Saudi's/Bin Laden

[Guest DragonflyKid]

The story isn't up yet so I guess it's still developing but at http://drudgereport.com it says the Saudi Arabia paid OBL and the Taliban 200 million dollars to not get attacked. If this turns out to be accurate I wonder if this is finally the time when Saudi Arabia will be classified by the U.S. as a supporter of terrorism and an enemy.

 

From the Drudge Report website:

___________________________________________________________

Senior members of the Saudi royal family paid at least $200m to Osama Bin Laden's terror group and the Taliban in exchange for an agreement that his forces would not attack targets in Saudi Arabia, according to court documents... MORE...

 

 

SAUDIS PAID BIN LADEN HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS

[Guest TJH]

I find it very diffiult to believe that OBL would attack Saudi. After all, it is the Muslim "holy land", and Osama doesn't have a grudge against Saudi, just Israel and the west.

[Guest DrTom]

Well, the Saudis DID throw him out of their country. I guess they would want to protect themselves from an attack. Besides, Mecca could remain standing while the rest of the country was sacked.

 

We've known for some time that the Saudis have sponsored terrorism. Why we've yet to act decisively on that knowledge is a mystery to me. Something like that shouldn't be allowed to go unpunished.

[Guest Ozymandias]

Oooh even better, let's just get the fuck away from Saudi Arabia and have nothing to do with these people any more. If we'd done that from the start there'd be 2700 more Americans still alive at this moment.

 

This is such a sad, transparent attempt by the Right Wing war-machine to jump us into yet ANOTHER war with a Mid-East country which can only provoke more terrorist attacks. What an adorable farce.

[Guest TJH]

I stand by my first post, and I also agree that Saudi is an evil state (they give shelter to Idi Amin for crying out loud) and we should have nothing to do with them.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

Oooh even better, let's just get the fuck away from Saudi Arabia and have nothing to do with these people any more. If we'd done that from the start there'd be 2700 more Americans still alive at this moment.

 

This is such a sad, transparent attempt by the Right Wing war-machine to jump us into yet ANOTHER war with a Mid-East country which can only provoke more terrorist attacks. What an adorable farce.

Actually it was the liberal immigration laws that allowed the highjackers into the country when they had no business being here. Also the U.S. reacting with kid gloves whenever Al Qaeda attacked made them think they could get away with it...sadly they did.

 

Do yourself a favor and get lost before Marney gets a hold of you.

[Guest DragonflyKid]

The story has been put up:

 

 

 

SAUDIS PAID BIN LADEN HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS

Sun Aug 25 2002 10:26:26 ET

 

Senior members of the Saudi royal family paid "protection money" totaling at least $300 million to Osama bin-Laden and the Taliban to prevent them from attacking targets in Saudi Arabia, the London Sunday Times reported today.

 

The revelation, based on extensive investigations, was contained in papers filed in a US lawsuit by lawyers representing the families of Sept. 11 victims.

 

According to the documents, the deal was struck after two secret meetings involving members of the Saudi royal family and al-Qaida leaders, including bin-Laden.

 

The cash enabled al-Qaida to fund training camps in Afghanistan that are said to have been attended by the Sept. 11 bombers.

 

The court documents reveal that the agreement committed bin- Laden not to use his forces to subvert the Saudi government, while the Saudis agreed to ensure that requests to extradite al- Qaida members and demands to close al-Qaida training camps were not carried out.

 

In addition, the Saudis agreed to supply oil and financial assistance to both the Taliban and Pakistan which, the documents report, was worth "several hundred millions" of dollars.

 

The revelations resulting from the investigation are likely to exacerbate already tense relations between the US and Saudi Arabia, which one analyst at the Washington-based Rand think-tank recently described at a Pentagon briefing as the "kernel of evil."

 

The document names the Saudi royals involved in the deal and provides details about the network of charities and businesses through which bin- Laden raised money.

 

The documents say the Saudi princes were informed about attacks by Islamic fundamentalists on American servicemen at a US army training facility in Riyadh in November 1995 and at the Khobar Towers barracks in June 1996, in which 19 US airmen died.

 

The princes decided to strike a deal with bin-Laden because they feared that al-Qaida, which opposed the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia, would show its displeasure by attempting to destabilize the kingdom.

 

The documents say Saudi Arabia's secret service, the Istakhbarat, had decided in late 1995 to fund the Taliban and the initial decision to pay bin-Laden "protection money" was agreed at a meeting of the Saudi princes in 1996.

 

A further meeting in the Afghan city of Kandahar in July 1998 led to the deal between Saudi Arabia and the Taliban.

 

According to the documents, those present included Prince Turki al-Faisal al-Saud, then chief of the Istakhbarat, Taliban leaders, senior officers from Pakistan's secret service and bin- Laden.

 

Turki was said to have known bin-Laden well through family connections and also because he had hand-picked bin-Laden in the early 1980s to organize Arab volunteers who were fighting Soviet troops in Afghanistan.

 

The lawsuit also alleges that the Saudi royal family supported charities with close ties to bin-Laden, including a $6 million gift from Saudi Defense Minister Prince Sultan, to the International Islamic Relief Organization, al-Haramain, the Muslim World League and the World Assembly of Muslim Youth.

[Guest Ozymandias]

Actually it was the liberal immigration laws that allowed the highjackers into the country when they had no business being here. Also the U.S. reacting with kid gloves whenever Al Qaeda attacked made them think they could get away with it...sadly they did.

 

Do yourself a favor and get lost before Marney gets a hold of you.

1) Conservatives have controlled the governemnt since Reagan rose to power and they have yet to to do a goddamn thing about immigration either. Do yourself a favor and don't fall into the trap of blaming everything you dislike on "liberals" since their power in governement is virtually non-existant these days. I haven't seen Bush propose any kind of stricter imigration policy either, by the way.

 

2) Get away with it? They're dead, there was never an intention on their part to get away with it.

[Guest DrTom]

Oooh even better, let's just get the fuck away from Saudi Arabia and have nothing to do with these people any more.

I've been advocating that for a while. I have no doubts that the royal family we put into power would be taken out not long after we left. The problem is, they'd probably be replaced by a pack of zealots, which would lead us into the same problems we're having elsewhere. Yes, we should withdraw from Saudi Arabia and tell them to shove their goddamn oil, but we need to be careful of who fills the power vacuum that would result.

 

If we'd done that from the start there'd be 2700 more Americans still alive at this moment.

We still support Israel. We still occupied Saudi lands during Desert Storm. We're still "The Great Satan" because of our culture. We would have been attacked regardless of our position on the ruling family of Arabia.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

Actually it was the liberal immigration laws that allowed the highjackers into the country when they had no business being here. Also the U.S. reacting with kid gloves whenever Al Qaeda attacked made them think they could get away with it...sadly they did.

 

Do yourself a favor and get lost before Marney gets a hold of you.

1) Conservatives have controlled the governemnt since Reagan rose to power and they have yet to to do a goddamn thing about immigration either. Do yourself a favor and don't fall into the trap of blaming everything you dislike on "liberals" since their power in governement is virtually non-existant these days. I haven't seen Bush propose any kind of stricter imigration policy either, by the way.

 

2) Get away with it? They're dead, there was never an intention on their part to get away with it.

Clinton was the President for 8 years. Conservatives haven't been in power for 22 consecutive years.

 

You're right about Bush not doing anything which I think is terrible.

 

Getting away with it means Al Qaeda not the 19 hijackers.

[Guest Ozymandias]

Problem: Clinton wasn't a Liberal, he was a Republicrat and the Senate/House was amost exclusively controlled by Conservatives during his Presidency. So yes, they HAVE been in power for 22 years. It never ended.

 

So far, not a thing has been proven that the Al Qaeda leadership was in on the planning beforehand- only that the killers were members of the group. That's not the same thing.

