or territory.” 

Syrian media shows air defences in action 

Syria’s state media on Monday aired footage that purportedly showed air defences being deployed to destroy the Israeli missiles.  

The statement was issued hours after the purported rocket over the Golan Heights.  

The Syrian military said Israel carried out intensive airstrikes with successive waves of guided missiles shortly after 1 a.m. local time. 

However, it added that Syrian air defences destroyed most missiles before they hit their targets.  

Monday’s strikes lasted for nearly an hour and were the most intense Israeli attacks since May, according to the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. It added that 11 people were killed in the strikes.  

Iran and Israel are arch enemies — the latter has sent thousands of military personnel to support Syria’s President Bashar Assad to help him regain full control over the nation.  

The nearly eight-year-long conflict has seen an estimated 400,000 Syrians killed in just the first five years of fighting, according to the UN Envoy for Syria.

Middle East Media Scope, LTD England and North Ireland (UK)
Intelligence Agencies

Joint intelligence directorate yet to see light of day four years on

Following the announcement of the National Action Plan (NAP) after the heinous attack on the Army Public School (APS) in 2014, the federal government had expressed its resolve for the formation of a proposed joint intelligence directorate to improve coordination among all intelligence agencies, civil and military, to curb terrorism in the country.-PK Dec 16, 2018

But despite the passage of four years, it’s still unclear when the directorate will be functional.

Speaking exclusively to Daily Times, an official of the National Counter Terrorism Authority (NACTA) said that threats of terrorists attack were still there given the recent attack on the Chinese consulate in Karachi.

He said that there was a dire need to improve coordination among all intelligence agencies to counter terrorist attack. “Every intelligence agency is working on its own. They all should join hand to form a joint intelligence directorate to counter terrorist attacks,” he said. Another official of the department said that a sum of Rs 109.42 million were allocated in the budget 2016-17 to combat the menace in the country, which indicated that the long-awaited NACTA proposal of launching a joint intelligence directorate might be established soon.

He added that the military had also supported the establishment of joint directorate and also nominated a brigadier and almost 50 officers for the purpose. He said that the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and provincial police intelligence cover, special branches, had also forwarded nominations for joint directorate the formation of which was still facing several constraints.

Mohammad Aamir Rana, a security analyst and head of the Pakistan Institute of Peace studies (PIPS) told Daily Times that the joint intelligence directorate could be the platform where all intelligence agencies would come under an umbrella to effectively counter and eliminate terrorism from Pakistan.

When asked about hurdles in the formation of the directorate, he ruled out the issue of funds paucity and said that if formed, “the joint intelligence directorate would perform under civilian control and that might not bode well for the establishment”.

“Both civil and military establishment should trust each other to successfully defeat terrorism,” Rana added.

Middle East Media Scope, LTD England and North Ireland (UK)

Trump Could Deport Vietnamese Immigrants Who’ve Lived In The US For Decades, A New Report Says

A decade-old agreement protecting certain Vietnamese immigrants from deportation could soon change, according to a Wednesday report by The Atlantic. If the Trump administration moves forward on this, President Donald Trump could oversee the deportation of Vietnamese refugees who arrived in the U.S. before 1995, The Atlantic reported, even if they have lived in the country for decades. – Monica Busch (Bustle Mag)

After the Vietnam War, the United States did not re-establish formal diplomatic relations with Vietnam until 1995. The Trump administration is reportedly exploring options to deport certain Vietnamese immigrants who arrived in the United States before that point. Bustle has reached out to the White House for comment.

A spokesperson for the U.S. embassy in Hanoi, who asked the magazine not to be identified because of embassy procedures, told The Atlantic that “the United States and Vietnam signed a bilateral agreement on removals in 2008 that establishes procedures for deporting Vietnamese citizens who arrived in the United States after July 12, 1995, and are subject to final orders of removal.”

However, they explained, “While the procedures associated with this specific agreement do not apply to Vietnamese citizens who arrived in the United States before July 12, 1995, it does not explicitly preclude the removal of pre-1995 cases.”

