Ibn Saud’s Star Wanes, British Scheme to Dislodge Americans 1948

kudzu

Verified User
New York Post
FRIDAY, APRIL 30, 1948

Ibn Saud’s Star Wanes

British Scheme to Dislodge Americans

From Middle-East Oil Control
By OBSERVER
In recent days the inner struggle in the Arab world for domination has taken a decisive turn. The star of Ibn Saud, king of Saudi-Arabia, is setting with the rise of the star of Abdullah, king of Transjordan. In this change, the figure behind the scene are British and American interests. Abdullah is a stooge of the British.

Ibn Saud is a protege of the Americans. The entire setup shows that the British have been not only playing against Jewish interests in Palestine but developing a long-range scheme against American interests in the Middle East.

The end of the First World War saw the Emir of Mecca under the Turks, Hussein Ibn Ali of the Hashimite Family, become king of independent Arabia. One of his sons, Feisal, was enthroned in Damascus, from which he was later removed by the French, and then invited to be king of the new kingdom of Iraq under the British mandate. Abdullah, another son of Hussein, and the elder brother of Feisal; became Emir of Transjordan, which had been separated from the body of Palestine but kept within the Palestine mandate entrusted to the British by the League of Nations.

Thus the family of Hussein the Hashimite ruled over the major part of the Arabian Peninsula and over Iraq and Transjordan.

* * *

A LEADER of the Wahhabi tribe of religious zealots, by the name of Ibn Saud, who ruled in Nejd, in the western part of the Peninsula, rose against Hussein Ibn Ali, king of Mecca and “all Arab countries.”

Only shortly before, in March, 1924, Hussein, during a visit at Amman, Transjordan, had proclaimed himself the Caliph of all Moslems. Ibn Saud marched toward Mecca. Hussein and his heir Ali were defeated. Hussein abdicated and went into exile, and was brought by a British warship to Cyprus, a British Crown Colony. There he died.

Feisal, King of Iraq, involved himself in a protracted dispute with Ibn Saud and had the British on his side. When Feisal died and his son, who succeeded him, was killed in an accident another son became the present regent of Iraq, the king being a child, a grandson of Feisal.

Abdullah is now the head of the Hashimite family and a bitter enemy of Ibn Saud, who expelled his father from Mecca. Abdullah is a British puppet and was elevated to the kingship by the British on May 25, 1946. By this step that part of the mandate over Palestine which is on the east of the Jordan was terminated—a wholly unauthorized act, since the British had no right to make such changes in the body of the mandate without the approval of the League of Nations or its heir, the United Nations.

* * *

THE head of the Moslem world is the Caliph. For centuries the Caliphate belonged to the Turkish Sultan. Since the deposal of the last Sultan, Abdul Hamid, and the rejection of the office by Kemal Ataturk, the first President of the Turkish Republic, following the separation of church and state in Turkey, there is no Caliph in the Moslem world.

The chief pretenders for the much desired role of Caliph are Abdullah, the son of Hussein, who was the deposed king of Mecca and a self-proclaimed Caliph; and Ibn Saud, the ruler of Saudi Arabia, which includes the emirate of Hejaz with Mecca and Medina.

Other pretenders are King Farouk of Egypt, the most populous country in the Middle East, but his weak personality does not impress the Arab world. Still another aspirant is the exiled ex-Mufti of Jerusalem, a schemer whose entire ambition is directed toward that goal. As a student of the Moslem law he is an ignoramus, and has made many enemies among prominent Arab families because of his assassination of his political foes. With the defeat of the bands which he sent to Palestine, his star has become completely dimmed.

* * *

THE two main aspirants to domination in the Arab world are personal enemies: Ibn Saud, who gave the oil concessions in his kingdom exclusively to American interests, and thus earned the animosity of the British; and Abdullah, whom he deprived of the throne at Mecca and who is a British-created, British-supported, and British-financed king.

In the event that Abdullah, with the help of the British, is successful in the war against Jewish Palestine, he, and not Ibn Saud, will be regarded as the head of the Arab world and as the natural successor to the Caliphate.

This is the objective for which the British prepare, using Jewish Palestine as a rung in the ladder in order that they and Abdullah may return to the riches of Saudi Arabia with its oil.

It is a long-range policy camouflaged by the Palestinian problem. The British Middle-East strategists have maneuvered the American oil companies and the State Department into playing decidedly against their own interests.

http://www.varchive.org/obs/480430.htm
 
The Brits spent the next 30 years trying to undermine American relations in Saudi Arabia.

They were pissed that they didn't get the oil concession.. The reason for that is the Brits wanted to control Saudi oil but NOT develop the oilfields..
 
The Brits spent the next 30 years trying to undermine American relations in Saudi Arabia.

They were pissed that they didn't get the oil concession.. The reason for that is the Brits wanted to control Saudi oil but NOT develop the oilfields..
 
The Brits spent the next 30 years trying to undermine American relations in Saudi Arabia.

They were pissed that they didn't get the oil concession.. The reason for that is the Brits wanted to control Saudi oil but NOT develop the oilfields..