[Guest DrTom]

Clinton wasn't a Liberal, he was a Republicrat...

 

No, Clinton was a clever political chameleon. He was a socialist at heart, but when he figured out the country had moved in a more conservative direction after 1994, he endorsed things he didn't really believe in (like welfare reform) and ran in 1996 on a fairly conservative platform. I have no doubts that he's a liberal, though.

[Guest MR. COOLING]

<We've known for some time that the Saudis have sponsored terrorism. Why we've yet to act decisively on that knowledge is a mystery to me. Something like that shouldn't be allowed to go unpunished.>

 

Actually you have, you've been slowly been reducing your oil consumption from Saudi (its only like 14% now) and me thinks that the really reason Bush wants to take Iraq is to get more oil from there and reduce the amount further from Saudi (this is probably why the Saudi's are against GWII).

 

On Saudi Arabia itself, Saudi Arabia is already ruled by zealots. If want to know what is causing all the problem in the muslim world its Saudi Arabia. It ruined Pakistan and with its (American) money spreads Islamio-Fascim around the world.

 

Also the country's a mess, with despite the Saudi's oil wealth millions unemployed and plenty of young males looking for something today.

 

Fact is Saudi Arabia with the likes of Egypt, Syria and Pakistan is the real axis of evil and the fact is America.

 

The fact is these are the ones that America should be fighting, the reason Bush doesn't is because the Saudi oil has made the Bush family (and many others in the adminstration) rich and because he fears having to fight a real war not little side shows like Afghanistan to appease the American public and because he fears the pathetic "liberal" elite who think that Islam is something good, it ISN'T. It is a curse on manking and must be defeated just like the Catholic Church was.

 

Now I know when I use to write in this forum regularly I sounded pretty soft well that was mere aversion to some off the nutter comments that came out from some people. The fact is that the war between the West and Islam, will not be easy, there will be casualities but it must be fought.

 

The fact is no matter what the flaws there are in Western society (and there are many) we have things that are wonderful Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Worship, Liberal (in the truest sense) attiudes to Women and Homosexuals and most all Democracy. The Islamic world has none of these things (save Turkey) and unless we do something about it right now, 20 or 30 years latter we are going to confront the fact that we have a Fifth Column in our mists made up of converts and immigrants that we stop us doing anything about it.

 

The fact is this, WE (and by that I mean the European/Anglo-Saxon world) are the good, we are the greatest civilisation the world has every none. Sure there are faults things like; homophobia, self-haterd, racism, materalism, etc, etc. But we are the best there is to offer and it is our duty like the Greek, Roman and British Empires of old to spread that civilisation to the rest. Not for petty and short sighted self gain but because if we don't we will leave ourselves a new Rome surrounded on all sides by the Barbians.

 

P.S. If anyone's wondering what has caused me to change my beliefs on the "War on Terror" well first I haven't, I still think Bush is incomptent and that he pissing off the muslim community without having the guts to finish the job but secondly when you spend the summer reading about Churchill and the courage of the British people it makes you very patrotic.

 

W.W.I COOLING

[Guest EricMM]

Riiight...

 

So you are a proponent of the white mans burden then?

 

The fact is this, WE (and by that I mean the European/Anglo-Saxon world) are the good, we are the greatest civilisation the world has every none.

Ignoring the racism in this thread is hard. Also I don't mean to be insulting, but is english your second language? We are the greatest civilization the world has ever seen is valid.. You just remind me of my friend who was from japan, I really meant no offense.

 

BUT.

 

he fears the pathetic "liberal" elite who think that Islam is something good, it ISN'T. It is a curse on manking and must be defeated just like the Catholic Church was.

 

Come on come on come on. Every religion is shaped by it's members. Saying that Islam is to blame for all of this is ignoring the roles of the people who did the acts. There is nothing in Islam advocating violence that can't be found in the bible. The reason that christians don't seem as violent is that Afghanistan has raised some fucked up people. If they were christian I still think they would have tried to crash into our building, SO I don't think that we need to fear Americans who worship Islam at all. I don't even know what you mean regarding the catholic church...

[Guest Ozymandias]

he fears the pathetic "liberal" elite who think that Islam is something good, it ISN'T. It is a curse on manking and must be defeated just like the Catholic Church was.

Fucking w3rd.

[Guest DrTom]

Actually you have, you've been slowly been reducing your oil consumption from Saudi (its only like 14% now)

I think it's closer to 10%, but the point remains that it's greatly reduced. I think we should cut it to 0%, tell them to fuck off, and add them to the hitlist, but that's just me.

 

Good to see you've come around to the "dark side," Will. B)

[Guest DrTom]

Every religion is shaped by it's members. Saying that Islam is to blame for all of this is ignoring the roles of the people who did the acts.

As a man-made institution, religion -- any religion -- is absolutely responsible for the atrocities men commit in its name. Islam is very specific about killing unbelievers and infidels, and even helpfully suggests some groups the faithful can target with their abhorrent violence and terrorism.

 

There is nothing in Islam advocating violence that can't be found in the bible.

The Qu'ran explicitly suggests the murder of Christians and Jews. The Bible has a lot of violence and sexism in it, but nothing quite like that. Also, Christian leaders for the last 100+ years have made it a point to denounce the acts of violence that zealots have committed in the name of their religion. No Islamic leaders have denounced the continuing terrorism against Israel, nor the attacks against the United States.

 

There's no racism here, Eric: we're just calling scum and filth what they are.

[Guest MR. COOLING]

First can I say I am very, very mad as I had just finished writing my response to the posts when I loose, damn you Microsoft.

 

Okay quick reponse, yes Eric english is my first language I just don't type/spell well, I know it makes me sound kinda a dumb ass but I'm not (really).

 

On your points, yes I do believe in the White Man's Burden and so do you and every other trendy "liberal". The fact is who the expect to sort out Palenstine? America! Who do expect the lift Africa out of poverty? The West! When two African (black) tribes are tearing each other to shreads who do expect to solve the conflict? The West! Now do you see a patten here? The fact is whenever Africa is in trouble the left automatically demands the West helps Africa and doesn't even stop to think if Africa can help itself (which it can't). That's perfectly natural after all the strong look after the week and all. All I did was lay out why we should help and the best method to help.

 

I'll ignore your points on Islam as Tom answered them fine, however I say this the differance between Islam and Christianity is that Islam is a strong religion and so can preach the Word undiluted while Christianity is so ridiculed that it must prevent a soppy liberal message to get noticed. There is also no doubt that Islam retarded the Arab world at the turn of the 20th Century by such acts like stopping the introduction of printing presses. Also thirdly unlike Christianity that is far more flexible in how it organisies itself Islam as to stict to a much more strict basis of laws.

 

On the Catholic Church I was talking about stuff like the Reformation/ Anti-Clerical wars in France that reduced the Catholic Church's power.

 

<Good to see you've come around to the "dark side," Will.>

 

Well black is my colour.

 

I'd to explain why I've changed my mind you see I've used my summer very well reading a bunch of history books about WW1/2. And two things became apparent to me.

 

First off as I've already said it made me realise how brilliant our civilisation is more than that it made me realise that it is worth fighting for and the alternative is a new Dark Age.

 

Secondly AJP Taylor underlined the major flaw in the logic of appeasement was that it assumed Hitler was a reasonable man with reasonable grievances and once these were settleted he would become peaceful (Wilison and Loyld Geogre made the same mistake with the Russian Revolution). And I went back and read my old posts and I realised that I had made the exact same mistake. The fact is Arafat doesn't care about a Palenstinain state he wants all the Jews out of the Holy Land, Bin Laden doesn't care about Kashmir he just hates Amercia. Just like Hitler they used reasonable causes and twisted them to help them spread their message, and just like Hitler they must be defeated.

