| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 11:36 am Post subject: Pilger Article on Journalistic Bias |
 |
|
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=6919
| Quote: | How Truth Slips Down the Memory Hole
by John Pilger – ANTIWAR.com July 26, 2007
One of the leaders of demonstrations in Gaza calling for the release of the BBC reporter Alan Johnston was a Palestinian news cameraman, Imad Ghanem. On 5 July, he was shot by Israeli soldiers as he filmed them invading Gaza. A Reuters video shows bullets hitting his body as he lay on the ground. An ambulance trying to reach him was also attacked. The Israelis described him as a "legitimate target." The International Federation of Journalists called the shooting "a vicious and brutal example of deliberate targeting of a journalist." At the age of 21, he has had both legs amputated.
Dr. David Halpin, a British trauma surgeon who works with Palestinian children, emailed the BBC's Middle East editor, Jeremy Bowen. "The BBC should report the alleged details about the shooting," he wrote. "It should honor Alan [Johnston] as a journalist by reporting the facts, uncomfortable as they might be to Israel."
He received no reply.
The atrocity was reported in two sentences on the BBC online. Along with 11 Palestinian civilians killed by the Israelis on the same day, Alan Johnston's now legless champion slipped into what George Orwell in Nineteen Eighty-Four called the memory hole. (It was Winston Smith's job at the Ministry of Truth to make disappear all facts embarrassing to Big Brother.)
While Alan Johnston was being held, I was asked by the BBC World Service if I would say a few words of support for him. I readily agreed, and suggested I also mention the thousands of Palestinians abducted and held hostage. The answer was a polite no; and all the other hostages remained in the memory hole. Or, as Harold Pinter wrote of such unmentionables: "It never happened. Nothing ever happened... It didn't matter. It was of no interest."
The media wailing over the BBC's royal photo-shoot fiasco and assorted misdemeanors provide the perfect straw man. They complement a self-serving BBC internal inquiry into news bias, which dutifully supplied the right-wing Daily Mail with hoary grist that the corporation is a left-wing plot. Such shenanigans would be funny were it not for the true story behind the facade of elite propaganda that presents humanity as useful or expendable, worthy or unworthy, and the Middle East as the Anglo-American crime that never happened, didn't matter, was of no interest.
The other day, I turned on the BBC's Radio 4 and heard a cut-glass voice announce a program about Iraqi interpreters working for "the British coalition forces" and warning that "listeners might find certain descriptions of violence disturbing." Not a word referred to those of "us" directly and ultimately responsible for the violence. The program was called Face the Facts. Is satire that dead? Not yet. The Murdoch columnist David Aaronovitch, a warmonger, is to interview Blair in the BBC's "major retrospective" of the sociopath's rule.
Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-four lexicon of opposites pervades almost everything we see, hear and read now. The invaders and destroyers are "the British coalition forces," surely as benign as that British institution, St. John Ambulance, who are "bringing democracy" to Iraq. BBC television describes Israel as having "two hostile Palestinian entities on its borders," neatly inverting the truth that Israel is actually inside Palestinian borders. A study by Glasgow University says that young British viewers of TV news believe Israelis illegally colonizing Palestinian land are Palestinians: the victims are the invaders.
"The great crimes against most of humanity," wrote the American cultural critic James Petras, "are justified by a corrosive debasement of language and thought... [that] have fabricated a linguistic world of terror, of demons and saviors, of axes of good and evil, of euphemisms" designed to disguise a state terror that is "a gross perversion" of democracy, liberation, reform, justice. In his reinauguration speech, George Bush mentioned all these words, whose meaning, for him, is the dictionary opposite.
It is 80 years since Edward Bernays, the father of public relations, predicted a pervasive "invisible government" of corporate spin, suppression and silence as the true ruling power in the United States. That is true today on both sides of the Atlantic. How else could America and Britain go on such a spree of death and mayhem on the basis of stupendous lies about nonexistent weapons of mass destruction, even a "mushroom cloud over New York"? When the BBC radio reporter Andrew Gilligan reported the truth, he was pilloried and sacked along with the BBC's director general, while Blair, the proven liar, was protected by the liberal wing of the media and given a standing ovation in parliament.
The same is happening again over Iran, distracted, it is hoped, by spin that the new Foreign Secretary David Miliband is a "skeptic" about the crime in Iraq when, in fact, he has been an accomplice, and by unctuous Kennedy-quoting Foreign Office propaganda about Miliband's "new world order."
"What do you think of Iran's complicity in attacks on British soldiers in Basra?" Miliband was asked by the Financial Times.
Miliband: "Well, I think that any evidence of Iranian engagement there is to be deplored. I think that we need regional players to be supporting stability, not fomenting discord, never mind death..."
FT: "Just to be clear, there is evidence?"
Miliband: "Well no, I chose my words carefully..."
The coming war on Iran, including the possibility of a nuclear attack, has already begun as a war by journalism. Count the number of times "nuclear weapons program" and "nuclear threat" are spoken and written, yet neither exists, says the International Atomic Energy Agency. On 21 June, the New York Times went further and advertised an "urgent" poll, headed: "Should we bomb Iran?" The questions beneath referred to Iran being "a greater threat than Saddam Hussein" and asked: "Who should undertake military action against Iran first... ?" The choice was "US. Israel. Neither country."
So tick your favorite bombers.
The last British war to be fought without censorship and "embedded" journalists was the Crimea a century and a half ago. The bloodbath of the First World War and the Cold War might never have happened without their unpaid (and paid) propagandists. Today's invisible government is no less served, especially by those who censor by omission.
However, there are major differences. Official disinformation now is often aimed at a critical public intelligence, a growing awareness in spite of the media. This "threat" from a public often held in contempt has been met by the insidious transfer of much of journalism to public relations. Some years ago, PR Week estimated that the amount of "PR-generated material" in the media is "50 per cent in a broadsheet newspaper in every section apart from sport. In the local press and the mid-market and tabloid nationals, the figure would undoubtedly be higher. Music and fashion journalists and PRs work hand in hand in the editorial process... PRs provide fodder, but the clever high-powered ones do a lot of the journalists' thinking for them."
This is known today as "perception management." The most powerful are not the Max Cliffords but huge corporations such as Hill & Knowlton, which "sold" the slaughter known as the first Gulf war, and the Sawyer Miller Group, which sold hated, pro-Washington regimes in Colombia and Bolivia and whose operatives included Mark Malloch Brown, the new Foreign Office minister, currently being spun as anti-Washington. Hundreds of millions of dollars go to corporations spinning the carnage in Iraq as a sectarian war and covering up the truth: that an atrocious invasion is pinned down by a successful resistance while the oil is looted.
The other major difference today is the abdication of cultural forces that once provided dissent outside journalism. Their silence has been devastating. "For almost the first time in two centuries," wrote the literary and cultural critic Terry Eagleton, "there is no eminent British poet, playwright or novelist prepared to question the foundations of the western way of life." The lone, honorable exception is Harold Pinter. Eagleton listed writers and playwrights who once promised dissent and satire and instead became rich celebrities, ending the legacy of Shelley and Blake, Carlyle and Ruskin, Morris and Wilde, Wells and Shaw.
He singled out Martin Amis, a writer given tombstones of column inches in which to air his pretensions, along with his attacks on Muslims. The following is from a recent article by Amis:
Tony strolled over [to me] and said, "What have you been up to today?" "I've been feeling protective of my prime minister, since you ask." For some reason our acquaintanceship, at least on my part, is becoming mildly but deplorably flirtatious.
What these elite, embedded voices share is their participation in an essentially class war, the long war of the rich against the poor. That they play their part in a broadcasting studio or in the clubbable pages of the review sections and that they think of themselves as liberals or conservatives is neither here nor there. They belong to the same crusade, waging the same battle for their enduring privilege.
In The Serpent, Marc Karlin's dreamlike film about Rupert Murdoch, the narrator describes how easily Murdochism came to dominate the media and coerce the industry's liberal elite. There are clips from a keynote address that Murdoch gave at the Edinburgh Television Festival. The camera pans across the audience of TV executives, who listen in respectful silence as Murdoch flagellates them for suppressing the true voice of the people. They then applaud him. "This is the silence of the democrats," says the voice-over, "and the Dark Prince could bathe in their silence.” |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nice words. But has Pilger came out and said 911 (and 7/7) are inside jobs?
In da Protocols it says we get given our opposition spokespersons.
Bernays was key to developing their media plan (brainwashing)
| Quote: | If we understand the mechanisms and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will
without their knowing it ... The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our
country ... In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere
of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we
are dominated by the relatively small number of persons ... who
understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses.
It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind."
-- Edward Bernays,
the "Father of Propaganda"
(and nephew of famed Jewish psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud).
The Father of Spin: Edward L. Bernays & the Birth of PR, PR Watch,
2nd Quarter, 1999 |
http://www.jewishtribalreview.org/
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faust
Minor Poster
Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Posts: 19
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rodin wrote: | | Nice words. But has Pilger came out and said 911 (and 7/7) are inside jobs? |
Why do you feel it important for pilger to "come out"?
_________________
reality is a manufactured illusion |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Long Tooth
Moderate Poster
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Posts: 306
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| faust wrote: | | rodin wrote: | | Nice words. But has Pilger came out and said 911 (and 7/7) are inside jobs? |
Why do you feel it important for pilger to "come out"? |
because when he constantly refers to the saudis that did 9/11, he is blatantly lying, do you want journalists to lie? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faust
Minor Poster
Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Posts: 19
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Long Tooth wrote: | | faust wrote: | | rodin wrote: | | Nice words. But has Pilger came out and said 911 (and 7/7) are inside jobs? |
Why do you feel it important for pilger to "come out"? |
because when he constantly refers to the saudis that did 9/11, he is blatantly lying, do you want journalists to lie? |
Isn't that because the money trail leads to the saudis? Isn't that the only concrete evidence that leads him to come to this conclusion? He would destroy all credibility if he were to throw his professionalism away and accuse everyone on circumstantial evidence (which is what the 9/11 movement does as a whole) don't you think? It is not a case of lying either - it is a case of common sense, you are letting your frustration get the better of you.
_________________
reality is a manufactured illusion |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dogsmilk
Mighty Poster
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 1616
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If Pilger doesn't believe 911 to be an inside job, why does that therefore mean he's a liar?
Why does it discredit him?
After all his decades of pioneering journalism, him not explicitly backing the truth movement means he's now all wrong?
Is it now at 'truther good, not truther bad'?
_________________
It's a man's life in MOSSAD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Long Tooth
Moderate Poster
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Posts: 306
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dogsmilk wrote: | If Pilger doesn't believe 911 to be an inside job, why does that therefore mean he's a liar?
Why does it discredit him?
After all his decades of pioneering journalism, him not explicitly backing the truth movement means he's now all wrong?
Is it now at 'truther good, not truther bad'? |
Pilger, we are led to believe is a very thorough researcher, dont you find it the least bit odd when he constantly refers to the saudi terrorists that did 9/11?
as nobody knows who or if anybody was on the planes that day, why does he point the finger at mythical saudi hijackers?
Are you seriously suggesting that pilger with meticulous investigation/research cannot spot the saudis did it hoax?
i find it odd with his researching/investigation methods that he ignores the mountains of lies in the official story of 9/11, and perpetualy spews out 9/11 lies.
good or bad, black and white, no inbetween for you either eh..
pioneering journalism good, misrepresenting 9/11 good too.
he may have his reasons for lying about 9/11, thats up to him, you may admire him for lying, thats up to you too. My opinion of him is hes repeating lies reg 9/11. thats only my opinion. After all, millions died in two world wars to give us all the right to be wrong didant they? (gave their lives so we could be free and speak freely, what a tragic waste of lives eh?) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dogsmilk
Mighty Poster
Joined: 06 Oct 2006
Posts: 1616
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Long Tooth wrote: | | Dogsmilk wrote: | If Pilger doesn't believe 911 to be an inside job, why does that therefore mean he's a liar?
Why does it discredit him?
After all his decades of pioneering journalism, him not explicitly backing the truth movement means he's now all wrong?
Is it now at 'truther good, not truther bad'? |
Pilger, we are led to believe is a very thorough researcher, dont you find it the least bit odd when he constantly refers to the saudi terrorists that did 9/11?
as nobody knows who or if anybody was on the planes that day, why does he point the finger at mythical saudi hijackers?
Are you seriously suggesting that pilger with meticulous investigation/research cannot spot the saudis did it hoax?
i find it odd with his researching/investigation methods that he ignores the mountains of lies in the official story of 9/11, and perpetualy spews out 9/11 lies.
good or bad, black and white, no inbetween for you either eh..
pioneering journalism good, misrepresenting 9/11 good too.
he may have his reasons for lying about 9/11, thats up to him, you may admire him for lying, thats up to you too. My opinion of him is hes repeating lies reg 9/11. thats only my opinion. After all, millions died in two world wars to give us all the right to be wrong didant they? (gave their lives so we could be free and speak freely, what a tragic waste of lives eh?) |
To tell a lie is to consciously say things you don't believe to be true. I'm not aware of any evidence Pilger is engaged in this, so I can't personally see him as a liar.
I don't believe in making black and white judgements; to say that Pilger is a liar just because he doesn't back the inside job angle of 911 is exactly the kind of black and white thinking I'm bemoaning.
There may be many reasons why Pilger does not endorse the truth movement. He may sincerely reject its claims, he may believe there isn't sufficient direct evidence to make a public stand, he may be worried about being labelled a conspiracy theorist. I don't know.
Whatever the case, he's done an extraordinary amount of pretty spot-on work over the years; writing him off entirely because he doesn't support this one matter seems to me to be jumping the gun somewhat. I admire him because he's got decades of fine campaigning journalism behind him which I've found interesting and highly informative. If he happens to take a different position on one given subject, I don't see that as a reason to throw all his books away. That's what I meant by 'truther good, not truther bad'; defining people on whether or not they happen to endorse trutherism is just defining people's entire work on the specific example of a single issue. IMHO, Pilger has far more to offer overall than the likes of that reactionary bozo Alex Jones.
_________________
It's a man's life in MOSSAD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Long Tooth
Moderate Poster
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Posts: 306
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dogsmilk wrote: | | Long Tooth wrote: | | Dogsmilk wrote: | If Pilger doesn't believe 911 to be an inside job, why does that therefore mean he's a liar?
Why does it discredit him?
After all his decades of pioneering journalism, him not explicitly backing the truth movement means he's now all wrong?
Is it now at 'truther good, not truther bad'? |
Pilger, we are led to believe is a very thorough researcher, dont you find it the least bit odd when he constantly refers to the saudi terrorists that did 9/11?
as nobody knows who or if anybody was on the planes that day, why does he point the finger at mythical saudi hijackers?
Are you seriously suggesting that pilger with meticulous investigation/research cannot spot the saudis did it hoax?
i find it odd with his researching/investigation methods that he ignores the mountains of lies in the official story of 9/11, and perpetualy spews out 9/11 lies.
good or bad, black and white, no inbetween for you either eh..
pioneering journalism good, misrepresenting 9/11 good too.
he may have his reasons for lying about 9/11, thats up to him, you may admire him for lying, thats up to you too. My opinion of him is hes repeating lies reg 9/11. thats only my opinion. After all, millions died in two world wars to give us all the right to be wrong didant they? (gave their lives so we could be free and speak freely, what a tragic waste of lives eh?) |
To tell a lie is to consciously say things you don't believe to be true. I'm not aware of any evidence Pilger is engaged in this, so I can't personally see him as a liar.
I don't believe in making black and white judgements; to say that Pilger is a liar just because he doesn't back the inside job angle of 911 is exactly the kind of black and white thinking I'm bemoaning.
There may be many reasons why Pilger does not endorse the truth movement. He may sincerely reject its claims, he may believe there isn't sufficient direct evidence to make a public stand, he may be worried about being labelled a conspiracy theorist. I don't know.
