O Black Messiah, O Nobel Peace Laureate, O Prince of Peace (O Full of Sh*t)


BY NORMAN FINKELSTEIN – U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration has offered Saudi Arabia more than $115 billion (86 billion pounds) in weapons, other military equipment and training, the most of any U.S. administration in the 71-year U.S.-Saudi alliance, a report seen by Reuters has found.

The report, authored by William Hartung of the U.S.-based Center for International Policy, said the offers were made in 42 separate deals, and the majority of the equipment has yet to be delivered. Hartung told Reuters the report would be made available publicly on Sept. 8.

The report said U.S. arms offers to Saudi Arabia since Obama took office in January 2009 have included everything from small arms and ammunition to tanks, attack helicopters, air-to-ground missiles, missile defence ships, and warships. Washington also provides maintenance and training to Saudi security forces.

The Center’s report is based on data from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, a Department of Defense body that provides figures on arms sales offers and Foreign Military Sales agreements. Most of the offers, which are reported to Congress, become formal agreements though some are abandoned or amended. The report did not disclose how many of the offers to Saudi Arabia were agreed.

Washington’s arms sales to Riyadh recently have come under fire from rights groups and some members of Congress are disturbed by the rising number of civilian casualties in the war in Yemen, where a coalition led by Saudi Arabia is fighting Iran-allied Houthi rebels.

The conflict has killed at least 10,000 people. Last month the United Nations human rights office said that 3,799 civilians have died in the conflict, with coalition air strikes responsible for an estimated 60 percent of the deaths.

The coalition says it does not target civilians and accuses the Houthis of placing military targets in civilian areas. The coalition has created a body to investigate civilian casualties.

The outcry over those casualties has led some members of Congress to push for restrictions on arms transfers, and amid the growing outcry, the Pentagon cautioned that its support for Saudi Arabia in its Yemen campaign was not “a blank check”.

The Control Arms coalition, a group that campaigns for stricter arms sales controls, said last month that Britain, France and the United States were flouting the 2014 Arms Trade treaty, which bans exports of conventional weapons that fuel human rights violations or war crimes.

Nevertheless, the Obama administration last month approved a potential $1.15 billion arms package for Saudi Arabia.

Hartung said the level of U.S. arms sales to Riyadh should give it leverage to pressure Saudi Arabia.

“It’s time for the Obama administration to use the best leverage it has – Saudi Arabia’s dependence on U.S. weapons and support – to wage the war in Yemen in the first place,” Hartung told Reuters.

“Pulling back the current offer of battle tanks or freezing some of the tens of billions in weapons and services in the pipeline would send a strong signal to the Saudi leadership that they need stop their indiscriminate bombing campaign and take real steps to prevent civilian casualties.”

Washington has been at pains to prove to Saudi Arabia and other Gulf allies that it remains committed to their defence against Iran in the wake of a multinational deal last year to restrict the Iranian nuclear program. Sunni Muslim Gulf states accuse Shi’ite Iran of fomenting instability in the region, which the Islamic Republic denies.

“The more recent deals that have involved resupplying Saudi Arabia with ammunition, bombs, and tanks to replace weaponry used up or damaged in the war in Yemen are no doubt driven in part by the effort to ‘reassure’ the Saudis that the U.S. will not tilt towards Iran in the wake of the nuclear deal,” Hartung said


  1. #1 by ray032 on 09/11/2016 - 9:34

    From: ray***@sympatico.ca
    To: postmaster@nobel.no; library@nobel.no
    Subject: Peace Prize/War Prize
    Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 22:35:33 +0000

    Honourable Members of the Nobel Committee,

    Considering the speeches candidate Obama gave before the Global Financial Meltdown-Economic Pearl Harbour-Tsunami of September 2008 under the watch of his predecessor, I was happy when your august Committee awarded the new President the Nobel Peace Prize.

    I supposed at that Time, you awarded it to him knowing the mess he inherited would leave him holding the bag, and at a great disadvantage with the American people to start with, and you hoped awarding him such a prestigious award at the outset of his Presidency might ameliorate the disadvantage of inheriting a failed economy and in those circumstances, help keep him focused on the Prize of Peace.

    I am positive I am not the only resident of earth to see the difference between the words of Candidate Obama and the inexperienced new President Obama you awarded the Peace Prize to, and his actions since then. Since being given the Prize, his actions on the world stage show he resorts to military action 1st and not as a last resort. He is showing by his actions to be undeserving of The Nobel Peace Prize.

    I may not be the 1st person to write to you about this, but I see justifiable reasons to recall the Peace Prize awarded to President Obama prematurely in wishful thinking. He is showing himself by his policies to be unworthy of it. If you can’t take it back, at least make a Public Statement saying in retrospect, The Committee made a hasty decision.

    What moved me Today to write to you was reading the latest article in the Blog of Professor Richard Falk, International Law Scholar titled ‘
    Missing the Point Twice: International Law as Empire’s Sunday Suit

    Ray Joseph Cormier


  2. #2 by rehmat1 on 09/11/2016 - 9:34

    The ‘Center for International Policy (CIP)’ is funded by Zionist Jewish groups.

    Saudi Arabia has bought more than $360 billions of arms since the 1960s. In the same period of time – US has given $3 trillion in military aid and soft loans.

    Dr. Finkelstein is “anti-Zionist Zionist” like Dr. Chomsky.

    Finkelstein is also openly anti-DBS movement even though the movement defends the Zionist Entity.

    On April 27, Finkelstein was interviewed by Phillip Weiss and Scott Roth, publisher of Mondowiess news website. He told the fellow Jews that Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people living in the West Bank have said little to defend Gaza solely because they have sold out to Israeli and Western interests in exchange for financial security misses three additional factors. He also asserted that there was never any real threat to Israelis from Hamas misguided rockets during the summer of 2014 while Israel was destroying Gaza.

    When asked about Bernie Sanders’s views on Israel/Palestine conflict, Finkelstein admitted: “They make me cringe.” He said, however, the Muslim support for Jewish politician like Bernie Sanders puzzled him.

    “Ask yourself, would American Jews in their majority vote for a Muslim? Never. Impossible. But Muslim Americans are rallying behind Sanders, even as he supports recognition of Israel and its right to live in peace. Why? Because he comes across as a fair and decent guy. That’s so moving, so wonderful, so inspiring. It gives hope that a better world is possible,” Finkelstein said.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: