Saudi Arabia Influence on US Foreign Policy

Saudi Arabia is the most powerful lobbyist in the world, greatly swaying the United States of America foreign policy, especially in the Middle East. The US has been submissively working for Saudi Arabia, the world capital of Islamic fundamentalism, for decades. It all started in the 1970s, during the President Carter Administration, when the US had just been hit hard by the second energy crisis. This second energy crisis had been caused by the world oil shortage that ensued the Iranian Islamic Revolution and the fall of Reza Pahlavi, the shah of Persia (Iran); this was the reason why Iran had stopped supplying the world with oil for at least two long years.

It was Saudi Arabia that came to the “rescue” increasing its oil production, violating the OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) agreement signed a couple of years earlier. Not only did this Islamic country began secretly selling oil to the US, but it also started buying US government’s bonds. As a result, the debt to the Saudi has been increasing over the years; and today it stands between 25 to 30% of the total US debt.

During the presidential campaign in 2016, Donald Trump had acknowledged the fact that it was Saudi Arabia the main country that supports and supplies Islamic terrorism world wide, followed by Iran. However, once he was sworn in as President, it seemed that he got “influenced” right away by the most powerful lobbyist (Saudi Arabia); it all boils down to business and money. In other words, the American greed is selling the free world peoples to Islamism (terror, death, destruction, etc) on a silver tray.

It was Saudi Arabia decision that Saddam Hussein and Mubarak had to go, for they were secular (non-religious) dictators that put a check to the expansion of Islamism. Not only was former Iraqi dictator an impediment for the proliferation of Islamic fundamentalism, but he also protected Christian minorities, science and arts. But the one of the rationals the Bush Administration gave for the invasion of Iraq was that Saddam Hussein violated Iraqi people human rights. Once he had fallen, the Iraqi people Bush supported (both Sunnis and Shiites) began attacking, burning and ransacking Christian churches, schools and museum throughout the countries, with the American troops doing nothing at all. Now, Saudi Arabia, and the US Administration, have al-Assad regime in their sights, just because he is another secular president. But this is going to be a harder nut to crack, as Syrian President is backed by Russia.

There is “confidential” information that it was Saudi Arabia who was behind the terrorist attack on the towers on September 11 as a week later after they had been knocked down, the Saudi prince visited ground zero, making strange declaration, and it was during the Bush Administration. Conclusion: the US and a couple of European countries governments work for the Saudis, that is to say, they collaborate for the establishment of a big caliphate in the Western World. It is about time we woke up and stop being naive once and for all.

Saudi Arabia objective: the spread of Islam and the creation of a caliphate in Europe, from which Islamic fundamentalism would spill over even further all over the world. With the growth of Islamism, the Saudi’s sphere of geopolitical influence would increase.

US Government role: to protect the “human rights” of Islamic people, not the Christian and Agnostic’s ones, for we can be maimed, mangled, riddled with bullets, chopped up with machete, and stabbed with daggers and no western government will come to our help. Unfortunately, in the era of political correctness, the free people will always be ignored, unless we start acting and doing something to stop the treason.

American Cultural Prejudice

I wonder why the Liberals, most Republicans, and the American mass media still see Russia as an enemy and NOT the Islamic terrorists, especially when the Cold War is over.

This biased attitude against the Russians seems completely irrational to me, when the Russian people and culture have the same lifestyle as we have and are similar to ours, and never a single Russian citizen or government has ever attacked the United States of America, with bombs or bullets.

Why do the GOP establishment and Liberals hate the Russians so much, when Putin is the only leader in the world who is seriously fighting the same Islamist terrorists that killed thousands of American citizens in US soil? I just wonder whether it’s a case of deeply-rooted American cultural prejudice against the Russians.

Society in History

Society versus the individual, who comes first? Or which one is more important for the development of a nation? It has always been a long-discussed argument in history, specially between those who strongly favor socialism, such as the incumbent Barrack Obama and the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, and those who support and speak up for individual rights, such as the Republicans. It is easy to figure out, using reason and common sense. Here is my opinion:
Without individuals there would not be society, just as there would not be a car without all the different parts that constitute it. So, the individual comes first, just as the family come first; then, the clan; then, the tribe; then, the nation, which had its origin in the confederation of tribes, that were connected together by a common language, ethnicity, and historical background. “Society” is an abstract concept, but individuals are real persons, who can rejoice or suffer, and who get together to form a society out of their own free will. A society is the interaction of the individuals, who behave according to cultural patterns. So, meeting the needs of each individual that get together to constitute the whole means meeting society’s needs.

Roman Emperors vs Modern Governments

Modern historians and media have always portrayed Ancient Romans and Roman emperors as being cruel and savage people. However, compared to modern 20th century governments, we can see that this picture of the Romans is a distorted one. The Ancient Roman culture did not produce ruling monsters the size of Stalin, Mao Tse-tung, Hitler, and Islamic fundamentalists who caused the death of millions upon millions of their own people as well as minorities in the name of an ideology and a religion. They also did not have presidents like Harry Truman and Lyndon B Johnson, who ordered the firebombing of Tokyo, Osaka, Bremen and Vietnamese cities, respectively, and the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing millions of women and children just because they wanted to increase their popularity by putting World War II and the Vietnam War to an end, taking the soldiers out of the battlefield and be elected presidents on their own (they had succeeded incumbent presidents). They also did not have Islamic terrorists, whose only objective is mass-murder of civilian population because the fundamentals of their religion say so.

I know you are going to say that Emperor like Caligula or Nero would have used atomic weapons if they had that technology, but these monsters were killed by the Praetorian Guards when things started to get out of hands, which paved the way for emperors such as Trajan, Adrian, Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius.

We must not get actual human events out of its historical and cultural context, for the Romans and the Greeks were the products of their time and had completely different cultural mores (the values that constitute the cultural fabric of a given civilization) than human beings of today. And one of their moral values was “courage”, and, in order to get social acceptance, a military had to fight face to face with the enemy on a given battlefield, and the enemy had the form of an armed soldier, not women and children. We must judge the Romans in their historical circumstances; in ancient times, an ordinary Roman citizen enjoyed the highest standard of living and political and social freedom in antiquity; Rome was also the only City-State to grant citizenship to foreigners. The Romans were vicious only with those nations that tried to destroy Rome, like Carthage.

In Ancient Times, specially among the Romans, the cultural values revolved around survival of the individual and of the group (clan, tribe, nation), never around monotheistic religious doctrines or political ideologies. The Romans would never waste their money, time and energy building pyramids to honor a tyrant, for example, for it was useless for survival; they would rather build bridges, aqueducts, irrigation systems, and a strata via (roads), because these were useful for the Roman citizens, who were living human beings. The Soviet Union, Communist China, and Cuba squandered away precious government income to deify and worship their tyrants, like Mao and Stalin; the result, terrible famines that wiped out entire populations.

In time of war, the objective of the Roman consuls and emperors were the conquest of a hostile nation to ensure the survival of Rome, which was completed through a process called romanization of that region.

Roman Republic vs Absolute Monarchy

When Voltaire spoke of “Republic”, or of a “Republican System”, during the 18th century Enlightment period, he mentioned the Ancient Roman Republic as a system to curb the dictatorial powers of absolute monarchs. He was rediscovering the Roman Republic of Ancient Times to find a solution to absolute monarchy of modern times! If you didn’t know, the Republic is the division of power in three branches (legislative, judicial, and executive ones) as a system of check and balance. So, all our so vaunted political evolution was nothing less than the political Renaissance of the Ancient Roman Republic, for there had been an involution in the light of Christian monotheism rather than an evolution until the 18th century. But the ancient Romans were not monotheistic people, for they were polytheists. Like absolute monarchy, monotheism is a totalitarian theological system that despotically rules the human mind through an only God; like the Republican System, polytheism is a system of check and balance of different Gods that keep the universe in equilibrium and that gives human being absolute liberty concerning knowledge and prosperity, and under a polytheistic system, women were not only a lot freer but they played an important role in society. Whereas in monotheistic societies of patriarchal tribes, women were not only segregated but also stoned to death from ancient times even until today! Look what is going on in the Middle East!

By Carlos Benito Camacho