Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Mon 06/21/2004 View Sun 06/20/2004 View Sat 06/19/2004 View Fri 06/18/2004 View Thu 06/17/2004 View Wed 06/16/2004 View Tue 06/15/2004
1
2004-06-21 Arabia
Kidnappers of U.S. Contractor Say They Were Given Police Uniforms
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 Zenster 2004-06-21 12:43:26 AM|| || Front Page|| [11136 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Hi Zenster:

I was going to post a variation of this article myself. Someone away from Rantburg emailed me the AP story...as kind as a slap up side my head for my defense of the House of Saud as being at least, nominally, a friendly government, and that it was the best that we were going to get at this time. As you know, I posted this argument yersterday on Rantburg. I thought it a good argument...but the AP article seemed to demand that I make a mea cupa for yesterday's post.

But as I look at it now, what is really interesting is how really different the three stories are (including CNN).

Your WPO article appears to hold the middle ground, saying in effect, "Maybe the Saudi's are dirty, but they're doing the best they can."

The AP piece, on the other hand, has the distinct slant that, "The Sauidi's are complicit, and dirty as all hell." This is maybe why my friend sent me this article rather than others. He wants me to feel bad...lol In any case here is the AP link:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20040620/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saudi_kidnappers__plot

Most interestingly, the CNN story seems to take the position that whatever uniforms were used, were bought w/o government help and that the Saudi's are clean. The CNN version is here:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/20/saudi.militants/index.html

I am not sure I have had the opportunity before to compare stories on the same subject...but with such differing tones to the writing.

This I do find interesting. They almost become different events.

Best Wishes,

Posted by Traveller 2004-06-21 2:08:36 AM||   2004-06-21 2:08:36 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 And Best Regrards to you Trav. You must be of India decent:) Sheesh

But still, a great comment!

All my best, Yours Forever, Truely Sincere, Seasons Greetings.

Sorry, my lamness runs deep.
Posted by Lucky 2004-06-21 2:36:22 AM||   2004-06-21 2:36:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 ahh..why I love Rantburg, even if the bj imagery was a bit much for me. I know, I know, this is rantburg and I should just 'STFU' if I don't like it. :-)

No really...love it when you write these Zenster- great read!

Two other thoughts
anesthetized him ? That must be why they look so calm in the videos.

This contains the admission they don't have the body. The question was asked by Fred [at least I think it was Fred] on rantburg yesterday, but surprisingly remains unasked elsewhere.... whose body was it?
Posted by B 2004-06-21 7:09:53 AM||   2004-06-21 7:09:53 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 if the entire KSA govt is in bed with Al Qaeeda, than who the hell snuffed Al Muqrin? Was that just for show, a pre-arranged sacrifice (with, say, Zarqawis, agreement?) to cover up the relationship?

Look even if Prince Nayef himself handed over the uniforms, does that implicate Crown Prince Abdullah? I guess I have a problem with people acting as if "the Saudi govt" is a single united entity. Ditto for the Pakland govt.
Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-06-21 9:10:26 AM||   2004-06-21 9:10:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 LH -- The Saudis have been fighting a war of sucession for the last few decades. This is just another aspect of it, and the government is split according to which wing of the "royal" family they support.
Posted by Robert Crawford  2004-06-21 9:15:56 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com]  2004-06-21 9:15:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Traveller, thank you for your comments. I appreciate your open reassessment of perceptions surrounding this issue. This forum has helped me to do the same as well regarding other positions I have held.

I have long maintained a deeply cynical view of the Saudi royals. Their profligate lifestyles, intense nepotism and tolerance of violently anti-American Wahabbist clerics within their midst have always caused a strong sense of revulsion.

Revelations surrounding Prince Turki al-Faisal's complicity with al Qaeda, mullah Omar and 9-11 financier, Mohammed Zouaydi, forever changed my mind about the House of Saud being an American ally. These matters do not even address the preponderance of Saudis among the 9-11 hijack teams.

Rantburg's own Robert Crawford recently speculated that the Saudis have allowed al Qaeda to deploy within their kingdom as a form of disincentive for any serious reform. In light of details emerging about Paul Johnson's murder, I am compelled to give increased weight to such suspicions.

As can be seen from the almost legendary degree of internecine strife that is so prominent within Arab culture, there appears to be some deep seated inclination towards deception and betrayal. The House of Saud is evidently no exception to this nearly ironclad maxim.

