1 posted on
01/21/2004 4:59:08 AM PST by
SJackson
To: SJackson
asIpredictedbump
2 posted on
01/21/2004 5:01:51 AM PST by
tracer
To: dennisw; Cachelot; Yehuda; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; ...
If you'd like to be on or off this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.
3 posted on
01/21/2004 5:06:11 AM PST by
SJackson
To: SJackson
"the horrifying conclusion is that the royal family is not only divided but certain princes sympathize with Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorist organization"
A flair for the dramatic?
Since this has been known to everyone with any interest in the royal family, it's not horrifying or surprising news. It's business as usual for the royals.
4 posted on
01/21/2004 5:14:45 AM PST by
nuconvert
( "It had only one fault. It was kind of lousy.")
To: SJackson
Someone posted an article that claimed that pro-Saudi/Wahabi propaganda expenditures world wide have been tremendous. Does anyone remember the article or have further details with reliable sources?
5 posted on
01/21/2004 5:16:04 AM PST by
risk
To: SJackson
The President has claimed that the war in Iraq is justified, if not by WMDs, then by the prosecution of terrorists
and the countries that harbor and fund them. No argument from me about that!
Some of the post State of the Union democrat spinners were asking why, then, are we not at war with Saudi Arabia. Though clearly an attempt to undermine the president, I believe that they have a good point.
To: SJackson
They were only self delusional because they thought their complicity in aiding aq and terrorists would help protect their kingdom. My money is on them knowing the camps were there the whole time.
7 posted on
01/21/2004 5:23:47 AM PST by
freeangel
(freeangel)
To: SJackson
This is no time to entrust America--and the world--to a bunch of loose-cannon, screwball Democrat "activists".
George W. Bush MUST be re-elected President!
10 posted on
01/21/2004 6:53:44 AM PST by
Savage Beast
(Whom will the terrorists vote for? Not George Bush--that's for sure! ~Happy2BMe)
To: SJackson
Arnaud de Borchgrave Bump.
17 posted on
01/21/2004 8:01:40 AM PST by
DoctorMichael
(Thats my story, and I'm sticking to it.)
To: SJackson
"Well concealed from prying Western eyes, the ruling family is in the throes of its worst crisis in its 71 years. "
For some reason this sentence puts a smile on my face.
To: SJackson; Angelus Errare
To: SJackson
I'm gonna Bump this for the 'evening FReepers' that may have missed this.
Also, because it gives a number that I have seen time and again asked about here ar FR: The number of DIRECT DECENDENTS of ibn Saud............
The founder of the dynasty, Abd al-Aziz ibn Saud, married 235 women and kept 660 concubines. Their pictures and particulars were enclosed in a huge gold-embossed album for occasional perusal during daylong Cabinet meetings that the king had a habit of interrupting. This reporter met with the founder in 1952 (he died in 53) and courtiers were proud to brag about the monarch's gargantuan sexual appetites, proof of great strength. The family is 24,000-strong today (including girls and wives).
Arnaud de Borchgrave Bump.
21 posted on
01/21/2004 5:36:42 PM PST by
DoctorMichael
(Thats my story, and I'm sticking to it.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson