Article

2005-03-14 Arabia

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Dan Darling 2005-03-14 1:29:23 AM|| || Front Page|| [7 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I have to ask:

What, precisely, does anyone - particularly these politicians - expect to happen?

Would allowing religious services for non-Muslims IK (In Kingdom) make it all better?

Would the Saudi Govt declaring it will (or has) stopped funding of Wahhabi pamphlets and other printed matter for distribution in the US make it all better?

Would their declaring that all Wahhabi funding to found new moskkks and "schools" and "institutes" in the US has been cut off make it all better?

Would ending all funding of Wahhabi interests in the US make it all better?

Would ending all funding of Wahhabi interests world-wide make it all better?

Though the article points out that Wahhabism is more an ideology (More? Lol!) is this only about "religious freedom" or ideological "intolerance"?

Without naming the goals, this is just a bunch of politicians posturing and posing for the press.

Calling a spade a spade regards the Wahhabi / Caliphatist / Islamist screed is on the tip of everyone's tongue - but none of our politicians have, as yet, made the call.

Until that happens, until reciprocal war is declared on this totalitarian hate machine, for it declared war on us in 1973, it's all spitting in the wind. The nibble, nibble approach means nothing, accomplishes nothing, and leads to nothing without the stones to make the call.

Would anyone be so gullible as to believe any such declaration? The House of Saud is composed of thousands of ultra-rich twits across the spectrum, from playboys fools to ideological fanatics. There is no Govt, there are a hundred (or more) factions. They fund whatever they want. They all make Saudi policy. They all act in their own "interests" and there is no effective means of restraining those who disagree with the "official" policy - short of killing them, that is.

So what would any of the forgoing Official Saudi Govt policies, efforts, and declarations mean?

Nothing. None would be worth warm spit.

Pfeh - Wahhabism is an ideology - with the goal of world domination and destruction or total subjugation, by any and all means, of all other ideologies. Period.

Posted by .com 2005-03-14 3:04:39 AM|| 2005-03-14 3:04:39 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 I see a flaw right in the headline.

Should be: Taking out Soddies, seriously.

Posted by Sobiesky 2005-03-14 7:30:26 AM|| 2005-03-14 7:30:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Thank you, .com. The Islamists represent the Muslim reformation. I gag every time the USG calls Islam the "Religion of Peace." I hope that the USG will emerge from PC wishful thinking before a lot of Americans die. Same goes for Western Europe, but not much hope there.

Posted by SR71 2005-03-14 8:27:16 AM|| 2005-03-14 8:27:16 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Nothing serious will be done about the Saudis until the world's oil supply can be ensured through control of Iraq and Iran. In the meantime, this kind of thing serves to remind the Saudis that they are not slipping under the radar, and that they will not be able to fast talk their way out of this -- not when both sides of the aisle are of the same opinion.

And if, in the meantime, the Saudis loosen restrictions/harassment even slightly of non-Wahabbi worshippers, that is all to the good.

Posted by trailing wife 2005-03-14 12:40:24 PM|| 2005-03-14 12:40:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 It's not a bad idea, but obviously I wouldn't want alot of our Soddy policy to get out in the press, so a public breakdown of policy is out.

A private meeting with "concerned" Congressmen is out too, since nobody with a brain trusts them to keep their mouths shut.

I believe that there are a variety of different strategies on the table behind closed doors regarding the Saudis, but W and his staff aren't idiots and they aren't going public. Look at everything that is happening in the ME right now without any further military actions having been necessary. The Saudis are going to find themselves under the same internal pressures as their neighbors and it won't be long until the signs of internal unrest begin to stir.

The time for those Congressmen to complain about this was last summer when all those ~~idiotic~~ rumors were floating aroud re: W in bed with the Saudis. Since the election, the momentum toward reform all over the ME shows me that the Saudi question (if there ever was one) is a waste of time.

Posted by Chris W. 2005-03-14 12:55:30 PM|| 2005-03-14 12:55:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Charles Schumer (D-New York), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Evan Bayh (D-Indiana), Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia), Gordon Smith (R-Oregon), Sam Brownback (R-Kentucky), John Ensign (R-Nevada), Frank Lautenberg (D-New Jersey), Norm Coleman (R-Minnesota), Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), Christopher Dodd (D-Connecticut), Herb Kohl (D-Wisconsin), Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska), Byron Dorgan (D-North Dakota), and Rick Santorum (R-Pennsylvania)

I don't trust the guys in bold at all. What an odd mix...

...and Bayh has been on my shit list since he voted against Condi...

Is this for real?

Posted by BigEd 2005-03-14 3:23:23 PM|| 2005-03-14 3:23:23 PM|| Front Page Top

17:41 Usagotohell
01:17 phil_b
01:17 phil_b
23:53 DMFD
23:53 trailing wife
23:47 Sobiesky
23:38 Phil Fraering
23:25 Phil Fraering
23:13 Frank G
23:02 Hupomoque Spoluter7949
22:54 Ol_Dirty_American
22:54 Sobiesky
22:52 trailing wife
22:43 Bon Scott
22:42 Bobby
22:36 Bon Scott
22:31 Bomb-a-rama
22:30 Frank G
22:30 Bobby
22:24 Bobby
22:21 Bobby
22:21 Gleaper Cleregum9549
22:20 Eric Jablow
22:17 Frank G