The Trump administration has reportedly reinterpreted the 2008 agreement, which was signed under President George W. Bush, to argue that Vietnamese immigrants who arrive before 1995 do not have special deportation protections. In other words, they can be prosecuted in the same way as any other immigrant, according to The Atlantic.

The administration had initially unveiled this interpretation of the agreement in 2017, but backed down from it earlier this year, The New York Times reported. According to the Atlantic report, however, the administration has since changed its mind again.

Katie Waldman, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) told the magazine that they “have 5,000 convicted criminal aliens from Vietnam with final orders of removal” and that “these are non-citizens who during previous administrations were arrested, convicted, and ultimately ordered removed by a federal immigration judge. It’s a priority of this administration to remove criminal aliens to their home country.”

Although it’s not clear when, exactly, the reinterpretation took place, DHS has confirmed that they did meet with representatives of the Vietnamese embassy in Washington, The Atlantic reported.

The reinterpretation would not apply to citizens or all legal immigrants, according to Vox. The several thousand people with deportation orders are most likely legal immigrants who have committed serious crimes, or else those who do not currently have legal authorization to be in the United States, Vox reported. If a Vietnamese immigrant has been in the United States since 1995 and still doesn’t have legal status, the outlet explains, it’s likely because he or she committed a crime which made them ineligible for it.The reported reinterpretation of the agreement, and potentially allowing for these deportations, is strongly in sync with the Trump administration’s hardline immigration policy, as well as its long-held America-first policy. The Atlantic report also comes as the president is embroiled in a battle with the legislative branch over the funding of a new and renovated U.S.-Mexico border wall. The president has repeatedly threatened to shut down the government if Congress is not able to pass a funding bill that includes money allocated to build the wall.

Middle East Media Scope, LTD England and North Ireland (UK)
Intelligence Agencies, KGB

“Cheka bags”, To Go Public Before Christmas

The files held by the KGB in Latvia, known colloquially as the  “Cheka bags”, will be published online before Christmas, the director of the Latvian National Archives, Māra Sprūdža, told Latvian Radio December 3.

That means that after more than two decades of debate and controversy about when, if and how the information contained in the files is released into the public sphere, the next three weeks will provide the answer.

According to Sprūdža, the Center for the Documentation of the Effects of Totalitarianism has forwarded to the National Archives of Latvia a full set of documents for publication of the Czech bag before the year-end deadline approved by Saeima earlier this year. 

“We have started to look at and experiment with the file contents to see if we can securely publish them and not have a situation in which people cannot get access, to make sure we have an optimal solution for people to easily open and view the contents,” Sprūdža told Latvian Radio.

Technical work is currently under way to ensure the information will be made public before Christmas, and will coincide with a virtual exhibition to place them in context.

In order to view the documents, registration via email address will be required on the Latvian National Archives website.

However, the full contents of the whole archive will not be available immediately. Initially only the KGB’s typed “agent cards”, the KGB telephone directory and official documents giving details of various administrative and procedural methods will be viewable.

Sprūdža predicted that public interest in the “Cheka bags” would be intense during the first days the contents appears online, but that some people might be disappointed that everything was not immediately available and searchable – with precise searches likely to be available only next May and before then further approval is required from the incoming government.

As previously reported by LSM, on October 4, the final sitting of the 12th Saeima supported amendments to the law which stipulated the publication on the Latvian National Archives website this year of several documents of the former KGB. Subsequently, it is planned to publish other documents related to the work of the KGB while Latvia was under Soviet occupation.

Middle East Media Scope, LTD England and North Ireland (UK)

Getting Off the Treadmill to Catastrophe

Earlier this year, UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned that “[t]he Cold War is back…but with a difference. The mechanisms and the safeguards to manage the risks of escalation that existed in the past no longer seem to be present.”               ARMS CONTROL TODAY.  _ Daryl G. Kimball, Executive Director

Indeed, the United States and Russia are planning to spend trillions of dollars to replace and upgrade their nuclear arsenals at force levels that far exceed what is required to deter nuclear attack. China is also improving its nuclear weapons capabilities. 

