[Mr. Mojo]

This year and a half old piece isn't in the archives of either FR or National Review Online (where it was originally published) anymore, so I thought I'd resurrect it.

[risk]

bttt

[freedom44]

Mojo thanks for the piece.

Ping --Saudi Scum.

[freedom44]

What i keep trying to tell people is that the Saudi's have the strictest form of Islam in the entire world, but few believe it since they're considered our 'ally'.

Things that are 'acceptable' in a place like Saudi Arabia are downright offensive in a place like Iran.

[Mr. Mojo]

Another article with an identical title, this time written by Michael Barone, U.S. News and World Report, June 3, 2002:

Our Enemies, the Saudis:

Fifteen of the 19 September 11 hijackers were Saudis. Perhaps as many as 80 percent of the prisoners held at Guantanamo are Saudis. Osama bin Laden is a Saudi, and al Qaeda was supported by large contributions from Saudis, including members of the Saudi royal family. The Saudis' cooperation with our efforts to track down the financing of al Qaeda appears to be somewhere between minimal and zero. They got us to let members of the bin Laden family scamper out of the United States on a private jet shortly after September 11. They refuse to provide - as almost every other country has - manifests of plane passengers flying to the United States.

Such behavior is nothing new. The Saudis stymied the FBI investigation of the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing. The Saudis refused a U.S. request in 1996 that they take custody of bin Laden; he went to Afghanistan instead. They refused in 1995 to hand over Imad Mughniyah, believed responsible for the bombing of a Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983. Far from aiding our efforts against terrorism, the Saudis have worked against them - to protect the terrorists in their own ranks.

Also, the Saudis have praised suicide bombings and raised money for the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Government-controlled Saudi media have frequently spread the vilest kinds of anti-U.S. and anti-Jewish propaganda.

Such has been the behavior of those the State Department has long referred to as "our friends the Saudis." It would be more accurate to call them our enemies the Saudis.

Freedoms? Zero for seven. The Saudis run a totalitarian society. Not one of the seven freedoms identified by President Bush in his State of the Union speech - the rule of law, limits on the power of the state, respect for women, private property, free speech, equal justice, religious tolerance - is honored by the Saudis.

There is no free speech and no freedom of religion (during the Gulf War the Saudis did not allow President Bush to conduct a religious service on Saudi soil), and women are restricted and physically assaulted by religious police who prowl the streets (and, by some accounts, would not allow teenage girls to leave a burning school, lest they not be properly clad; 15 girls died).

But the Saudis are not content to run a totalitarian society at home; they are trying to export their totalitarian Wahhabi Islam around the world. Since the Gulf War, the Saudis have financed Wahhabi clerics and Wahhabi-run mosques and schools in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Western Europe, and the United States.

The results can be seen on the Edgware Road in London or Leesburg Pike in Northern Virginia: Journalists have no trouble finding young people spouting the most vituperative anti-U.S. and anti-Jewish propaganda and swearing that they would fight for Islam against the United States. The Saudis are waging war against us, financing the spread of the idea that our free society must be overthrown and totalitarian Wahhabi Islam must be imposed by force.

So why do some still call the Saudis our friends? Because they have the power to keep oil prices down? That leverage is being reduced by increased oil production by our friends Russia and Mexico. Because they are anti-Communist? Communism is no longer a threat. Because they are used to heeding the mellifluous advice of Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar? What has he done to stop al Qaeda or the propagation of totalitarian Wahhabi Islam? Because we depend on Saudi military bases? Despite Pentagon denials, it seems we are wisely dispersing our forces in the gulf.

It may not be prudent yet to speak the truth out loud, that the Saudis are our enemies. But they should know that it is increasingly apparent to the American people that they are effectively waging war against us. And they should know that we have the capacity to destroy their military, presumably in a matter of hours. The Saudis' eastern provinces, with their oil, could be given to their Shiite Muslim majority, now oppressed by the Sunni Muslim Saudi rulers. The holy cities of Mecca and Medina could be returned to the custody of the Hashemites (Jordan's King Abdullah's family), who unlike the Saudis are direct descendants of the prophet Mohammed. Let the Saudis have the sands of central Arabia and their bank accounts in Switzerland, hotel suites in London, and villas on the Riviera.