You seem to have a deep seated hatred of the British, and Israel come to that.
 
The Brits spent the next 30 years trying to undermine American relations in Saudi Arabia.

They were pissed that they didn't get the oil concession.. The reason for that is the Brits wanted to control Saudi oil but NOT develop the oilfields..

Americans are remarkably uninformed about history...and I could improve myself. I lot of the shit we are dealing with today are because of decisions and events that go back to at least the 1950s....and in some cases, back the immediate aftermath of World War 1.

If we lived in a nation where one major political party did not admire abject ignorance, I would suggest we make middle east history, and religious history the three monotheistic faiths more widespread and available in high school and college.
 
Americans are remarkably uninformed about history...and I could improve myself. I lot of the shit we are dealing with today are because of decisions and events that go back to at least the 1950s....and in some cases, back the immediate aftermath of World War 1.

If we lived in a nation where one major political party did not admire abject ignorance, I would suggest we make middle east history, and religious history the three monotheistic faiths more widespread and available in high school and college.

I know... I think Operation Mass Appeal and the British booze wars in Arabia should make Americans angry.
 
I know... I think Operation Mass Appeal and the British booze wars in Arabia should make Americans angry.

Well, I don't know anything about that, so thanks for putting it on the radar.

I actually remember when pro-Kremlin Republicans used to pose as erstwhile uber-patriots, and would howl in protest at the mere mention that our CIA overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran, and gave aid and comfort to Saddam Hussein. I mean, these pro-Kremlin Republicans at one time would suggest I was being a traitor for daring to suggest invading Iraq would be a dumb ass idea.
Personally, I think you need to have contextual texture of history in mind, if one expects to make informed judgements.
 
Well, I don't know anything about that, so thanks for putting it on the radar.

I actually remember when pro-Kremlin Republicans used to pose as erstwhile uber-patriots, and would howl in protest at the mere mention that our CIA overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran, and gave aid and comfort to Saddam Hussein. I mean, these pro-Kremlin Republicans at one time would suggest I was being a traitor for daring to suggest invading Iraq would be a dumb ass idea.
Personally, I think you need to have contextual texture of history in mind, if one expects to make informed judgements.

Even McCain has recently admitted that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake.

Let me find you a link on the so called "booze wars".
 
Even McCain has recently admitted that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake.

Let me find you a link on the so called "booze wars".

I will give McCain some credit for that, but he is on his death bed. It is remarkable how imminent death is a great moral clarifier and compels one to confess their sins.

The time to admit it was a mistake was about 12 years ago, when it was clear the Iraq Misadventure was obviously a failure on an epic scale. That's when Chuck Hagel, Hillary Clinton, Walter Jones, et al. confessed their sin. Oddly enough, most pro-Iraq War supporters on jpp.com have not fessed up, nor has Donald Trump (who in fact lied about opposing the invasion of Iraq)
 
I will give McCain some credit for that, but he is on his death bed. It is remarkable how imminent death is a great moral clarifier and compels one to confess their sins.

The time to admit it was a mistake was about 12 years ago, when it was clear the Iraq Misadventure was obviously a failure on an epic scale. That's when Chuck Hagel, Hillary Clinton, Walter Jones, et al. confessed their sin. Oddly enough, most pro-Iraq War supporters on jpp.com have not fessed up, nor has Donald Trump (who in fact lied about opposing the invasion of Iraq)


Yes... McCain's admission is a bit late. Trump was for the war on Howard Stern..
 
Yes the Saudis invented that to distract attention, they just couldn't admit to there being terrorists.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3028083.stm

Derek Plumbly was the British Ambassador to KSA.. Everywhere he went there were bombings. It was a quickly organized bombing to implicate the Palestinians. Everyone in the kingdom knew there was NO bootleggers turf war.

Plumbly was a spook.

Referring to the 2000 Riyadh Bombing, Gordon Logan wrote that was Plumbly "routinely knighted to cover up the cock-up on his watch".

According to journalist Neil Mackay he was 'one of the key figures' in an alleged disinformation operation called Operation Mass Appeal from the late 1990s in the run up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Same thing happened in a resort town Sinai in 2005 when Plumbly was ambassador to Egypt.
 
When the British gave up their empire in the fifties and sixties they started a long gradual decline into being nothing but a pointless little rock in the North Atlantic.
 
Derek Plumbly was the British Ambassador to KSA.. Everywhere he went there were bombings. It was a quickly organized bombing to implicate the Palestinians. Everyone in the kingdom knew there was NO bootleggers turf war.

Plumbly was a spook.

Referring to the 2000 Riyadh Bombing, Gordon Logan wrote that was Plumbly "routinely knighted to cover up the cock-up on his watch".

According to journalist Neil Mackay he was 'one of the key figures' in an alleged disinformation operation called Operation Mass Appeal from the late 1990s in the run up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Same thing happened in a resort town Sinai in 2005 when Plumbly was ambassador to Egypt.

Yes, I can read as well as you, the difference is I think is mostly bullshit.
 
Back
Top