OBL stated on numerous occasions that we (infidels) were occupying SA (holy lands).
Where is the confusion?
Where is the confusion?
Only in your mind. Who cares what he states? He represents no foreign power; especially a power that has invited us into their country. His beliefs are to be taken with no greater weight than yours or mine. They are opinion and carry no diplomatic weight.
The fact that Ron Paul gives them weight shows just how naive and misguided he is.
No confusion, the question for me is, what gives OBL the moral authority we should listen to him and obey his will regarding those lands? If we capitulate to his authority on this, what would his next demand be?
So what? Maybe OBL should go back to Saudi Arabia and tell the government why he is opposed to the United States being there.
And it is my understanding (and hopefully someone with a better grasp of Semitic tradition can clarify) that we ARE NOT occupying any holy land in Saudi Arabia. The tradition, that began with the Jews and has been adopted by Christians and Muhammadens is that SITES (the Wailing Wall, the Nativity, the mosque in Mecca, etc.) are holy land, some cities (Jerusalem) have so many holy sites that the entire city is considered holy (also, I believe the Muhammadens have declared the entire city of Mecca off-limits to non-Muhammadens); however, there is NO SUCH THING as a "holy country" if for no other reason than the fact that Saudi Arabia didn't exist as a country a century ago, much less at the time of Muhammad.
There is none.
The Aztlan movement has stated on numerous occasions that we (gringos) are occupying Aztlan land.
Every bit as legitimate of a stateless former Saudi terrorist.
As to the confusion who represents Saudi Arabia, that can be found between Ron Paul's ears.