 

However perhaps more importantly I watched in horror and anger at the genocide in Zimbabwe against the White farmers. I thought to myself, many of those farmers colluded with Mugabi and ignored the racism directed against them by the black marjoity as they thought they were too useful and too rich to be touched. We are those white farmers then, the likes of Saudi Arabia are Mugabi. Some day just like Mugabi has, the Saudi's will unleashed the racism masses to hang onto power. If wait till then to do something it will be to late we must do something now.

 

W.W.I Cooling

[Guest EricMM]

There's no racism here, Eric: we're just calling scum and filth what they are.

 

It's justifiable to claim that Islamists in the Middle East deserve everything they're getting. However, I don't believe that American Islamists are of the same ilk. That's why I say you can't just blame the religion you have to look at people's backgrounds. Clearly growing up in the middle east is condusive (sp) to becoming a terrorist.

 

MR. COOLING your posts seem to reinforce that. The west is called upon by the rest of the world (fairly or not) to aid people who need aid because we have the money, the guns, and the ability. Everyone looks to the US for help. But it's no longer an issue of race, is what I'm hoping I'm reading. First of all America is no longer the single race that the English were. I think that calling it the white mans burden is a misnomer. Maybe it should be the rich man's burden.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

Interesting conversation, but I'd like to just mention that Matt Drudge is more or less a Republican/right-wing dirtsheet. Sometimes you can find interesting news on there but I'd be wary of any massive groundbreaking stories you aren't seeing anywhere else.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I find it very diffiult to believe that OBL would attack Saudi. After all, it is the Muslim "holy land", and Osama doesn't have a grudge against Saudi, just Israel and the west.

Bin Laden hates the Saudi "royals" precisely because they control Moslem sites, and they allow "infidel" American troops on the "holy land."

[Guest Cancer Marney]

This is such a sad, transparent attempt by the Right Wing war-machine to jump us into yet ANOTHER war with a Mid-East country which can only provoke more terrorist attacks. What an adorable farce.

Oh, right, like the war with a Mid-East country that we were in about a year ago... wait, hang on. Which country was that again? Hmm, we weren't in any wars at the time, were we? Odd, I don't remember any terrorist attacks a few months later, when we definitely were at war with a Moslem country. Maybe that's because all the terrorists infesting it were too busy running for their lives to kill more innocents.

 

People like you are the real farce, Cletus, but I don't find you adorable. Just boring, tired, and contemptible. You're from another time, another era, when we could afford your foolish carping. But that time is over. And you're irrelevant.

[Guest Ozymandias]

Aw, looks like the troll was kicked out from under his bridge. Tragic

 

In the mean-time until you find another one, try to contribute something productive or worthwhile without humiliating yourself by resorting to Junior High-level insults.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

his bridge

Her. At least get the pronoun right.

 

contribute something productive or worthwhile

Like your posts? Claiming that there's no evidence of bin Laden's involvement in 9/11 after he's taken credit for it on video isn't exactly a masterly exhibition of debating skill.

 

Just take Vern's well-meant advice, kid. I'm cranky in the mornings.

[Guest Ozymandias]

I was sharing an opinion with fellow posters (in this case the CORRECT opinion B)), see how I was able to accomplish that WITHOUT bad-mouthing others or implying that my opinion superceded others'? Learn.

 

Do yourself a favor, don't post in the morning.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I was sharing an opinion with fellow posters (in this case the CORRECT opinion B))

WITHOUT... implying that my opinion superceded others'?

Without being a flaming retarded hypocrite in a single sentence, either. How remarkable.

 

I notice you convinced absolutely everyone, too. Nice job.

 

Seriously, jackass, lay off the holier-than-thou bullshit and stick to the issues if you want to make a case.

For example, what's the basis for your idiotic claim that further military action will only serve to provoke terrorist attacks, when Operation Infinite Justice proved pretty goddamned conclusively that military action prevents terrorist attacks by destroying terrorist infrastructure and training facilities, disrupting terrorist communications, confiscating terrorist funds, and obliterating terrorist-supporting regimes? It's been almost a year now, we've eliminated the Taliban, and, along with them Al Qaeda HQ. I haven't noticed any more aeroplanes flying into skyscrapers.