As a nexus of the Haj, Saudi Arabia occupies a unique position in Arabian geopolitics. Each year, the royals' immense wealth has permitted them to fly in thousands of impressionable pilgrims who are summarily surrendered up to the not-so-tender mercies of resident Wahabbist fanatics. I hold the Saudis responsible for Wahabbism's spread, as it is their deal with the devil that gave this brutally repressive and morally corrupt "religion" a chance to take root.

The insidious tendrils of Wahabbism have spread across the globe and eradicating it will prove to be nothing short of another World War. All of this was made possible by Saudi financing. The massive toll in both human life and financial outlay necessary to combat this virulent strain of intolerance is unforgivable.

Consider for one moment how many other crucial foreign aid projects must be put on hold as civilized countries are obliged to divert their attention to combating terrorism. Once again, epidemics, famine, genocide and pestilence are flourishing while the powers that be are forced to address terror's mindless slaughter.

The Saudi royals are seated front and center in this theater of horrors and I lay the lion's share of blame squarely at their feet.


PS: B, no need to STFU at all. I'm glad you had fun with my bit of satire. On reflection, I probably should have used "stroked off" in place of my oral sex reference. In my outrage over this latest atrocity I managed to outpace my muse as I worked to submit the article.
Posted by Zenster 2004-06-21 9:32:03 AM||   2004-06-21 9:32:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 I guess I have a problem with people acting as if "the Saudi govt" is a single united entity.

Liberalhawk, this is a very valid point to make and one that many people overlook. However, I do not feel it ameliorates Saudi responsibility for Wahabbism's spread.
Posted by Zenster 2004-06-21 9:36:08 AM||   2004-06-21 9:36:08 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 LHawk-

...if the entire KSA govt is in bed with Al Qaeeda, than who the hell snuffed Al Muqrin?

There's an old military saying - "There's always some SOB who doesn't get the word." This is a thought I've had for a couple days now - the guys who got Al Muqrin might not have known who they were shooting at.

Mike
Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2004-06-21 10:02:04 AM||   2004-06-21 10:02:04 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 ... the guys who got Al Muqrin might not have known who they were shooting at.

So, Mike, what you're saying is that al Murqrin's taking the dirt nap was a case of "friendly fire?" Man alive! This is really going to keep me awake during the long winter nights.
Posted by Zenster 2004-06-21 10:41:31 AM||   2004-06-21 10:41:31 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 Zenster -
That is exactly what I'm saying, and let me clarify it just a bit - the guys who nailed him either weren't the ones in on things, in which case they will soon be patrolling the camel dung storage bins, or even worse they were in on it and thought they were shooting at run-of-the-mill criminals, alk runners and the like.

Mike
Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2004-06-21 11:58:07 AM||   2004-06-21 11:58:07 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 Dear Zenster:

You seem to be able to keep you humor on this dispite strongly held views. Let me play Devil's advocate here for a moment. If AQ is not really at this time not aiming at the US or the West directly, that will come later, but rather all of these recent outrages are directed toward its Arab base and audience to solidify its legitmacy as anti-western, and if its real short term goal is to bring down the House of Saud...

Then what better way acomplish this than to sow discord between the Saudi government and the United States by making it look as though the Saudi Security Service is complicit in the beheading of Johnson and at Kobar?

In other words, while the Saudi's have much to answer for as you correctly point out, it may remain true that you are being played by AQ like the proverbial fiddle...your anger at the Saudi Government is exactly what they want.

Just a thought.

Best Wishes,
Posted by Traveller 2004-06-21 12:27:34 PM||   2004-06-21 12:27:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 As a Brit working in Saudi I am possibly more qualified than most to comment on this article.
I also knew Paul Johnson from a couple of BBQs on his compound.

From my experience (3 years on site, working with Saudis and having experienced the last six months at the sharp end) the majority of Saudis are tolerant and peaceful individuals. They are extremely concerned about the way the situation is developing here and have great fears that they will be caught in "Iraq 2", with fundamentalist terrorists on one side and right-wing US hawks and the jewish lobby on the other. If the US wants to win out in "the war on terror" on both a strategic and moral level then it has to occupy the high ground. The Iraq prison debacle and Guantanamo do nothing but fuel anti american feeling in this part of the world and will ultimately lead to a world that is unsafe for both westerners, jews and arabs. But I imagine that most of your contributers have little concern for such matters, as they seldom travel far from the trailer and fridge.
Posted by redsnapper 2004-06-21 12:39:31 PM||   2004-06-21 12:39:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 
Thanks for the insight, redsnapper. It is always nice to hear from people that have been or are in the heart of the beast...lol

If you are in SA, do take care, Okay? I'm not sure how to say this, but there is no way I'd ever go to Saudi Arabia at the moment. It is for this reason that I sincerely wish all the Foreigners, some 5 million of you as I understand, all the best. Really.