President Bush has said that we must have regime change in Iraq to be safe from terrorism. It is increasingly clear that we must have regime change in Saudi-ruled Arabia as well.

[dix]

I don't trust those A-Rab bastards any further than I can throw them, but Mr Hanson is someone I listen to.

[singsong]

bump for later

[PoorMuttly]

Maybe our new best bud Mo in Libya will set them up the bomb, to show how much he loves us.

We could trade him for Neverland, which I hear will be looking for a new resident dignitary.

[marron]

This is one of the best analyses I have read of the Saudi kingdom and how they fit into the overall mideast puzzle.

There are several forms of muslim radicalism but Saudi-funded Islamism is the most virulent and hateful of all of them. And the one whose hatred is most directed at the US, oddly enough.

But the road to Riyadh did lay through Baghdad. There was no way to put the kind of pressure on Riyadh that they merit while we still needed them for the containment of Iraq. It was necessary to finish up the 12-year war against Saddam in order to free ourselves from the Saudis.

That has been done, and we are now free of them.

The idea that we somehow need the Saudis for their oil is mistaken. They need to sell it far more than we need to buy it. The idea that OPEC controls the world's oil supply is laughable. OPEC, Saudi Arabia included, is a collection of bankrupt oil producers who dare not cut production for more than a short time; indeed, most announced oil production cuts are simply announced to cover cuts due to maintenance problems, which vanish as soon as the problem is resolved. All of the producers talk about controlling production while working like crazy to double their own production.

Their best hope is to convince their OPEC partners to cut production while increasing their own beneath the radar, but since they are all doing the same thing, no one falls for it.

So, no, we don't need the Saudis for their oil.

The basis of our relationship with them is their preference for American companies, which meant that for decades US companies were first in line for the mega-projects, their preference for US armament meant billiion dollar purchases every year just in time to fix our balance of trade problems, and most important of all, the kingdom's hermetic control of its territory and its banking secrecy made it the perfect platform for launching off-books operations. It also made it possible for generations of US public servants to provide for their retirement with the knowledge that their investment portfolios would remain private.

Don't underestimate the latter. During the nineties when the Clinton administration was on the rampage to eliminate banking secrecy everywhere, from Switzerland to the Caymans and beyond, not once did anyone turn their focus on Saudi Arabia, which remained curiously off-limits. Or maybe not so curiously if you assume that this is where the money is.

Others have pointed out how almost every US ambassador to Saudi Arabia has retired to head his own Saudi-funded policy institute, Baer's book points out that droves of CIA men retire to work as consultants for the kingdom. When the kingdom had no apparent ambitions of its own, it all seemed rather innocent, and perhaps it was. They seem so nice, they offer you a share of an investment in the kingdom, and out of respect for your need to comply with ethics rules back home it all stays right there, between friends. Your only problem is how to repatriate your investment income, which is where those think-tanks and policy institutes come in. Or maybe those book deals for books you may never write, or if you do you just hire some flunky for $20,000 and pay yourself $20 million for writing it. Or whatever. You let your money men figure all that out, thats what you pay them for.

Suffice to say that relations between the Saudis and our political class have been very close, so pulling the rug out from under these guys will have to be done very carefully. We want to bring them down, but we don't want to slapping cuffs on all our retired politicians.

[185JHP]

"Sparking disequilibrium" - "the carrying out of diplomacy by other means."

[goldstategop]

Its time to push the Saudis to open up and liberalize their society. Business as usual will no longer suffice after the events of 9-11.

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on or off this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

[PGalt]

Thanks/bump.

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks for resurrecting and posting this.

Old news is often very valid history. Valid history that many Americans are not aware of. In this case due to the massive amount of money spent by the Saudie PR to buy out American Media, Americans, the state department and other federal departments, the real history has been subverted by the Opecker Petro Blood $'s.

[manic4organic]

for later reading

[PogySailor]

A great VDH blast from the past.

As I was reading this, Mark Belling(sp?) -- today's Rush sub -- was talking about Al-Qaeda trying to topple the SA monarchy.

[Mr. Mojo]

BTTT

[technochick99]

bump for a later read

[Mr. Mojo]

bttt

[Mr. Mojo]

bttt