Looks like causality to me.

Not to mention that, again, bin Laden himself stated in so many words that it was our LACK of military action and our precipitous withdrawal from Somalia that encouraged him to "declare war" on the United States. Really, this is the same tired old crap we've been hearing since October of last year. Your strutting defeatist nonsense was wrong then and it's wrong now. Have you always been this full of shit or did you go to the local DNC office to get a top-up sometime today?

 

Do yourself a favour, don't post at all. At least not until you find a brain and learn how to use it.

[Guest Ozymandias]

It was a joke you stupid bitch. The fact that you can't see that and would get bent out of shape so easily just shows how DEEPLY ignorant and mentally unbalanced you are. In other words, you're about the LAST person who should be discussing politics because you clearly don't have the capabilities to do so.

 

I'd respond to everything else you said, but I only made it halfway through before it started giving me a headache. You sound like the kid claiming that his rock repels tigers and elephants because there are no tigers or elephants in his neighborhood. Meaning: you're a fucking fool.

 

Be gone, troll.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Doesn't fly. Jokes aren't followed by an injunction to "Learn" in boldface.

 

I'd respond to everything else you said, but I only made it halfway through before it started giving me a headache.

So, you won't refute it, and therefore you can refute it.

 

Who's the kid with the rock again?

 

Be gone, troll.

I notice you're very eager to call other people "trolls" when they don't immediately fall on your cock and start sucking. Let's see, so far it's been me and Vern Gagne. He, like me, basically seems to have seen your absurd posts and thought "WTF?!" When you're challenged, you retreat into professions of boredom, refuse to clarify or defend your vague, ridiculous, meandering statements, and shout personal insults. And then you try to claim that your opponents are doing the same thing to you.

 

Sorry, I'm not buying it. I doubt anyone else is either.

[Guest Ozymandias]

Nobody here was kissing my ass or even agreeing with me, and many adamently diasagreed with what I said. A troll is simply someone who hasn't the basic (VERY basic, actually) intellect to express their views in a civil manner without resorting to attacks on other people. You and Vern are the only people who've felt the need to do so, hence I called you trolls.

 

You don't see me having to call Dr. Tom, TJH, or Jingus names and purposely insult and ridicule their beliefs in order to disagree with them, nor have you seen them do the same to me. Why? Because most people have the conviction to let their feelings and rhetoric speak for itself without dragging things down to a grade-school level of arguing. Just because you lack that is no reason to be a jerk.

 

Grow the fuck up already, this Lucy Van Pelt shit might seem cute to you but you're really just making an ass out of yourself.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Nobody here was kissing my ass or even agreeing with me, and many adamently diasagreed with what I said.

Precisely. You were unconvincing because your arguments were stupid.

 

A troll is... someone who hasn't the basic... intellect to express their views in a civil manner without resorting to attacks on other people.

No. Your definition of a troll on a message board is simply incorrect. There is ample precedence.

 

You don't see me having to call Dr. Tom, TJH, or Jingus names and purposely insult and ridicule their beliefs in order to disagree with them

Your beliefs are wrong, stupid, offensive, and dull, as are you. Furthermore, beliefs of any kind are a very poor basis for debate.

 

nor have you seen them do the same to me. Why?

Probably because you're new, they've heard all your crap before from other, equally uninformed cretins, and they're being nice. For now. Enjoy it while it lasts.

 

Just because you lack that is no reason to be a jerk.

Quite correct. Your monumental stupidity, your paranoid conspiracy-theory mentality, your complete inability to consistently follow and defend your own statements (let alone engage in actual debate), and your disgusting terrorist-sympathising, anti-American bullshit is.

 

One more time: explain your obscene contention that bin Laden was not necessarily behind 9/11, and that the government is orchestrating unnecessary wars.