The Arabs Spent A Whopping $20,000,000 So That A U.S. Politician Can Marry A Camel Dressed Up In A Muslim Hijab

By Walid Shoebat

If you are an American and still do not understand the meaning of ‘Hijab‘ and ‘Bakhshish‘ then you get an ‘f’ on your middle-east studies. So here is a crash-course from a story that will blow your mind on how Arabs buy U.S. politicians. When a trove of diplomatic correspondence pilfered from an email account of UAE Ambassador to the U.S. Yousef Al Otaiba it revealed that the UAE was on pace to contribute $20 million worth over the course of 2016 and 2017 to the Middle East Institute, one of Washington’s leading think tanks. This is what it costs to buy U.S. politicians and public opinion to turn everything Middle East in accordance to Arab (not U.S.) foreign policy.

So now you know what ‘Bakhshish‘ means, right? This ‘bribe’ must also have a cover. ‘Hijab’ literally means a covering of a shame which is why Muslim women dress up in one and in America it can be colorful and deceptive.

This is why on we always said to never trust analysts and ‘think tanks’ since the funder (the one who is paying the bakhshish) dictates the outcome. This time its UAE Arab money and its all covered up with a Hijab, which completely blocks off the shame from being seen by the naked eye.

Its that simple.

The outsized contribution, which the UAE concealed was to have the institute (according to the agreement) to “augment its scholar roster with world class experts in order to counter the more egregious misperceptions about the region, inform U.S. government policy makers” and “to convene regional [U.S] leaders for discreet dialogue on pressing issues.”

In other words, money will buy U.S. Policy in the Middle East.

Founded in 1946 MEI is a major influential player in Washington foreign policy circles. These then of course regularly appear on cable news, author papers, host private briefings and appear on panels in between stints in government. Washington itself is awash in money from both foreign corporations and foreign governments.

To put it more bluntly, if you do not mind that the UAE runs U.S. Middle East foreign policy, then the MEI is for you. After all, the UAE bends U.S. policy in a more militant direction toward UAE’s foes, Iran and Qatar whom you might hate. But keep in mind this also boosts Saudi Arabian influence who is a main causer of the crisis in the Middle East. Who cares after all about all the people who are dying since money talks, right? But the crucial issue is that you, as a U.S. citizen, should not trust much of what comes out of the mouths of ‘experts’ and are better off trusting what comes “out of the mouth of babes” on things ‘middle east’.

And this is not the first time that MEI was hunting Arab petrodollars. In April 2008, Mac McClelland Jr., then a UAE-based consultant, reached out on behalf of MEI president Wendy Chamberlin to tell Otaiba he had committed to raising $50 million from the UAE for the MEI institute.

And what was this $50,000,000 for? “I suspect that now is the right time to approach the respective leaders [of the UAE] given the huge liquidity in the country as well as the obvious need to promote Arab/Muslim awareness in the US,” offered McClelland in one of the leaked emails.

Well, am sure that you as an ‘American’ still do not mind, right? After all, the UAE is a U.S. ally and ‘loving Muslims’ is a biblical mandate after all. So why not get paid for it, right?

But hey, even a Muslim bakhshish (bribes) has room to maneuver, Otaiba responded to McClelland telling him that he was asking for an awful lot since petrodollars do not grow on trees in the treeless deserts of Arabia. Otaiba negotiates back: “I’m aware of MEI’s fundraising drive and I’ll do what I can to help support it but I feel its important to manage expectations. I think the numbers you’re mentioning are a little far off our original estimates.”

The chairman of MEI’s board, Richard Clarke (former top national security adviser to both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush) was cheeper to buy in the past when he has been particularly openly critical of the Saudi government, until of course he received his last ‘bakhshish’, a miserable $500,000 check when Clarke once walked out of the Saudi embassy meeting with al-Jubeir.

As to how the ‘bakhshish’ from the UAE is also covered up under a ‘hijab’ veil, the checks are written by “The Emirates Center for Strategic Studies and Research (ECSSR)“, another ‘think tank’ based in Abu Dhabi. In other words, its one ‘think tank’ simply funding another ‘think tank’.