Whatever the case, he's done an extraordinary amount of pretty spot-on work over the years; writing him off entirely because he doesn't support this one matter seems to me to be jumping the gun somewhat. I admire him because he's got decades of fine campaigning journalism behind him which I've found interesting and highly informative. If he happens to take a different position on one given subject, I don't see that as a reason to throw all his books away. That's what I meant by 'truther good, not truther bad'; defining people on whether or not they happen to endorse trutherism is just defining people's entire work on the specific example of a single issue. IMHO, Pilger has far more to offer overall than the likes of that reactionary bozo Alex Jones. |
Nice post dogsmilk, i agree with what you say.
I am not writing him off entirely, just sceptical of him. If hes misleading me on 9/11, how do i know he hasant been misleading me in the past?
perhaps he tows the official line of the mythical saudi hijackers whithout examining 9/11. or indorcing the official myths after examining 9/11.
perhaps he regurgatates the saudis did it myths, knowing to question it will see him denied coloumn space in the tabloids, theres many perhaps's there. I dont know either, i just find it mystifying that the biggest hoax ever, which ties into the middle east and the rest of the world, he's either silent or repeating lies. Surely with his reputation, how can he repeat myths without investigating/examining things? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faust
Minor Poster
Joined: 20 Jul 2007
Posts: 19
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Long Tooth wrote: | I am not writing him off entirely, just sceptical of him. If hes misleading me on 9/11, how do i know he hasant been misleading me in the past?...
...Surely with his reputation, how can he repeat myths without investigating/examining things? |
But you're sowing seeds of doubt because he might think it was saudi hijackers that did it? He might not think that part of the story is worth investigating. There is absolutely nothing to be misled on in his writings.
_________________
reality is a manufactured illusion |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dogsmilk wrote: | If Pilger doesn't believe 911 to be an inside job, why does that therefore mean he's a liar?
Why does it discredit him?
After all his decades of pioneering journalism, him not explicitly backing the truth movement means he's now all wrong?
Is it now at 'truther good, not truther bad'? |
If he can't see 911 was an inside job he is an idioit. If he can he is a liar. As for the Ladins...
| Quote: | The Saudi Dynasty: Where Do They Come From and Who Is their Real Ancestor?
http://ethnikoi.org/saudi.htm
by Muhammad Salaam
RESEARCH AND PRESENTATION OF: MOHAMMAD SAKHER, ordered killed by the Saudi Regime for the following findings:
1. Do the Saudi Family members belong to the Tribe of ANZA BEN WA'EL, as they allege?
2. Is Islam their actual religion?
3. Are they of ARAB ORIGIN at all?
The following facts will blot out all the allegations of the Saudi Family and will refute all the false statements made by those hypocrites who sold their conscience to this family by falsifying and interpolating the real history of the Saudi Family; I mean the journalists and historians who, for a financial temporal reward, have inserted and attached the genealogy of this family to our Great Prophet Muhammad ( ) alleging that the Saudis are viceroys of our Almighty Allah on the Earth. It is quite clear that such a flattery is intended to vindicate and justify the Saudis' Crimes and Atrocities, so as to firmly stabilize their Throne and to prop the pillars of their despotic regime. Which is extremely dictatorial and completely rejected by our great Islamic Faith.
Kingship is accursed in our Islamic Religion, in the Holy Qur'aan, because it is an imposed authority of One Person and his Family members to suppress the people and silence any other voice "of opposition" to the king's despotic and completely dictatorial rules. So kings are denounced in the Holy Qur'aan in this verse: "Kings, when they enter a country, despoil it, and make the noblest of its people the meanest. Thus do they behave." (27-34)
Nevertheless, the Saudi Family ignores this Qur'aanic verse, and alleges falsely that they are the strongest believers in the Holy Qur'aan, while in interim; they issue their strict orders to prohibit such Qur'aanic verses from being recited on the radio or the TV. At the same time, such verses are strictly forbidden by them to appear written on any journal, because their recitation or printing affects the Seat of Majesty!