But you be careful too.

Best Wishes,
Posted by Traveller 2004-06-21 12:53:28 PM||   2004-06-21 12:53:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 "From my experience (3 years on site, working with Saudis and having experienced the last six months at the sharp end) the majority of Saudis are tolerant and peaceful individuals."

Posted by: redsnapper 2004-06-21 12:39:31 PM

Tolerant and peaceful, eh?

So, they are respectful of the various imported workers who come to the kingdom to do the various jobs that they are too lazy and/or uneducated to perform, right?

And they treat these workers as if they were equals while in the kingdom, right?

And they support women being able to drive and appear in public, right?

And they support the right of non-Muslims to worship in the kingdom as they wish, right?

And they don't harbor any animosity for Israel and the Jews, right?

What?

Well, perhaps they aren't really "peaceful and tolerant" at all!
Posted by Crusader 2004-06-21 12:59:42 PM||   2004-06-21 12:59:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Redsnapper, I haven't seen you here before, so welcome to Rantburg. I am always happy to read from people "who are there". And I'm sorry for the loss of your BBQ acquaintance, Mr. Paul Johnson, who had his head sawed off with a knife and placed on his back for NO REASON AT ALL besides unreasoning, malignant hate. Hate that can never be assuaged. Don't you get it?
I was agreeing with your comments up to the part about the Joooos. That bothered me. So did your swipe at the netizens of Rantburg. Do you really divide your world into terrorists on one side and the neocons and "the Jewish lobby" on the other? Do you really think of the rest of the posters at Rantburg as trailer-dwelling, ignorant oafs?
Posted by Seafarious  2004-06-21 1:02:45 PM||   2004-06-21 1:02:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Redsnapper, can you also tell me wht your peaceful tolerant Saudi friends haven't told the Saudi Insecurity forces where to find Mr. Johnson's head and/or body yet?
Posted by Seafarious  2004-06-21 1:06:06 PM||   2004-06-21 1:06:06 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 ive never lived in a trailer, but then my being a Jew lobbyist from Jew York would explain that.

I do apologize for not being sufficiently "cosmpolitan" though.

Another parochially American member of the Jew-FreeMason-Bolshevik conspiracy.
Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-06-21 1:19:27 PM||   2004-06-21 1:19:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#18  jewish lobby
Sigh
And there you have it.
Posted by Shipman 2004-06-21 1:36:36 PM||   2004-06-21 1:36:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Therefore Bush-Powell shouldn't be planting their lips on Saud ass.
Therefore we should nuke Riyadh, Mecca and Medina, and repatriate the Anglo-American oil fields from the koranimal savages.
Listen folks: you have a constitutional right to offer suggestions. At least that fat pig, Michael Moore, uses the tools of activism. Slugs spin in their slime. Therefore, anyone who doesn't end their post with therefore we... could be a scum-sucking, terrorist indulging, State Department spun troll.
Posted by Dog Bites Trolls 2004-06-21 2:51:49 PM||   2004-06-21 2:51:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 There is this idea that recent American actions are increasing Arab resentment of Americans. I am someone who HAS lived outside the US for extended periods of time, and who has many friends, relatives, etc who have worked in SA. In my experience anti-Americanism has been strong among a very large segment of foreign populations for a very long time (decades), and SA is no exception. Most people don't seem to remember the anti-Americanism during the cold war, which was just as strong then as it is now. The reasons people hate America have little to do with our policies, and everything to do with the neuroses of the individuals in question.
Posted by virginian 2004-06-21 2:52:15 PM||   2004-06-21 2:52:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 "redsnapper" == Ignorant bigot
Posted by Robert Crawford  2004-06-21 2:54:31 PM|| [http://www.kloognome.com]  2004-06-21 2:54:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Ummm, Mr. Redsnapper, sir...

Apparently you haven't been visiting this site long enough to notice that a great many of the posters are current/former military types, along with a large sprinkling of current/former expats and our fave non-Americans, like JFM (France), Murat (Turkey), Aris Katsaris (Greece), Bulldog and Tony (among others) from the UK, and True German Ally (Germany).

I, myself, have only lived in the U.S and several countries in Europe, unlike my husband who has had to replace several passports ahead of schedule because they were overfull and the extensions kept falling out -- but I couldn't join him, you see, because in tolerent Saudi Arabia, while it is illegal to openly practice Christianity, it is illegal to even be Jewish, and my husband thinks my head looks prettier attached to my shoulders, oddly enough.

Its clear from your post that you have gone native, or that you always were a bigoted ass, and have not improved your ignorance by your experience.

Do have a nice day
Posted by trailing wife 2004-06-21 2:54:55 PM||   2004-06-21 2:54:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 ouch! now that's a can of whupass!
Posted by Frank G  2004-06-21 2:57:19 PM||   2004-06-21 2:57:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 Wow. Trailing wife, that was just beautiful.
Posted by Robert Crawford  2004-06-21 2:59:32 PM|| [http://www.kloognome.com]  2004-06-21 2:59:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Redsnapper,
As somebody who also live in Saudi Arabia, I beg you to lay off the Sadiqqi before you get yourself killed!
Posted by Anonymous4617 2004-06-21 3:31:32 PM||   2004-06-21 3:31:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 red douchebag--how many friday kutbahs have you attended--infidel--what your sweet natured saudi friends told you is just more taqqiyyaa for the kufr--not that you know what that means--the whole country is a cesspool of incitement and jihad--al-taghallub--islamic supremacy is the by word--break it up--hashimites back to the hijaz--nejdis to the rub al khali--the al frauds back to dariyah to drink camel's milk-eat dates-and locusts for protein--restore the al rachid to reyhad--eastern province to the shia--bomb asir and quasam--stop smoking ikhwan cock--redfish
Posted by SON OF TOLUI 2004-06-21 3:36:38 PM||   2004-06-21 3:36:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 POPCORN! PEANUTS! GET'CHER RED HOTS!

[/donnybrook]

#11 If AQ is not really at this time not aiming at the US or the West directly, that will come later, but rather all of these recent outrages are directed toward its Arab base and audience to solidify its legitmacy as anti-western, and if its real short term goal is to bring down the House of Saud...

Then what better way acomplish this than to sow discord between the Saudi government and the United States by making it look as though the Saudi Security Service is complicit in the beheading of Johnson and at Kobar?

In other words, while the Saudi's have much to answer for as you correctly point out, it may remain true that you are being played by AQ like the proverbial fiddle...your anger at the Saudi Government is exactly what they want.

Interesting speculation there, Traveller. I just have yet to see anything remotely benevolent about the Saudi government. They come across as ruthlessly manipulative and not much beyond that.

Their support for al Qaeda merely has come back to bite their well padded arses in richly deserved fashion. "[S]owing discord" is precisely what the Saudis have been doing for decades. The ostensible amity they show towards America is just that, a façade and little else.

While al Qaeda may indeed be playing both ends against the middle, I believe that they are overestimating their popularity. The once comfortable Saudi people may go along with anti-American sentiment as spewed by their Wahabbist clerics, but when ordinary citizens begin to die in droves that will all change overnight. Witness the rapid erosion of support for Moqtada al Sadr in Iraq.

I'd enjoy seeing what other Ranters have to say about this interesting proposition.

PS: Watch your six, redsnapper. I think you underestimate the danger that is all around you.
Posted by Zenster 2004-06-21 4:36:28 PM||   2004-06-21 4:36:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 #12 From my experience (3 years on site, working with Saudis and having experienced the last six months at the sharp end) the majority of Saudis are tolerant and peaceful individuals.

redsnapper, your statement beggars one simple but compelling question. If the Saudi people are such " tolerant and peaceful individuals," who were all those folks honking their horns and blaring sirens when Paul Johnson's brutal murder was announced in Riyadh?
Posted by Zenster 2004-06-21 4:44:31 PM||   2004-06-21 4:44:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#29 Dear Zenster:

Honking horns? I was unaware of this...still, I have a post waiting in line for you before this reply of yours.

So it is really the next one from me that counts.

Best Wishes,
Posted by Traveller 2004-06-21 5:21:19 PM||   2004-06-21 5:21:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#30 Dear Zenmeister (a compliment...lol)

My problem remains that I see nothing to replace the House of Saud...God knows that I don't want it to become a Democratic country...I think that possibility scares the bejusus out of me.

I can only hope that your premise that when blood begins to spill, the general Saudi populace will come around...but I just don't want to bet the whole farm on that idea.

Though we disagree, I still think it best to work whatever kind of accomondation that can be put in place with the current Saudi Government until some other option is ready to be put in place, (BTW, a general slaughter is an option, but not now, not yet, and hopefully never, but we will see).

Eventually, though not necessiarly this thread, I'd be curious on your opinion on how and what to replace the House of Saud with.

Maybe you have an idea on this. I just don't. But if you have written this out before, you could always cut and past.

Best Wishes,
Posted by Traveller 2004-06-21 5:21:43 PM||   2004-06-21 5:21:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#31 Im need to check me brood sugars.
Posted by Shipman 2004-06-21 5:31:19 PM||   2004-06-21 5:31:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#32  jewish lobby

I have a jewish lobby - it's in my italianate farmhouse. It's full of things I picked up from the Middle East, Asia and Africa - not to mention a bit of military bric-a-brac. I occasionally see it on my way "between the trailer and the fridge".

...if its real short term goal is to bring down the House of Saud... Then what better way acomplish this than to sow discord between the Saudi government and the United States...

Y'know, Traveller, your theory makes sense. However, I'm not sure if it's a case of "bringing down" the House of Saud. It may be more a case of "changing who's to be on the throne" of the House of Saud.
Posted by Pappy 2004-06-21 6:30:43 PM||   2004-06-21 6:30:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#33 Well, Pappy, that does make sense. It may simply be a question of who's sitting on the throne.

That works for me, and may well work within the context of Saudia Arabia also. But at this moment I am not on top of the in's and out's of palace politics...who is preferable to Abdulla, though there seems to be a consensus that we could all do without Prince Nayef.

Best Wishes,
Posted by Traveller 2004-06-21 7:18:32 PM||   2004-06-21 7:18:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#34 right-wing US hawks

Hmmm - The erstwhile Mr Snapper doesn't realize this is a blog well populated by us so-called "right-wing hawks", that is, r-w-h from HIS perspective. Does "red" Snapper color his political perspective? It is interesting to hear the point of view form an eyewitness, but, it seems that once someone is there long enough, ope starts to believe the anti-Wstern melarkey that comes from the official blather there.

My suggestion to Mr. Snapper is to take a deep breath look around you and see the wotld for what it really is. If he is in the same circle as Mr Johnson, he shouly be very very wary. . . . Those native Saudi associates of his are going to wait for their moment, and when it comes, then truly only God will help him, for he shall be out of reach of anyone else.
Posted by BigEd 2004-06-21 8:13:29 PM||   2004-06-21 8:13:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#35 Traveller, why do you fear the country becoming a democracy? Something to do with the number of fundies who might get the vote?
Posted by The Doctor 2004-06-21 8:27:47 PM||   2004-06-21 8:27:47 PM|| Front Page Top

#36 Something to do with the number of fundies who might get the vote?

Dear Doctor:

Bingo and exactly! I am on two minds on this, on the one hand, I do thing that redsnapper's point is well taken (though being a bit defensive, he threw in a bunch of unnecessary verbage...to his grief...lol...though I hope he sticks around), in that the majority of Saudis are pretty decent people, yet terribly conflicted by all that is going on around them. As we circle the wagons to a perceived threat, so do they. They have pride as do we. (sometimes this is foolish in both of us).

I am a freedom of conscience man...this is what this war should be over, and I fault the bush Administration for framing the terms of the debate so badly. There were real and good reasons for going into Iraq without the WMD issue at all. But they just seemed determined to play that card...rather than the Freedom of Conscience card, which was the true winning hand.

Democracies make mistakes also...the great and grand benifit of democracy is that, over time, it is a self correcting system...but I'm not sure that we have time on this.

Let me put it this way, When I can carry or buy a Bible in Medina with the same ease that I can buy a Koran in Los Angeles, then, and only then will this war be over.

No, I don't want the fundies to have a vote. At least not yet.

Best Wishes,


Posted by Traveller 2004-06-21 9:00:54 PM||   2004-06-21 9:00:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#37 I apoligize, (it would be nice if I spellchecked a little)

It Should read:

I am of two minds on this, on the one hand, I do think...