Its bakhshish talks and camel dung walks, all dressed up in a Hijab. For more of the juicy details on this story, see  at The InterceptSo this time its Arabs bribing Americans to keep the prices of Hijabi camels up. Who do we blame this one on? Lets see … the Jews.








  • Grandmere

    I love your wit, Chef!

  • Thank you, master chief, for teaching me about Bakhshish. I didn’t know what it mean and now I do, it’s a bribe.

    It immediately reminded me of this verse from Joel 3:3,”They have cast lots for My people, traded a boy for a harlot and sold a girl for wine that they may drink.”

  • Kamau41

    Excellent crash course on what ‘Bakhshish’ means. Thank you for teaching us something new daily as we continue to learn something new here all the time.

  • filomena seiffert

    If the hijab is the cover for shame it means that men in he islamic world consider woman a shame so that she has to wrap her head.

    • Higlac

      In fact, Islam HATES women, following the example of its “perfect, ideal man the Prophet” Mohammed. Moslems typically disdain women as mere breeding machines (real sexual pleasure is reserved for prepubescent boys!!), and if a girl is born, the man may blame both the girl AND the mother – all the way to and including killing one or both thereof.

      The niqab and the burqa are symptoms, not the root cause of a woman’s sorry plight in Moslem society – that’s Mohammed’s “preaching” (including the Qur’ân!!) and “traditions”. In fact, I remember reading somewhere that various imams (muftis, mullahs, ayatollahs) have said if Moslems could either “live eternally” &/or use artificial wombs, they would be happy to get rid of the entire female half of ALL Mankind – and that sounds completely in character. EVERYTHING about Islamic dress is designed to make women as anonymous, unattractive, unremarkable and pathetic as possible.

      In Pakistan and India, the custom of purdah would even keep women as totally invisible to the world as possible: their NEVER being visible even in those dreadful cloth-tents – they instead have to be kept in carriages carefully-constructed so they can’t be seen the very instant they step outside of a house.

      • There was a line from a movie I once saw. The actor playing as a blonde Jesus in disguise said to a young woman he was debating with, “Men can dress women in concrete and they would still find a way to lust.”

        That line, out of the entire movie, stuck with me.

        • filomena seiffert


          • susan

            The man. A woman can make even concrete desirable.

          • filomena seiffert

            In my opinion, woman try to make self desirable for man as the societies of centuries only saw value in woman if she could find a husband, the younger the better. The problem is the moral decadency of western

          • filomena seiffert

            cont… western societies came to very low understanding of beauty and created fashions to expose woman’s body and man like it for the male seams to put sex above everything, above love, respect and dignity. I came to think males are incapable a female with a love above sex. Woman needs to come to a mature stage where she does not trust when males say they love her, to separate the wheat from the tares. Our Lady said in Fatima that many fashions would appear on the world that greatly displeased God, and it is happening since the sixties I believe.

          • susan

            We have definitely become decadent. I have compassion on the young though because they’re like fish. Like Ted teaches…The last thing they realize is they’re wet. They don’t know any other way. Christianity is always mocked and its followers are portrayed as “losers”.

      • filomena seiffert

        Thanks Higlac, it is a very good exposition of the sect. I am more convinced the sect is truly creation of satan because he hates woman more then man as God decreed the woman would crush satan’s head. It is so good to have you in this site as your knowledge is so vast, always giving us more understanding. God bless you more and more.

      • Quote “…and if a girl is born, the man may blame both the girl AND the mother – all the way to and including killing one or both thereof.”

        As you may know, the irony is that it is not even the woman’s fault for determining whether a child will be a boy or a girl. While the female has XX chromosomes, it is the normal human XY chromosomes of the father that are the determining factor. If conception is by the father’s X chromosome, the result is a girl; the Y results in a boy.
        Even in medieval times, kings would blame their wives for not conceiving a boy and would either divorce or behead the wife as a result.

  • Kelly Ann

    Lol love the last Line, my first taught was to blame it on the Russians as this is the current illusional trend.