WHO ARE THESE SAUDIS? WHERE ARE THEY FROM? AND WHAT IS THEIR FINAL GOAL?
The Saudi Family members know perfectly well the Muslims all over the world have already known their real Jewish Origin. Muslims have now known all their bloody past, which was, and still is stuck in the same mire of Brutal Despotism and Atrocity. Presently, they exert their utmost efforts to conceal their Jewish Origin by covering themselves with the cloak of the Islamic Religion, so as to try to keep their real Jewish Ancestry hidden in the dark by connecting their family tree with our Holy Prophet Muhammad ( ).
They forget or ignore that Islam does never give any favorable attention to genealogy or "Family Trees"; it favors and honors indiscriminately all human beings whose actions and words are commensurate with the doctrines of the Holy Qur'aan as confirmed by the following Qur'aanic verse: "O Mankind! We created you from a single (Pair) of a male and female, and made you into nations and tribes, so that you may know each other (not that you may despise each other.) Verily, the most honored by you in the Sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you." (49-13)
Anyone who is iniquitous and blasphemous cannot affiliate him/her self to our great Prophet Muhammad ( ) even though he/she may be the closest blood relative to him. Bilal, the Abyssinian slave, who was a faithful Muslim, was much more honored by Islam than Abu Lahab, the pagan, who was the real blood uncle of our Prophet. In Islam there is no favoritism. Allah sets the degree of comparison in Islam according to the person's piety and not according to his/her worldly status of affiliation to any dynasty.
Who is the Real Ancestor of the Clan of Saud?
In the year 851 A.H. a group of men from Al Masaleekh Clan, which was a branch of Anza Tribe, formed a caravan for buying cereals (wheat and corn) and other foodstuff from Iraq, and transporting it back to Najd. The head of that group was a man called Sahmi Bin Hathlool. The caravan reached Basra, where the members of the group went to a cereal merchant who was a Jew, called Mordakhai bin Ibrahim bin Moshe. During their bargaining with that merchant, the Jew asked them: "Where are you from?" They answered: "From Anza Tribe; a Clan of Al Masaleekh." Upon hearing that name, the Jew started to hug so affectionately each on the them saying that he, himself, was also from the clan of Al Masaleekh, but he had come to reside in Basra (Iraq) in consequence to a family feud between his father and some members of Anza Tribe.
After he recounted to them his fabricated narrative, he ordered his servants to load all of the camels with wheat, dates, and tamman; a remarkable deed so generous that astonished the Masaleekh men and aroused their pride to find such an affectionate (cousin) in Iraq-the source of sustenance; they believed each word he said, and, because he was a rich merchant of the food commodities which they were badly in need, they accepted him (even though he was a Jew concealed under the garb of an Arab from Al Masaleekh clan).
When the caravan was ready to depart returning to Najd, that Jewish merchant asked tem to accept his company, because he intended to go with them to his original homeland, Najd. Upon hearing that from him, they wholeheartedly welcomed him with a very cheerful attitude.
So that (concealed) Jew reached Najd with the caravan. In Najd, he started to promulgate a lot of propaganda for himself through his companions (his alleged cousins), a fact, which gathered around him a considerable number of new supporters. But, unexpectedly, he confronted a campaign of opposition to his views led by Sheikh Saleh Salman Abdullah Al Tamimi, who was a Muslim religious preacher in Al-Qaseem. The radius of his preaching area included Najd, Yemen, and Hijaz, a fact which compelled the Jew (the Ancestor of the present Saud family) to depart from Al Qaseem to Al Ihsa, where he changed his name (Mordakhai) to Markan bin Dir'iya near Al-Qateef, where he started to spread among the inhabitants a fabricated story about the shield of our Prophet Muhammad ( ) that it was taken as a booty by an Arab pagan in consequence of the Battle of Uhud between the Arab pagans and the Muslims. "That shield," he said, "was sold by the Arab pagan to a Jewish clan called Banu Qunaiqa who preserved it as a treasure! He gradually enhanced his position among the Bedouins through such stories, which indicated how the Jewish clans in Arabia were so influential, and deserved high esteem. He gained some personal importance among the Bedouins, and decided to permanently settle there, at Dir'iya town, neat Al Qateef, which he decided to be his "Capital" on the Persian Gulf. He aspired to make it his springboard for establishing a Jewish Kingdom in Arabia.