Sorry, But,

Best Wishes...lol
Posted by Traveller 2004-06-21 9:05:10 PM||   2004-06-21 9:05:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#38 The thing is the house of saud is resented by their people. The people view them as manipulating their wealth & selling it off to the westerners. While the dozens of princes enjoy enormous wealth and luxury IE; cars, palaces, drugs,women,etc. the majority of the proleteriat is very, very poor and don't enjoy the proceeds of their oil wealth.Plus they have an extremely rigid form of Islam practiced on them which in fact is very un-islamic. As a result since it is a Monarchy and there are no elections really, the only alternative they have is extremist groups like Al Qaeda. That is why they enjoy 60-70 % support. Although that is not widely publicized. It's true.
Posted by Sammy Frobisher 2004-06-21 9:10:10 PM||   2004-06-21 9:10:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#39 true comment, to a point:
"Plus they have an extremely rigid form of Islam practiced on them which in fact is very un-islamic"

If AQ had their way, a 7th century caliphate would be installed, which would keep the common Arab down even further. Nice try, though
Posted by Frank G  2004-06-21 9:13:10 PM||   2004-06-21 9:13:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#40 Well yeah A.Q wants to set up a Taliban style regime. But the early days of Islam were not really rigid in the same sense as you think. In the early days of Islam for example a woman would go to mohammed the prophet to complain that her husband was not satisfying her in bed.It has nothing to do w/ modern day freekazoid interpretations of Islam. These extremist groups ae feeding on the frustration of muslims w/ what they view as american oppression. You're right though about what u said, however out of desperation they support them & in the hopes of at least getting to have control over their oil.It's an outgrowth of desperation and frustration, & Gulf War II has fanned the flames of this rage ten-fold.
Posted by Ali Abdel Hafiz ben americani al ignorami aziz el alb mahmoud mustafa ben shoo bee doo 2004-06-21 9:24:55 PM||   2004-06-21 9:24:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#41 #30 My problem remains that I see nothing to replace the House of Saud...God knows that I don't want it to become a Democratic country...I think that possibility scares the bejusus out of me.

I think the world is getting a good foretaste of what might happen in Saudi Arabia with the Iraqi situation.

I can only hope that your premise that when blood begins to spill, the general Saudi populace will come around...but I just don't want to bet the whole farm on that idea.

People tend to become a lot more pragmatic when it's their own @ss on the line. While it all looks good on paper, when al Qaeda's operations further depress the Saudi economy to the point where basic survival is compromised, a degree of backlash should manifest. I would tend to wager that Saudi society represents a hotbed of back-sliding apostasic practices and general hedonism compared to what al Qaeda has in mind for them. For a yardstick, merely compare Afghanistan with Saudi Arabia.

Though we disagree, I still think it best to work whatever kind of accomondation that can be put in place with the current Saudi Government until is ready to be put in place, (BTW, a general slaughter is an option, but not now, not yet, and hopefully never, but we will see).

The problem is that Saudi royalty has absolutely zero interest in "some other option." They are well-accustomed to farting through silk and see no immediate need for that to change in any way. A "general slaughter" is al Qaeda's "option," the Saudi people just do not happen to realize it yet.

Eventually, though not necessiarly this thread, I'd be curious on your opinion on how and what to replace the House of Saud with.

Smoking glass is an alternative that continues to arise ever more frequently in ongoing discussions of this subject. I would prefer that America exercise its technological might and simply delete it's reliance upon petroleum.

When you factor in the massive defense budget vis protecting American national interests in the Middle East, in addition to ancillary environmental and health risks associated with the pollution caused by fossil fuels, if such funds were diverted to a dedicated drive towards independence from oil, such a thing could happen in a relative short (5-10 year) time span.

Sadly, both big oil and the domestic automotive industry have no intention of seeing their huge investment in internal combustion technology go down the drain. Lobbying efforts by them are solid proof of their willingness to defy the American public's best interests.

Maybe you have an idea on this. I just don't. But if you have written this out before, you could always cut and past.

Some folks here have mentioned the increasingly attractive notion of simply appropriating the dense concentration of oil fields in Saudi Arabia's Eastern region.

Such a move would eliminate any significant economic prize for those seeking to usurp the Saudi throne. Additionally, it would serve to stabilize global oil supplies and suppress market fluctuations. While only a military pipe dream as of now, further duplicity by the House of Saud will surely drive such ruminations towards actual reality.

