Ezekiel and the House of Saud
Vol: 63 Issue: 21 Thursday, December 21, 2006
During World War Two, official secrets were treated as weapons by both sides. US forces captured a German Enigma decoder in 1942 giving US intelligence officials an open channel to the German High Command.
Being able to decipher coded German messages shortened the war and saved uncounted lives. Had the secret leaked, Admiral Doenitz would have changed the codes. Secrecy in wartime is vital, if one hopes to win it.
Back in 2003, the 9/11 Commission submitted its final report on the events leading up to the assault on the World Trade Center and Pentagon but some twenty-eight pages of that report were ‘redacted’ (blacked out).
The 28 pages allegedly dealt with possible links between Saudi officials and the Sept 11 hijackers. But since they are classified, nobody knows for sure what they dealt with.
According to published leaks, the redacted portions laid out the details of the money trail between Saudi officials and supporters of Osama bin Laden.
Among others, it singles out Omar al-Bayoumi, who gave financial assistance to 9-11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar.
The FBI charges al-Bayoumi, an official of the Saudi civil aviation authority, never lacked for money and is believed to have received funds from a charitable trust run by the wife of the Saudi Ambassador to the U.S.
The Saudis, for all their protestations of cooperating in the war on terror, still refuse to allow the FBI access to al-Bayoumi. Explaining the redacted portions, President Bush said that, “declassification of that part of a 900-page document would reveal sources and methods that would make it harder for us to win the war on terror. … It would help the enemy if they knew our sources and methods.”
I’ve never had a problem with the government keeping wartime secrets. After all, if I know something, then so does the enemy. There’s stuff I don’t really need to know, but the enemy really, really does.
So if it keeps the enemy off-balance and gives our forces an edge, I’m ok with that. I am less worried about the 1st Amendment becoming a temporary casualty of war than I am of flesh-and-blood Americans becoming the more permanent kind.
During the 2nd World War, there were all kinds of restrictions on individual freedoms, with the 1st Amendment taking the biggest hit.
People lived according to the slogan; “Loose lips sink ships.” There was a great movie scene from the period in which some guy was shooting off his mouth about ship movements in the harbor in a bar.
To the delight of the other patrons of the bar (and undoubtedly, the audiences of the time) the movie’s hero, played by Humphrey Bogart, quietly slugged him to shut him up.
War news was heavily censored. Newspaper editors that refused to cooperate with ‘voluntary’ censorship rules were pressured out of their jobs. Some were arrested for violating the War Secrets Act.
So if it helps to shorten this war by keeping secrets, as I said, I am ok with that.
The New York Times of the 1940’s, loyal to the United States, wouldn’t have revealed US possession of an Engima machine, even if it knew we had one.
But the New York Times of the 21st century, loyal only to a political agenda, would have splashed it all over the front page. And has.
As a consequence of repeated leaks that put wartime secrets on the front pages, there is very little of America’s financial war against the terrorists that isn’t part of the national debate.
America’s ability to intercept terrorist communications has been compromised as lawmakers debate whether phone intercepts violate some recently-discovered Constitutional ‘right to privacy’.
Washington’s ability to monitor terror activity via international banking records has been compromised as lawmakers debate whether or not the Bush administration ‘went too far’.
Three years ago, before all this was leaked by traitorous officials to a traitorous press, the redaction of those 28 pages was justifiable. Today, one wonders what possible secrets could remain to be compromised by the redacted portion of the report?
Six years after the attack, and three years after the New York Times compromised the programs that were used to justify its classification, the secrets are still deemed too vital to national security to release to the public.
If the report exonerates the Saudis, then why not issue an executive summary to that effect? The Saudis have petitioned the White House to do just that, and the administration has refused, citing national security concerns.
There is an old saying; “Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.” It is hard to say which is the true motivation for the administration’s refusal to declassify the information. To protect a friend? Or to keep tabs on an enemy?
That Saudi Arabia is of strategic importance to the US is obvious, but a strategic relationship is not a ‘friendship’. But what is strategically important to the Saudis drives the relationship, rather than the other way around. And that is what is so unsettling.
Whatever it is that is being covered up about the Saudis spans both administrations. This morning’s headlines put Sandy Berger back on the front pages again as new details emerged about his theft of classified documents related to the Clinton administration pre-9/11 activities.
The National Archives Inspector General released its report of Berger’s theft, more than a year after Berger received a slap on the wrist in exchange for a guilty plea.
Berger didn’t just steal the documents, he deliberately and systematically destroyed them.
Berger admitted to stealing and destroying copies of a of a classified report prepared in 2000 on the so-called millennium terrorist plots. But stealing those particular documents makes little sense. The 9/11 Commission already had them.
What the NAIG report reveals is the extraordinary lengths Berger went to in order to conceal the theft, especially since the documents in question were already in the Commission’s hands.
Since missing documents are, by definition, missing, nobody knows what else Berger stole. And Berger’s slap on the wrist by a Bush Justice Department suggests the administration was equally eager for them to stay missing.
I don’t know what the reasons are behind the effort to protect the Saudis from responsibility for the monster they created. But I do know that, as strange as it all is, it conforms perfectly with the Ezekiel Scenario as he outlined it some 2500 years ago from captivity in Babylon.
Ezekiel identifies the various members of the Gog-Magog invasion forces by name, with Persia, or modern Iran, at the top of the list. The various other nations make up the bulk of Islamic North Africa, together with Russia (Gog) and its heavily Islamic ‘stans’ (Magog).
Ezekiel says that when this Russian/Iranian/Islamic confederation marches on Israel, the rest of the world launches what appears to be a weak diplomatic protest, but does NOT play a role in the conflict on either side.
“Sheba, and Dedan, and the merchants of Tarshish, with all the young lions thereof, shall say unto thee, Art thou come to take a spoil? hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey? to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to take a great spoil? ” (Ezekiel 38:13)
“Tarshish” was, in Ezekiel’s day, the western-most civilization of the known world. They were a wealthy and powerful seafaring nation, and Ezekiel’s inclusion of “all the young lions thereof” symbolizes the West and its colonies.
One popular theory says that Tarshish symbolizes Great Britain, and the former British Empire, which is symbolized by the British Lion. This theory allows for the inclusion of the United States as one of the ‘young lions thereof.’
While I think identifying America in the text goes beyond what the text says, it is clear that ‘Tarshish’ represents the West in general.
But what is significant to today’s OL is Ezekiel’s inclusion of Sheba and Dedan as members of this Western alliance. Sheba is modern Saudi Arabia. Dedan is modern Kuwait.
THAT is astonishing, when considered in context. America’s friendship with both the Saudis and Kuwaitis is schizophrenic, to say the least. The Saudis are the wellspring of Islamic terrorist philosophy and are, together with the Kuwaitis, among its chief financiers. Only the Taliban had more direct links to 9/11 than the Saudis.
Yet two successive administrations have gone to extraordinary lengths to protect America’s increasingly baffling relationship — despite the straight line between al-Qaeda and the House of Saud. It defies understanding, in the natural.
But 2,500 years ago, the prophet Ezekiel said that was how it was going to be in the last days. And that’s the way it is. Because this IS the appointed time.
No other conclusion makes sense.