In order to fulfil his ambitious scheme, he started to approach the desert Arab Bedouins for support of his position, and then gradually, he declared himself as their king!
At that juncture, Ajaman Tribe, together with Banu Khaled Tribe became fully aware of that Jewish cunning plan after they had verified his true identity, and decided to put an end to him. They attacked his town and conquered it, but before arresting him he had escaped by the skin of his teeth.
That Jewish ancestor of the Saudi Family, Mordakhai, sought shelter in a farm at that time called Al-Malibeed-Ghusaiba near Al-Arid, which is called at our present time Al-Riyadh.
He requested the owner of that farm to grant him asylum. The farmer was so hospitable that he immediately gave him sanctuary. But no longer than a month had he (Mordakhai) stayed there, when he assassinated the landlord and all members of his family, pretending that they were killed by an invading band of thieves. Then he pretended that he had bought the estate from them before the catastrophe happened! Accordingly, he had the right to reside there as a landlord. He then gave a new name to that place: Al-Diriya-the same name as that he had lost.
That Jewish ancestor (Mordakhai) of the Saudi Family, was able to establish a "Guest House" called "Madaffa" on the land he usurped from his victims, and gathered around him a group of hypocrites who started to spread out false propaganda for him that he was a prominent Arab Sheikh. He plotted against Sheikh Saleh Salman Abdulla Al Tamimi, his original enemy, and caused his assassination in the mosque of the town called Al-Zalafi.
After that, he felt satisfied and safe to make Al-Diriya his permanent home. There he practiced polygamy at a wide scale, and indeed, he begot a lot of children whom he gave pure Arab names.
Ever since his descendants grew up in number and power under the same name of Saudi Clan, they have followed his steps in practicing under ground activities and conspiracies against the Arab nation. They illegally seized rural sectors and farmlands and assassinated every person who tried to oppose their evil plans. They used all kinds of deceit for reaching their goals; they bought the conscience of their dissidents; they offered their women and money to influential people in that area, particularly those who started to write the true biography of that Jewish family; they bribed the writers of history in order to purify their ignominious history, and to make their lineage related to the most prominent Arab tribes such as Rabi'a, Anza, and Al Masaleekh.
A conspicuous hypocrite in our era, whose name is Mohammad Amin Al Tamimi - Director/Manager of the contemporary Libraries of the Saudi Kingdom, made up a genealogical tree (family tree) for this Jewish family (the Saudis), connecting them to our Great Prophet Muhammad ( ). For his false work, he received a reward of 35 thousand Egyptian pounds from the then Saudi Ambassador to Cairo, Egypt, in the year 1362 A.H. -1943 A.D. The name of that Ambassador is Ibrahim Al-Fadel.
As aforementioned, the Jewish ancestor of the Saudi family, (Mordakhai), practiced polygamy by marrying a lot of Arab women and begot many children; his polygamous practice is, at the present time, being carried out "to the letter" by his descendants; they cling to his martial heritage!
One of Mordakhai's sons called Al-Maraqan, arabized from the Jewish root Mack-ren, begot a son called Mohammad, then another son called Saud, which is the name of the present day Saudi Dynasty.
Descendants of Saud (the present day Saudi Family) started a campaign of assassination of the prominent leaders of the Arab Tribes under the pretence that those leaders were apostates; renegading from the Islamic Religion, and deserting their Qur'aanic doctrines; so they deserved the Saudi condemnation and slaughter!
In the History Book of the Saudi Family pages 98-101, their private family historian declares that the Saudi dynasty considers all people of Najd blasphemous, so their blood must be shed, their properties confiscated, and their females taken as concubines; no Muslim is authentic in his/her belief unless he/she belongs (affiliates) to the sect of Mohammad bin Abdul Wahab (whose origins are also Jewish from Turkey). His doctrines give authority to the Saudi Family to destroy villages with all their inhabitants - males including children, and to sexually assault their women; stab the bellies of the pregnant, and cut off the hands of their children, then burn them! They are further authorized by such a brutal doctrine to plunder all the properties of which they call renegades (not following their Wahabi sect.)