All three countries are pursuing new strategic-range weapons systems, including hypersonic missiles, and the weaponization of other emerging technologies, such as cyberweapons, that could upset the uneasy balance of nuclear terror that exists among the world’s major nuclear actors.

Meanwhile, U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control agreements designed to reduce nuclear risks, including the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), are in serious jeopardy. Currently, there is no bilateral dialogue on strategic stability to help avoid misperception and worst-case assumptions.

President Donald Trump, unfortunately, seems to believe that if he builds up the U.S. nuclear arsenal, other nations will back down. “Until people come to their senses, we will build it up,” Trump said to reporters Oct. 22 outside the White House. His simplistic notion of getting ahead in the nuclear game is a dangerous illusion.

In a nuclear arms race, the only finish line is catastrophe. As the veteran U.S. diplomat Paul Warnke wrote in 1975 as the United States and the Soviet Union were amassing new strategic nuclear weapons, “We can be first off the treadmill. That is the only victory the arms race has to offer.”

As Democrats prepare to take control of the U.S. House of Representatives in January, there is an opportunity to check and balance Trump’s nuclear impulses. Members of Congress of both parties, along with key U.S. allies and middle powers, should encourage the United States to get off the treadmill and take the first steps to reduce the role, size, and cost of its bloated nuclear arsenal.

Rather than ape Russia’s nuclear behavior, the United States should size and orient its nuclear force on the basis of its defense requirements alone. In 2013, a Pentagon review determined that the U.S. deployed strategic nuclear force is one-third larger than necessary to deter a nuclear attack. That means the United States can reduce the number of deployed strategic warheads from roughly 1,400 today to 1,000 or fewer and challenge Russia to do the same.

A thousand deployed warheads provide far more nuclear firepower than is needed to deter any current or potential nuclear adversary. Just one U.S. nuclear-armed submarine, carrying 192 thermonuclear warheads, each with an explosive yield of 100 kilotons or greater, could devastate a large country and kill tens of millions of people.

To lock in mutual reductions, Washington and Moscow should agree to extend New START for another five years, to 2026, and call for talks on a new agreement on new limits on all types of strategic offensive and defensive, nuclear and non-nuclear weapons systems that could affect strategic stability. Such a strategy could prompt Russia to rethink its own new weapons projects and possibly reduce its nuclear arsenal.

Further reductions in U.S. and Russian nuclear forces, which comprise 95 percent of global stockpiles, would increase pressure on China to halt its own slow but steady nuclear buildup and join the nuclear disarmament enterprise.

By scaling back its nuclear force to 1,000 deployed strategic warheads and making associated reductions to the hedge stockpile, the United States could trim billions of dollars from today’s excessive and unsustainable $1.2 trillion, 30-year plan to replace and upgrade its nuclear weapons delivery systems and warheads.

U.S. policymakers also need to shift away from outdated policies that increase the risk of nuclear war by accident or design. Current U.S. and Russian strategies call for the prompt launch of land-based missiles in the event of an impending nuclear attack. Each side also retains the option to use nuclear weapons first in a conflict. Worse still, the Trump administration wants new, “more-usable” low-yield nuclear weapons to counter Russia and has expanded the circumstances under which the United States would consider first use.

Instead, as Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the incoming chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, recommends, the United States should adopt a no-first-use nuclear policy, forgo new nuclear war-fighting weapons, and shed excessive nuclear force structure. There is no plausible circumstance that could justify legally, morally, or militarily the use of nuclear weapons to deal with a non-nuclear threat. Once nuclear weapons are employed in war, there is no guarantee the other side would not respond in kind and trigger an all-out nuclear exchange.

It is still within the power of U.S. and other world leaders to avoid a new global nuclear arms race, save billions of defense dollars on redundant and unnecessary nuclear weapons, and reduce the risk of nuclear use. The time to start is now.