The Saudis have very little time to put their "House" in order. Evidence of official complicity in terrorist attacks is putting the lie to their publicly held positions. That an ex-Saudi police chief has become the new head of al Qaeda's Arabian operations is rather telling.
Posted by Anonymous5317 2004-06-21 9:29:04 PM||   2004-06-21 9:29:04 PM|| Front Page Top

#42 As a result since it is a Monarchy and there are no elections really, the only alternative they have is extremist groups like Al Qaeda.

Oddly enough, when the US was run by a monarch, we did not turn to an al'Qaeda-like group. Neither did Britain, for that matter.

It's an outgrowth of desperation and frustration, & Gulf War II has fanned the flames of this rage ten-fold.

Yeah. Sure. They don't like the problem, so they get angry at us -- people completely uninvolved. We offer a way out, so they get even angrier at us.

Screw 'em. They can either pull their heads out of their asses and stop believing their the poor, beleaguered master race, or they can face the whirlwind they're starting.

In fact, neither did Britain.
Posted by Robert Crawford  2004-06-21 9:29:46 PM|| [http://www.kloognome.com/]  2004-06-21 9:29:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#43 I would prefer that America exercise its technological might and simply delete it's reliance upon petroleum.

Yeah, let's just do that. It's so damned easy, after all.

such a thing could happen in a relative short (5-10 year) time span

It's not that simple, no matter what you've heard. SDB's written quite a bit about this; there really aren't any easy alternatives to oil, no matter how hard we wish there were.
Posted by Robert Crawford  2004-06-21 9:35:04 PM|| [http://www.kloognome.com/]  2004-06-21 9:35:04 PM|| Front Page Top

#44 RC - by debating these points you've entered a universe where logic, facts, cause/effect do not apply....troll-land
Posted by Frank G  2004-06-21 9:39:54 PM||   2004-06-21 9:39:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#45  If we are going to lay blame for current situation in Mid-East,the two seminal events were first the fall of Shah,resulting in a successful home for Radical Islam,and second Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait.W/out Saddam's invasion,US troops would never have been stationed on Saudi soil,Osama would not have become infuriated w/US and Saudi Govt.,no Al-Q,no 9-11,no Iraq War.Iranian mullocracy emboldened other radical religious leaders to speak out and become active in public policy,as well as humiliating US,causing many to think they could defeat US,thus laying ground for Al-Q and the rest.W/out Hussein's invasion,Osama prob. would either have tried for power in Saudi or more likely would have joined/started jihad against Israel.None of this had anything to do with Bush,neo-cons or the VRWC.
Posted by Stephen 2004-06-21 9:45:43 PM||   2004-06-21 9:45:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#46 RC - by debating these points you've entered a universe where logic, facts, cause/effect do not apply....troll-land

Apparently the laws of physics don't apply, either.
Posted by Robert Crawford  2004-06-21 10:16:23 PM|| [http://www.kloognome.com/]  2004-06-21 10:16:23 PM|| Front Page Top

#47 Well, Frank G, I hope it's not trollandia, but like RC, I have also read SDB's energy writing, but I still think there is much that can be done with fuel efficency, eg I just read about Ford's Zero Emmision Ztec engine genting in excess if 35mpg, I believe, to be produced next year...but it is in a Ford Focus. There are things that can be done and I'd like to give kudo's to Anonymous5317 for doing the heavy thinking on a bunch of topics.

Mentioning Steven Den Beste, it is hoped that his article on how a general slaughter would be worse on the United States than even on all the Arabs killed. They would be dead, yes, but America as we know it would vanish also.

Heavy thinking there also.

Best Wishes,

Posted by Traveller 2004-06-21 10:25:53 PM||   2004-06-21 10:25:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#48 I trust SDB's numbers- as another San Diego engineer, I've followed his (lengthy) writings (whew!). There's a lot of work and good results to come from hybrids, especially from the general population of cars.

From the moral blowback from a generational-clearing attack on SA,Iran, Pak, etc., I would suggest you query the general population how badly they feel for Dresden and Tokyo in WW2. It is strictly a survival-mode morality, which we haven't yet reached by any means. Should Baltimore or Long Beach disappear in a mushroom cloud, the muslims may find worshipping in Mecca or Medina without a lead vest life-shortening, and should chalk it up to poor reading of history
Posted by Frank G  2004-06-21 10:33:49 PM||   2004-06-21 10:33:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#49 Sorry everybody, Anonymous5317 was me.

Traveller, it took a massive search, but I managed to find the reference cited previously:

#29 Dear Zenster: Honking horns?