Their hideous Jewish family has, in fact, done all that kind of atrocities in the name of their false religious sect (the Wahabi), which has actually been invented by a Jew so as to sow the seeds of terror in the hearts if people in towns and villages. This Jewish Dynasty has been committing such brutal atrocities ever since 1163 A.H. They have named the whole Arabian Peninsula after their family name (Saudi Arabia) as if the whole region is their own personal real estate, and that all other inhabitants are their mere servants or slaves, toiling day and night for the pleasure of their masters (The Saudi Family).
They are completely holding the natural wealth of the country as their own property. If any poor person from the common people raises his/her voice complaining against any of the despotic rules of this Jewish Dynasty, the Dynasty cuts off his/her head in the public square. A princess of theirs once visited Florida, USA, with her retinue; she rented 90 (ninety) Suite rooms in a Grand Hotel for about one million dollars a night! Can anyone of her subjects comment about that extravagant event? If he/she does, his/her fate is quite known: DEATH WITH THE EDGE OF THE SAUDI SWORD IN THE PUBLIC SQUARE!
WITNESSES ON THE JEWISH ANCESTRY OF THIS SAUDI FAMILY:
In the 1960's the "Sawt al Arab " Broadcasting Station in Cairo, Egypt, and the Yemen Broadcasting Station in Sana'a confirmed the Jewish ancestry of the Saudi family.
King Faisal Al-Saud at that time could not deny his family's kindred with the Jews when he declared to the Washington Post on Sept.17, 1969 stating: "We, the Saudi Family, are cousins of the Jews: we entirely disagree with any Arab or Muslim Authority which shows any antagonism to Jews; but we must live together with them in peace. Our country (Arabia) is the fountain head from where the first Jew sprang, and his descendants spread out all over the world." That was the declaration of King Faisal Al-Saud bin Abdul Aziz!
Hafez Wahbi, the Saudi legal advisor, mentioned in his book entitled "The Peninsula of Arabia" that King Abdul Aziz A-Saud, who died in 1953, had said: "Our message (Saudi Massage) encountered the opposition of all Arab Tribes. My grandfather, Saud Awal, once imprisoned a number of the Sheikhs of Matheer Tribe; and when another group of the same tribe came to intercede for the release of the prisoners, Saud Awal gave orders to his men to cut off the heads of all the prisoners, then, he wanted to humiliate and derogate the interceders by inviting them to eat from a banquet he prepared from the cooked flesh of his victims whose cut off heads he place in the top of the food platters! The interceders became so alarmed and declined to eat the flesh of their relatives, and, because of their refusal to eat, he ordered his men to cut off their heads too. That hideous crime was committed by that self imposed king to innocent people whose guilt was their opposition to his most cruel and extremely despotic rules.
Hafez Wahbi states further that King Abdul Aziz Al-Saud related that bloody true story to the Sheikhs of the Matheer Tribs, who visited him in order to intercede for their prominent leader at that time, Faisal Al Darweesh, who was the king's prisoner. He related that story to them in order to prevent them from interceding for the release of their Sheikh; otherwise, they would meet the same fate; he killed the Sheikh and used his blood as an ablution liquid from him just before he stood up for his prayer (after the false sect doctrine of the Wahabi). The guilt of Faisal Darweesh at that time was that he had criticized King Abdul Aziz Al-Saud when the king signed the document which the English Authorities prepared in 1922 as a declaration for giving Palestine to the Jews; his signature was obtained in the conference held at Al Aqeer in 1922.
That was and still is the system of this regime of the Jewish, Saudi Family. All its goals are: plundering the wealth of the country, robbing, falsifying, and committing all kinds of atrocity, iniquity, and blasphemy - all are executed in compliance with their self invented Wahabi Sect which legalizes the chopping of the heads of their opposing subjects. |
http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=160241
...still under the microscope BTW
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