Middle East Media Scope, LTD England and North Ireland (UK)

5G Transponders Kill Hundreds Of Birds In Holland

5G refers to the “5th generation” wireless technology. Its intended purpose is to provide faster and higher capacity transmissions to carry the massive amount of data that will be generated from the Internet of Things (IoT), Smart Cities, driverless cars, and video streaming. No one is yet clear about how 5G will be achieved, so at present, it is being used more as a marketing term, although in Dec. 2017, industry announced that it has finally settled on specs or standards for 5G. 


What is clear is that 5G will include the higher millimeter wave (MMW) frequencies never before used for Internet and Telecommunications technology. These waves do not travel as easily through buildings as the lower frequencies, so according to the original marketing scheme, 5G would require millions of new so-called “small cells” aka Wireless Telecommunications Facilities. But more recently, a number of wireless companies have stated that 5G signals can travel 3000 feet (over half a mile). Regardless, the wireless telecom industry is still aggressively seeking to outfit lampposts and utility poles around the country with wireless “small cell” antennas beaming hazardous radiation next to, or into our homes, 24/7.

In light of the robust and ever growing independent science showing adverse health effects from radiofrequency/microwave radiation, the densification of our neighborhoods with 5G-infrastructure may prove to be a very ill-conceived idea.


Canada’s Welcome Mat for Jihadis Poses Threat to US

Canada’s welcome mat for jihadis — including returning ISIS terrorists as well as  numerous Islamists immigrants — is well known.  This not only threatens our northern neighbors but is an increasing threat to the U.S. as well. – Clarion Project

Some analyst believe it is only a matter of time before a major terror attack is carried out in the U.S. by jihadis based in Canada.

Watch the following eye-opening report on the infiltration of radical Islamists into Canada:


Islamic Clerics Warn Against Spread of Christianity in the Most Islamic City in Iran

The Iranian Islamic government implemented a two fold plan to stop the spread of Christianity in the country, and it has failed on both fronts.
The first front was the allocation of millions of dollars for Islamic propaganda across the country, which over the years has proven to be ineffective as Iranian youth seem to be distancing themselves from the Islamic lifestyle the Iranian government wishes to spread.
The second front, in which the Iranian government’s Islamic agenda has failed is their crackdown campaign on newly converted Christians in order to plant fear in those who are interested in learning more about Christianity and possibly becoming Christians themselves. This failure is obvious as Iranian Islamic authorities continue to express their concern over the rapid growth of Christianity in the country.

via Islamic Clerics Warn Against Spread of Christianity in the Most Islamic City in Iran

PAKISTAN, Saudi Arabia

Saudization of Pakistan- Updated 2017

EXCERPT:  Pak-Saudi Military Nexus

Pervez Hoodbhoy

In December 2015, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia announced plans for creating a military alliance along the lines of NATO. This came in the backdrop of KSA having failed to deter the United States from pursuing a nuclear deal with archrival Iran. Pakistan has been roped into this thirty-four country all-Sunni Saudi-led effort albeit somewhat reluctantly and after first denying that it was part of the alliance. Adel al-Jubeir, the Saudi Foreign Minister, and Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the deputy crown prince and Defense Minister, traveled to Islamabad one month later to meet the civilian and military leadership.

The relation between Pakistan and KSA goes back many decades. Former Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki bin Sultan was on the mark when, speaking about Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, he said: “It’s probably one of the closest relationships in the world between any two countries.” Both countries are Sunni and conservative; both have ruling oligarchies (though one is dynastic and the other military). They were the first to recognize and support the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Their respective relationships to the U.S. share a strong similarity: Pakistanis and Saudis strongly resent what they see as a master-client relationship. Pakistan has a long history of dispatching its soldiers to protect the Saudi royal family and its interests. Thousands of Pakistani troops were garrisoned there in the 1980s and during the 1991 U.S.-led Gulf War. In 2013, KSA proffered a “gift” of $1.5 billion to ease Pakistan’s balance of payments crisis.13

In the 1970’s, major funding for Pakistan’s nuclear program had come from Saudi Arabia; it is said that suitcases of cash were brought into Pakistan from Saudi Arabia (as well as Libya). In gratitude, Bhutto renamed the city of Lyallpur as Faisalabad (after King Faisal of Saudi Arabia). The Pak–Saudi–U.S. jihad in Afghanistan was to further cement Pak–Saudi relations. Madrassas belonging to the Wahabi–Salafi school of thought exploded in numbers and enrolment. After India had tested its bomb in May 1998 and Pakistan was mulling over the appropriate response, the Kingdom’s grant of 50,000 barrels of free oil a day helped Pakistan decide in favour of a tit-for-tat response and cushioned the impact of sanctions subsequently imposed by the U.S. and Europe.14The Saudi Defense Minister, Prince Sultan, was a VIP guest at Kahuta, where he toured its nuclear and missile facilities just before the tests. Years earlier Benazir Bhutto, the then serving prime minister, had been denied entry. Pakistani leaders, political and military, frequently travel to the Kingdom to pay homage.

The quid pro quo for the Kingdom’s oil largesse has been soldiers, airmen, and military expertise. Saudi officers are trained at Pakistan’s national defense colleges and the Pakistan Air Force, with its high degree of professional training, helped create the Royal Saudi Air Force. Pakistani pilots flew combat missions using Saudization of Pakistan – Saudi jets against South Yemen in the 1970s. Saudi Arabia is said to have purchased ballistic missiles produced in Pakistan.


In early 2015, the Saudis requested Pakistan to join it in fighting allegedly Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen. In its attempt to rally Sunni support, the Kingdom wants the Yemen war to be seen as a doctrinal issue. Iran today is challenging Saudi hegemony in the Middle East. It is an insurrectionary, revolutionary power while Saudi Arabia wants the status quo. Iran’s mullahs openly call for the overthrow of all monarchies. In their political model the Iranian clergy holds the reins of power, with some marginal space allocated for the expression of popular opinion. But any political freedom, no matter how small, is anathema to the Kingdom. It is deeply alarmed that Iran’s support for the Palestinians, and its staunch opposition to US-led wars in the Middle East, has resonated with Arab public opinion even in Sunni majority countries.

Given Pakistan’s past obedience, Saudi Arabia was quite shocked when Pakistan’s Parliament unanimously voted in April 2015 to decline a military role in the coalition. Worn out by an internal Taliban insurgency that has claimed upwards of 60,000 lives, and wracked by a series of targeted assassinations and bombings of Shia mosques, the country was in no mood for a potentially disastrous overseas adventure.

It was overstretched at home and unwilling to pick sides between a “brotherly” Saudi Arabia and a “neighborly” Iran. Tension with Iran would be bad on several counts especially since the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline, which has been largely constructed, could greatly reduce Pakistan’s severe energy deficit. Moreover, with a twenty to thirty percent population of Shias, it cannot afford yet more killings carried out by Saudi supported Sunni groups.

Interestingly, the only street demonstrations in support of joining the Saudi-led coalition were by the officially banned violent sectarian-militant group, the Sipah-e-Sahaba, now rechristened as Ahl-e-Sunnat- wal-Jamaat. Long the recipient of Saudi benevolence, ASWJ blasted the parliament’s decision and staged public rallies urging Pakistan’s intervention in Yemen.

Arab anger at Pakistan is partly understandable. Nawaz Sharif and his government had given the Arabs an impression that his country stands at their beck and call. So, on the one hand, they pampered the egos of Saudi despots and gratefully accepted their favors, including the mysterious “gift” of $1.5 billion dollars in March 2014.

Was there to be no quid pro quo?  Then, various Pakistani leaders raised Arab expectations further with loud declarations promising to “shed every drop of our blood” for the defense of Haram-ul- Sharafein (keepers of the holy places) when, in fact, no Muslim holy site was ever threatened. But, when it came to putting boots on the ground in what would be a long-drawn bloody civil war, they had backed off.  To soothe an irritated Saudi septuagenarian monarch and his angry princes, an entourage consisting of the prime minister, chief of army staff, minister for defense, foreign secretary, and an assemblage of high officials went hoping that their contrite expressions could somehow calm Arab anger. There was no indication of success. Pakistan’s “disobedience” might have been more forgivable had it not come at this particular moment, when the Saudis are already in a state of fury over the action of their long-time ally, the United States. A preliminary Iran-US nuclear deal, which the Kingdom has long feared and opposed, has already been signed. Although staunch anti-Iran and pro-Israel Republicans in the US Congress strained every nerve to block it, President Obama succeeded in pushing through the final version in 2015.

The Saudi nightmare remains that an Iran-US rapprochement will accept Iran as a threshold nuclear state, and end US-imposed sanctions. Iran would then appear as the victor, giving a big blow to the Saudi-led Sunni coalition, of which Israel is an honorary member.

Expectedly, the GCC Arabs were in no mood to listen to lame excuses from a dependent country. Employed mostly as domestic help, wage laborers, construction workers, and restaurant employees, millions of Pakistanis, Indians, Bangladeshis, Nepalese and Filipinos in the Gulf sustain their families back home by scrimping and saving their precious riyals.

This left UAE’s minister of state for foreign affairs, Dr. Anwar Mohammad Gargash, flabbergasted: how could one such country actually dare to choose neutrality in an “existential confrontation” with Iran. Pakistan, he threateningly said, would “pay the price”.

Pakistan eventually did join the all-Sunni thirty-four country Saudi-led alliance in early 2016. But it has not participated – at least openly – in the Saudi war on Yemen. While it fears Saudi anger, it knows that kicking out Pakistani workers is not a realistic option for the Kingdom. Nationals of all Gulf countries live in a work-free country and are hopelessly poor in skill and working habits. Moreover they are in no hurry to change – it remains to be seen whether the oil glut and drop of prices will significantly impact that. Without an adequate supply of hard-working and underpaid servants, every petro-country would grind to a halt.

A second reason also sharply limits the strength of Saudi reaction. Pakistan is the only country that can, at short notice, potentially provide the Kingdom with nuclear weapons, or with a nuclear umbrella. Of course, Pakistan would be wise in not even considering such a possibility. But the fact is that there are no other nuclear vendors in town – and the Saudis know it.

Read Full Report Saudization-of-Pakistan-updated



Here is a list of 30 Locations Inside the United States…
1. Marion, Alabama 2. Baladullah, California 3. Oak Hill, California 4. Squaw Valley, California 5. Tulare County, California 6. Buena Vista, Colorado 7. Tallahassee, Florida8. Commerce, Georgia 9. Jessup, Georgia 10. Springfield, Massachusetts 11. Hagerstown, Maryland 12. Hyattsville, Maryland 13. Coldwater, Michigan 14. Binghamton, New York 15. Deposit, New York16. Hancock, New York (National Headquarters) 17. Talihina, Oklahoma 18. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19. Saylorsburg, Pennsylvania 20. York, South Carolina 21 Dover, Tennesee 22. Houston, Texas23. Waco, Texas 24. Fairfax, Virginia 25. Falls Church, Virginia 26. Meherrin, Virginia 27. Red House, Virginia 28. Roanoke, Virginia 29. Bethany, West Virginia 30. Onalaska, Washington

Sheikh Gillani Soldiers of Allah Jihad Training Video: Part 1

Shiekh Gilani’s Soldiers of Allah Jihad Tape: Part 2

This is a secret video produced around 1992 by Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gillani, leader of Jamaat ul-Fuqra / Muslims of the Americas (MOA) to offer “Islamic guerilla warfare” training courses to aspiring jihadists. He tells viewers to contact the MOA and International Quranic Open University offices in the U.S., Canada and Caribbean. This is part one of the video.

Secret “Soldiers of Allah” Training Video from Early 1990s Reveals “Islamic Guerilla” Training and Strategy, Offers to Assist Non-MOA Jihadists