After the news of Jonhson's decapitation, I got a call from a friend in Khobar. She reported that sirens were blaring and people were honking in celebration.

I am obliged to admit that I was incorrect about the location. It was in Khobar, not Riyadh. Also, this is a FOAF (Friend Of A Friend) sort of cite, as opposed to one found in the general media. Salt to taste.

You have been decent enough to maintain a consistent (and very polite) dialogue, so I felt obligated to make available the best reporting possible.
Posted by Zenster 2004-06-21 10:43:55 PM||   2004-06-21 10:43:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#50 I hung around a few trailer parks in my time. Kinda stuffy! The ones that don't blow away can get down right pretty in the spring.

Problem was with the brokered up cars. Once the hoods went up it'as usually a bad sign. I remember once when there be more cars with for sale signs than ones with current tabs. Everybody always piss'n and moan'n bout Social Security checks, or food stamps, spit and go to hell, it was poverty.

But it twern't all bad. There were summer nights that went on till daybreak, everybody get'n ignorant and all! Sent my cousin home one night and all he could comment on was how the pavement seemed to occilate kinda, ups and downs, yaknow?
Posted by Lucky 2004-06-21 10:58:58 PM||   2004-06-21 10:58:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#51 Lucky - as a friend I can only say - you are pleasantly disturbed :-)
Posted by Frank G  2004-06-21 11:01:57 PM||   2004-06-21 11:01:57 PM|| Front Page Top

#52 Frank G, I still maintain that America could wean itself of oil dependence if we somehow diverted the huge outlays required to protect our Middle East petroleum interests towards a concerted technology shift.

I fully well recognize the upheaval this represents, but at some point the oil is going to run out anyway and we'll eventually be confronted with a changeover no matter what.

Nowhere did I say it would be "easy." Yet, in light of the way petrodollars have been misused by our putative allies in spreading Wahabbism and other equally harmful doctrines, we would be well advised to begin a de-emphasis of our reliance upon oil.

If AQ had their way, a 7th century caliphate would be installed, which would keep the common Arab down even further.

I made a similar point earlier and could not agree with you more.
Posted by Zenster 2004-06-21 11:23:36 PM||   2004-06-21 11:23:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#53 Anwar open, domestic pumping (now that the economics work) til we find a suitable substitute for a portion of the needs, I'm with ya. I was a Radiation Physics minor at San Diego State, in addition to my Civil Engineering major, so I have no fear of nuke plants, done right, and open Yucca Mtn (my Nevada relatives will argue, but not with much gusto) to adequate waste security. That satisfies the energy nets, cars are the only users then
Posted by Frank G  2004-06-21 11:39:41 PM||   2004-06-21 11:39:41 PM|| Front Page Top

#54 --While the dozens of princes enjoy enormous wealth and luxury IE; cars, palaces, drugs,women,etc. the majority of the proleteriat is very, very poor and don't enjoy the proceeds of their oil wealth.--

That's what happens when one doesn't have an inkling of history - Marie Antoinette and the Rominovs (sp).
Posted by Anonymous5184 2004-06-22 12:09:40 AM||   2004-06-22 12:09:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#55 Hi Zenster:

I;m afraid this day's thread is going to disapear before I can have my last say.

Why shouldn't I be polite? You're smart, write really well, and I like reading you...on the other hand, recommending or saying something nice about the Ford Focus was cruel and unusal..lol

And I'm on the same page as Frank G...open Yucca Mountain, now, and yes eventually we will go nuclear and like france (small f), get 80% of electricity from reactors. Finally, sure, open Anwar.

Be Good Gentlemen, I had lots of fun today.

Best Wishes,
Posted by Traveller 2004-06-22 12:12:47 AM||   2004-06-22 12:12:47 AM|| Front Page Top

14:18 Robert Crawford
14:18 Robert Crawford
14:18 Robert Crawford
14:18 Robert Crawford
14:17 Robert Crawford
14:17 Robert Crawford
18:00 A Loved One
22:37 Frank G
22:28 Anonymous6299
18:33 Anonymous5746
06:11 USMarine1980
09:21 B
09:10 Aris Katsaris
01:11 Zenster
00:57 Atomic Conspiracy
00:52 Atomic Conspiracy
00:44 Zenster
00:39 Dog Bites Trolls
00:28 Mark Espinola
00:23 Mark Espinola
00:13 Zenster
00:12 Traveller
00:09 Anonymous5184
00:07 Edward Yee









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com